Can you get the magic back? The moderating effect of passion decay beliefs on relationship commitment.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research introduces the construct of a decay theory of passion-a lay belief that romantic passion decline is irreversible-and investigates how this construct interacts with existing levels of passion for one's romantic partner to predict lower relationship commitment and greater pursuit of romantic alternatives. Across three studies employing experimental and nonexperimental procedures-and a set of meta-analytic syntheses including additional studies-results generally supported the hypotheses that, although low passion is linked to lower commitment and greater pursuit of romantic alternatives, such effects are stronger when adherence to decay beliefs is high rather than low. These effects tended to be independent of effects of destiny and growth theories (Knee, 1998), a related set of lay theories in the domain of relationships. Mediated moderation analyses revealed that the moderating effect of decay theories on relationship commitment mediates the moderating effect of decay theories on the link between low passion and the pursuit of romantic alternatives. Discussion addresses the possibility that changing one's beliefs surrounding the nature of romantic passion may be an important, but previously overlooked, means for preventing one from prematurely abandoning an otherwise satisfying relationship. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".