University of North Dakota UND Scholarly Commons Theses and Dissertations Theses, Dissertations, and Senior Projects January 2020 Effects Of Choice Orientation And Consensual Non-Monogamy On Relationship Quality Meara Thombre Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/theses Recommended Citation Thombre, Meara, "Effects Of Choice Orientation And Consensual Non-Monogamy On Relationship Quality" (2020). Theses and Dissertations. 3304. https://commons.und.edu/theses/3304 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, and Senior Projects at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EFFECTS OF CHOICE ORIENTATION AND CONSENSUAL NON-MONOGAMY ON RELATIONSHIP QUALITY by Meara Ellen Thombre Bachelor of Arts, Indiana University, 2014 Master of Arts, University of North Dakota, 2017 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of North Dakota in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Grand Forks, North Dakota August 2020 i DocuSign Envelope ID: E43A7AF8-7A9D-44C5-8A6C-A702E4C0DFB4 Meara Thombre Name: Degree: Doctor of Philosophy This document, submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree from the University of North Dakota, has been read by the Faculty Advisory Committee under whom the work has been done and is hereby approved. ____________________________________ Kara Wettersten, PhD ____________________________________ Emily Brinck, PhD ____________________________________ Elizabeth Legerski, PhD ____________________________________ Heather Terrell, PhD ____________________________________ Thomas Motl, PhD ____________________________________ This document is being submitted by the appointed advisory committee as having met all the requirements of the School of Graduate Studies at the University of North Dakota and is hereby approved. ____________________________________ Chris Nelson Dean of the School of Graduate Studies 7/16/2020____________________________________ Date iii PERMISSION Title Effects of Choice Orientation and Consensual Non-Monogamy on Relationship Quality Department Counseling Psychology Degree Doctor of Philosophy In presenting this dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a graduate degree from the University of North Dakota, I agree that the library of this University shall make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for extensive copying for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor who supervised my dissertation work or, in her absence, by the Chairperson of the department or the dean of the School of Graduate Studies. It is understood that any copying or publication or other use of this dissertation or part thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the University of North Dakota in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my dissertation. Meara Thombre July 7th, 2020 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................. iv CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION........………..………….........……………………………………………….1 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE…………………………..……………………….…..……6 What is Consensual Non-Monogamy?…………………………………............…………6 Comparing Monogamy and Consensual Non-Monogamy………………………...…….13 Personality Differences of Those Who Engage in CNM Relationships............................43 Defining Relationship Quality...........................................................................................46 The Paradox of Choice and The Maximization Paradox...................................................51 Factors Influencing Choice Orientation.............................................................................58 The Purpose of the Current Study......................................................................................60 III. METHOD ...............................................................................................................................63 Participants.........................................................................................................................63 Group Differences..............................................................................................................64 Measures............................................................................................................................66 Procedure...........................................................................................................................70 IV. RESULTS ...............................................................................................................................73 Preliminary Analyses…………………………………………………………………….73 Description of Statistical Analyses……………………...……………………………….76 Measurement Model.…………………………………………………………………….77 Structural Model.…………………………………………………………..…………….80 V. DISCUSSION...........................................................................................................................83 iv Measurement Model Discussion.………………. ……………………………………….83 Main Analysis Discussion.………………. ……………………………………………...86 Limitations……………………………………………………………………………….91 Clinical Implications…….………………. ……………………………………………...97 Future Research…….………………. ……………………………………………...…...98 Conclusion…….………………. ……………………………………………...……….101 REFERENCES…………………………....................................................................................102 APPENDICES………………..............…………………………………………………….......125 v LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Participant Demographics and Group Differences............................................................65 2. Means and Standard Deviations for All Measures by Whole Sample and Relationship Type.......................................................................................................74 3. Correlations Among Key Study Variables for Whole Sample and by Relationship Type..................................................................................................75 4. Goodness of Fit Statistics for the Estimated Measurement Models……………………..78 5. Coefficient Paths in the Measurement Among Key Study Variables for all Whole Sample........................................................................................................ 79 6. Summary of Invariance Fit Statistics for the Relationship Type Multiple Group Analyses……………………………………………………………….79 7. Goodness of Fit Statistics for the Estimated Structural Models…………………………81 8. Coefficient and Regression Paths in the Structural Among Key Study Variables for the Whole Sample……………………………………………………………………………82 vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my sincere appreciation to all of the Counseling Psychology Faculty as well as my advisory Committee for their guidance and support during my time at the University of North Dakota. In particular, I would like to thank my past advisor, Dr. Ashley Hutchison, who not only pushed me to study this population, but also diligently helped me edit my proposal. I would also like to thank my current advisor, Dr. Kara Wettersten, who help to support me in the final steps, as well as Dr. Rachel Navarro, who helped me to run the final analyses. Finally, thank you Dr. Robert Stupnisky, for answering many countless confusing emails and for your clear guidance on structural equation modeling. vii ABSTRACT Consensual non-monogamy (CNM) is a style of sexual or romantic relationship that consensually includes more than two people. Despite a notable prevalence of CNM relationships in the United States, there is relatively little research on this population. While previous research generally finds similar levels of relationship quality to that of monogamist relationships, those in CNM relationships experience notable stigma and are an understudied population. The current study used the Maximization Paradox (Dar-Nimrod, Rawn, Lehman, & Schwartz, 2009) to investigate whether individual differences in choice orientation might impact relationship quality differently in CNM and monogamist relationships. Specifically, it investigated whether maximizers, or those who understand the goal of decision-making as choosing the best option, through a strategy of alternative search, might not have reduced relationship quality when in engaged in CNM as opposed to monogamist relationships. Data was collected online through a survey format. Results did not find evidence to suggest that maximizing predicted lower relationship quality and did not suggest that relationship type would moderate this relationship. Findings suggest that both monogamous and CNM relationship show high levels of relationship quality and that the tendency to maximize does relate to relationship quality for either relationship type. Potential issues with maximization measurement may explain these results and recommendation for future research are discussed. viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The assumption that romantic relationships are meant to be only between two individuals is both ubiquitous and relatively unquestioned when studying romance, love, sex, and relationships. In fact, many scales and theories related to romantic relationships make the assumption that romance is between just two people [e.g., the Dyadic Adjustment