Why the Perfect Partner Makes the Worst Relationship?

This is the most gentle man/woman you have ever found. He/she says exactly what you want to hear. But watch out! Don't involve yourself too much in this relationship, as it can be the most disastrous possible, as revealed by a new research published in the journal "Communication Reports."

People constantly monitoring themselves in social situations can be the most popular and appear appropriate as romantic partners, but they are less happy and committed in relationships than direct people. The self-monitoring people constantly adjust their actions and words to match a given situation and social environment.

"High self-monitors are social chameleons. And, because they're quick to pick up on social cues, are socially adept and unlikely to say things upsetting to others, they are generally well-liked and sought after," said co-author Michael E. Roloff, professor of communication at the Northwestern University.

It's not all that bad.

"Research finds [self-monitors] to be excellent negotiators and far more likely to be promoted at work than their low self-monitoring peers," said Roloff.

But the romantic side has a downfall, as they cannot shut off the self -monitoring.

"High self-monitors may appear to be the kind of people we want to have relationships with, but they themselves are less committed to and less happy in their relationships than low self-monitors. The desire to alter one's personality to appropriately fit a given situation or social climate prevents high self-monitors from presenting their true selves during intimate interactions with their romantic partners. High self-monitors are very likable and successful people. However, it appears they're just not deep," said Roloff.

The team investigated 97 single young adults, who were questioned about the levels of emotional commitment in their romantic relationships and their degrees of self-monitoring, intimate communication, levels of emotional commitment, relational satisfaction and relational commitment was assessed. The research did not include the partners of the subjects.
"That may be something we eventually should look at," Roloff said.

High self-monitoring subjects appeared to avoid face-threatening interactions and honest self-disclosure, leaving their partners in complete darkness about how they receive other's commitment and regard.

"It's not that high self-monitors are intentionally deceptive or evil. They appear to have an outlook and way of achieving their goals that makes them attractive to us socially but that prevents them from being particularly happy or loyal in their romantic relationships," said Roloff.

Oppositely, the low self-monitoring individuals, the least concerned with self-image, more direct in displaying their feelings or opinions, are more committed and happier with their relationships. A direct person can make blunt and hurtful observations, or tell the painful truth, but they are more genuine and capable of intimacy, being more honest and loyal in their relationships.

"Fortunately, self-monitoring is normally distributed, so most people end up with a partner who falls somewhere in the middle. A person who moderately self-monitors may have great social skills and the ability to be unguarded with their partner when necessary," said Roloff.