Abstract
Although polyamorous relationships have received increasing attention from researchers over the past decade, little attention has been paid to differences in relationship configurations: some individuals arrange their relationships hierarchically, prioritizing a primary partner; other relationship structures are non-hierarchical with no relationships prioritized over others. Across two samples (NStudy1= 225; NStudy2= 360), we compared relationship satisfaction and attachment security between individuals in hierarchical and non-hierarchical configurations. Greater variability in attachment security was found between partners in hierarchical relationships than those in non-hierarchical relationships; no significant differences were found in variability in relationships satisfaction across these groups. Furthermore, individuals in hierarchical relationships reported lower overall relationship satisfaction and attachment security compared to individuals in non-hierarchical relationships. More specifically, although no significant differences were found between non-hierarchical and primary partners, participants reported lower relationship satisfaction and attachment security with secondary and tertiary partners compared to non-hierarchical and primary partners. Findings suggest that these differences may attenuate with time. Although previous research has found that differences (e.g., in investment) between partners exist in both non-hierarchical and hierarchical configurations, the current research suggests that differences that occur organically rather than in a predetermined manner may be related to greater similarities in attachment security across partners as well as greater overall levels of relationship satisfaction and attachment security for individuals in non-hierarchical configurations. More research is needed to determine whether the observed between-partner differences are consistent with the relationship goals of individuals in hierarchical relationships.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
References
Balzarini, R. N., Campbell, L., Kohut, T., Holmes, B. M., Lehmiller, J. J., Harman, J. J., & Atkins, N. (2017). Perceptions of primary and secondary relationships in polyamory. PLoS ONE, 12(5), e0177841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177841.
Balzarini, R. N., Dharma, C., Kohut, T., Campbell, L., Lehmiller, J. J., Harman, J. J., & Holmes, B. M. (2019a). Comparing relationship quality across different types of romantic partners in polyamorous and monogamous relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48, 1749–1767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-1416-7.
Balzarini, R. N., Dharma, C., Muise, A., & Kohut, T. (2019b). Eroticism versus nurturance: How eroticism and nurturance differs in polyamorous and monogamous relationships. Social Psychology, 50(3), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000378(Supplemental).
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss, Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 46–76). New York: Guilford Press.
Conley, T. D., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., & Ziegler, A. (2013). The fewer the merrier? Assessing stigma surrounding consensually non-monogamous romantic relationships. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13, 1–30.
Dagger, C. (2018). What is couple privilege? Polyamory For Us. http://polyfor.us/couple-privilege/.
Davila, J., Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1999). Attachment change processes in the early years of marriage. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 783–802. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.5.783.
Fraley, R. C. (2019). Attachment in adulthood: Recent developments, emerging debates, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 401–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102813.
Fraley, R. C., Heffernan, M. E., Vicary, A. M., & Brumbaugh, C. C. (2011). The experiences in close relationships—Relationship structures questionnaire: A method for assessing attachment orientations across relationships. Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 615–625. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022898.
Funk, J. L., & Rogge, R. D. (2007). Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the Couples Satisfaction Index. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(4), 572–583. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.572.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511.
Jamnik, M. R., & Lane, D. J. (2017). The use of reddit as an inexpensive source for high-quality data. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 22(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.7275/swgt-rj52.
Kale. (2016). The difference between relationship anarchy and non-hierarchical polyamory. Retrieved June 21, 2019 from http://www.relationship-anarchy.com/videos/2016/6/20/the-difference-between-relationship-anarchy-and-non-hierarchical-polyamory.
Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, methods, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.118.1.3.
Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York, NY: Wiley.
Klesse, C. (2006). Polyamory and its ‘others’: Contesting the terms of non-monogamy. Sexualities, 9(5), 565–583. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460706069986.
La Guardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(3), 367–384. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.79.3.367.
Labriola, K. (2003). Models of open relationships. Retrieved April 15, 2018, from http://www.cat-and-dragon.com/stef/poly/Labriola/open.html.
Mitchell, M. E., Bartholomew, K., & Cobb, R. J. (2014). Need fulfillment in polyamorous relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 51(3), 329–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.742998.
Moors, A. C. (2017). Has the American public’s interest in information related to relationships beyond “The Couple” increased over time? Journal of Sex Research, 54(6), 677–684. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1178208.
Moors, A. C., Conley, T. D., Edelstein, R. S., & Chopik, W. J. (2015). Attached to monogamy? Avoidance predicts willingness to engage (but not actual engagement) in consensual non-monogamy. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 32(2), 222–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407514529065.
Moors, As, Ryan, W., & Chopik, W. J. (2019). Multiple loves: The effects of attachment with multiple concurrent romantic partners on relational functioning. Personality and Individual Differences, 147, 102–110.
Murphy, A. P., Joel, S., & Muise, A. (2021). A prospective investigation of the decision to open up a romantic relationship. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12, 194–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619897157.
Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., & R Core Team. (2018). Nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models, R package version 3.1-137. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme.
Rast, P., Hofer, S. M., & Sparks, C. (2012). Modeling individual differences in within-person variation of negative and positive affectin a mixed effects location scale model using BUGS/JAGS. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47(2), 177–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2012.658328.
Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the Investment Model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 172–186.
Wei, M., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). The experiences in close relationship scale (ECR)-short form: Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88(2), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890701268041.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (exempt due to less than minimal risk and anonymous surveys: Antioch College: 201802; California State University: 18-19-242; University of Kansas; University of Michigan) and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Flicker, S.M., Sancier-Barbosa, F., Moors, A.C. et al. A Closer Look at Relationship Structures: Relationship Satisfaction and Attachment Among People Who Practice Hierarchical and Non-Hierarchical Polyamory. Arch Sex Behav 50, 1401–1417 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01875-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01875-9
Keywords
- Consensual non-monogamy
- Polyamory
- Relationship quality
- Attachment
- Hierarchy
- Relationship anarchy