Communication and Courtship
positive emotions held only for geographically-close couples.
Rusbult and Van Lange (2003) asserted that an overlooked variable in interdependence
theory is the relational situation. They argued that communication processes are particularly
susceptible to situational influence. Although Stephen (1986) and Le and Agnew (2001) did not
explicitly make the link, these authors’ work can be seen as implicitly considering the situational
ramifications of geographic separation. That is, this research was tacitly rooted in the notion that
LDDR and GCDR partners communicate and perceive their relationships differently given their
unique relational contexts.
Unlike the research reviewed above, most work on long-distance relationships has been
atheoritcal, focusing, for example, on the similarities and differences between aspects of LDDRs
and GCDRs (see Stafford, 2005 for a review). Little consideration has been given to the theories
that may explain these similarities or differences. We argue that interdependence theory provides
a useful framework from which to explore previous speculations and conclusions in the extant
long-distance relationship literature. Expanding on Stephen (1984, 1986) and Le and Agnew
(2001), it seems logical that geographic separation be considered a unique relational situation
with ramifications for partner interaction. Rohlfing (1994) called for research of long-distance
relationships precisely for this reason, noting long-distance relationships challenge “many of our
taken for granted theoretical assumptions about the conditions under which interpersonal
relationships are developed and maintained” (p. 174).
Geographic Separation as Unique Relational Context
Situations are defined by their unique limitations and affordances. According to Rusbult
and Van Lange (2003), the factors that define situations include “the cognition and affect that are
possible, the dispositions, motives, and norms that are activated, and the interpersonal processes
4
Convention