How Romantic Relationships Influence Quantity of Friends

Running Head: HOW ROMANTIC RELAITONSHIPS INFLUENCE NUMBER OF FRIENDS1

How Romantic Relationships Influence Quantity of Friends

Courtney Erixon

University of Nebraska-Lincoln

HOW ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS INFLUENCE QUANTITY OF FRIENDS 2

Abstract

This study attempts to understand the interaction between relationship status, relationship

seriousness, and relationship length as they relate to the reported number of close friends and the

number of people that the participant thinks would consider them a friend. The purpose of

studying relationship aspects and number of friends is to see whether the well believed notion

that a person is more likely to lose their friends when they engage in a serious and long

relationship compared to when being single or in less serious and short relationships. To do this

we conducted a self-repot survey and completed a 3-way ANOVA. It was found that the reported

number of close friends and the number of close friends that people think would consider them a

close friend are related to relationship aspects very similarly except for the interaction between

relationship seriousness and relationship status. For both dependent variables, participants who

had most recently been in a short relationship reported a greater number of friends than other

relationship length, but only for those whose relationships were very serious. Relationship length

did not matter for people who were currently in a relationship and for single people who were in

not very serious or somewhat serious relationships. More studies on young adults that

investigate how different aspects of romantic relationships relate to number of close friends will

help to understand the conflicts that college students have of whether or not to engage in long

serious relationships.


How Romantic Relationships Influence Quantity of Friends

The number of close friends that a person has influences their well-being. Through

adolescence, teenagers increasingly start to rely less on their parents for emotional support and

begin to rely more on their friends for support (Bios, 1967). Eventually, close friends become the

primary source of social support and help to form an adolescent’s self concept while having

important effects on their well-being (Furman & Buhrmester, 1992). Specifically, the number of

friends that a person has is an indicator of social competence (Kuttler & La Greca, 2004). In

college, social interaction increases in importance.

It has long been a fear of many college students that they will lose a dear friendship

because the friend has engaged in a romantic relationship. This may be why many single students

try to convince their friends to stay single as well or may even attempt to sabotage their friend’s

relationship. This fear associated with a friend starting a romantic relationship is supported by

some literature but not others. It was found that girls who casually dated had more friends than

girls who had never dated, rarely date, and seriously dated (Kuttler & La Greca, 2004). Another

study found that romantic relationships in adolescents did not have an effect on close peer

relationships (Laursen & Williams, 1997). One downfall of these studies is that they attend only

to relationship status or whether or not the participant is usually in a relationship or not as it

relates to friendship.

Relationships are not all the same though, so studying several aspects of relationships is

beneficial. As adolescents grow older, their romantic relationships may begin to hold more

importance and become more serious (Connolly & Goldberg, 1999). One study of young adults

found that intimate involvement with friends decreased as commitment to romantic relationships

increased (Johnson & Leslie, 1982). Hendrick and Hendrick (1993) have argued that as

http://0-www.sciencedirect.com.library.unl.edu/science/article/pii/S0140197104000594#BIB31




relationships become more serious, the romantic partner may start taking over a more “best

friend” role than before.

Another aspect of relationships that may be important is the length of the relationship.

Research suggests that between age 15 and 17, long term relationships start to become more

prevalent (Carver, Joyner, & Udry, 2003). Most would assume that the longer a relationship

lasts, the more serious that the relationship is but that is not always the case so relationship

seriousness as well as relationship length were included in this study. Former research on

relationship lengths has found that for adolescents, those that were in short relationships reported

more support from their best friend than their romantic partner whereas those who were in long-

term relationships reported more support from their romantic partners than their best friends

(Connolly & Johnson, 1996). The amount of support from best friends may translate over to

amount of close friends because support is a major variable of close friendships.

Most studies that are interested in romantic relationships and friendships tend to compare

them to each other (Kuttler & La Greca, 2004). Other studies have tried to investigate how

relationships with parents and friends affect a romantic relationship (Sprecher & Felmlee, 1992).

The few studies that have examined how relationships are related to amount of friends have

focused mostly on adolescents ignoring the adult population. Therefore we conducted this study

on young adults to find out whether the fear of losing a friendship to a romantic relationship is

qualified, and how different aspects of a relationship may interact when looking at amount of

friendships. In this study we looked at the association between length of relationship, seriousness

of relationship, and current relationship status on two different measures of perceived number of

close friends that a person has.



It was hypothesized that for people who are single and who have most recently had a not

very serious, somewhat serious, or very serious relationship, the number of close friends that

they report will be equivalent for all lengths of their last relationship. Also, for people currently

in a not very serious relationship, the number of close friends that they report will be equivalent

across all lengths of their relationship whereas, for people currently in a somewhat serious or

very serious relationship, the number of close friends that they report will be higher for shorter

relationships. This three-way interaction will also apply to another measure of number of friends

which is how many people the participant thinks would consider them a friend.

Method

Participants

Five hundred thirty-four Undergraduate students from the University of Nebraska-

Lincoln were recruited by a student in an introductory statistics course to participate in the study.

Two hundred twenty-two (41.6%) of the participants were male and three hundred twelve

(58.4%) were female. Of these participants, 483 (82%) were European-American, 34 (6.4%)

were African-American, 11 (2.1%) were Hispanic-American, 5 (0.9%) were Asian-American, 2

(0.4%) were Native-American, and 42 (7.9%) identified themselves as other. Their mean age

was 21.01 falling within a range of 17 and 34 with a standard deviation of 2.11.

Measures

A self-report survey was formed by compiling self-descriptive questions which included

age, gender, number of times moved as a child, type of family raised in, as well as others.

Included in the survey as well, were several scales some of which were the Index of Self-Esteem,

the Compulsiveness Inventory, and the Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire. This study focused

on several measures of a relationship, and two measures of friendship. Participants were asked in


the survey if they were currently in a romantic relationship and were presented with a choice of

yes or no. Participants were also asked how serious their current or most recent romantic

relationship was on a scale with 0 being the least serious and 7 being the most serious. It was

also asked how long their current or most recent relationship was in months. Participants

recorded the number of people that they thought of as a close friend and the number of people

that they thought would list them as a close friend.

Both dependent variables are included in this study because even thought they are both

measures of number of friends, they have different implications that they draw about the

participant are different. The definition of a friend according to the Merriam-Webster Online

Dictionary is: 1. a person who you like and enjoy being with; 2. a person who helps or supports

someone or something. The number of close friends that a participant thinks that they have

assesses that how many people they enjoy being around and who are supportive to them. In this

measure, the friend support is coming from the friend and the participant enjoys being with the

friend. The number of people that a participant thinks would consider them a friend assesses how

many people enjoy being around the participant and who also receives support and help from the

participant. In this measure, the friend support is coming from the participant and the friend

enjoys being with the participant.

Procedures

Students in an intro to statistics course filled out the survey themselves and then found

five other undergraduate students each to complete the survey for them. The survey was taken in

the naturalistic setting that the participant happened to be in at the time they filled out the survey.

In order to perform a 3-way ANOVA, relationship seriousness was recoded into not very serious

(0-4), somewhat serious (4-6), and very serious (6-7). Relationship length was recoded into short


(0-4 months), medium (4-16 months), and long (14-367 months). A 3-way ANOVA was

conducted using relationship status, relationship length, and relationship seriousness as

independent variables and number of people the participant thinks of as close friends and number

of people the participant thinks would list them as a close friend as dependent variables.

Results

There is a significant interaction between length of current or most recent relationship,

seriousness of current or most recent relationship, and whether or not the participant is still in

that relationship or not as they relate to reported number of close friends [F(4,505)=3.077, MSe

=102.934, p = 0.016, r = 0.154]. Figure 1 and Figure 2 show the descriptive statistics. As

hypothesized, for those in a relationship that is not very serious, there is no difference in reported

number of close friends across all relationship lengths. Contrary to the hypothesis, that those in a

somewhat serious or very serious relationship would report a higher number of close friends if

they were in a shorter relationship, there was no difference in reported number of close friends

across relationship length. Also as hypothesized, for single people who were most recently in a

not very serious relationship, the number of reported close friends is equivalent across all

relationship lengths. Contrary to the research hypothesis that for single people who were most

recently in a somewhat serious relationship, those who had a longer relationship would report

less close friends than those who were in a shorter relationship, there was no difference in

reported number of close friends between the relationship lengths. For single people who were

most recently in a very serious relationship, as hypothesized, those who were in a short

relationship reported having more close friends than both those who were in a medium length

relationship and those that were in a long relationship, but contrary to the hypothesis that those

who were in a medium length relationship would report more close friends than those who were


in a long relationship, there was no difference in reported number of close friends between these

two relationship lengths.

There is a significant interaction between length of current or of most recent relationship,

seriousness of current or most recent relationship, and whether or not the participant is still in

that relationship or not as they relate to the number of people the participant thinks would

consider them a friend [F(4,504)=6.375, MSe =93.103, p <0.001, r = 0.219]. Figure 3 and

Figure 4 show the descriptive statistics. As hypothesized, for those in a relationship that was not

very serious, somewhat serious, or very serious, there is no difference in number of people the

participants thought would consider them a friend across all relationship lengths. Also as

hypothesized, for single people who were most recently in a not very serious relationship, the

number of people the participant thought would consider them a close friend is equivalent across

all relationship lengths. Contrary to the research hypothesis that for single people who were most

recently in a somewhat serious relationship, those who had a longer relationship would report

less people who consider them as a close friend than those who were in a shorter relationship,

there was no difference in reported number of people who consider the participant as a close

friends between the relationship lengths. For single people who were most recently in a very

serious relationship, as hypothesized, those who were in a short relationship reported a greater

number of people that would consider them a close friend than both those who were in a

medium length relationship and those that were in a long relationship, but contrary to the

hypothesis that those who were in a medium length relationship would report more people in

which they thought would consider them a close friends than those who were in a long

relationship, there was no difference in reported number of close friends between these two

relationship lengths.


There is a significant interaction between relationship length and relationship seriousness

as they relate to reported number of close friends [F(4,505)= 5.826, MSe = 102.934, p <0.001,

r=0.210]. Figure 5 shows the descriptive statistics. For not very serious and somewhat serious

relationships, there is no difference in reported number of close friends between relationships of

different lengths. For very serious relationships, there is no difference in reported number of

close friends between medium and long relationships, but those who were in short relationships

reported having more close friends than both those who were in medium relationships and those

who were in long relationships. The effect is misleading for people in a very serious relationship

who had the same reported number of friends across all relationship lengths.

There is not a significant interaction between relationship status and relationship

seriousness as they relate to reported number of close friends [F(2,505)=2.992, MSe = 102.934,

p = 0.051, r= 0.108]. Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics. This pattern is descriptive for

single people who were in a short relationship, but misleading for everyone else in which there

was no difference in reported number of friends across relationship seriousness.

There is a significant interaction between relationship status and relationship length as

they relate to reported number of close friends [F(2,505)= 3.508, MSe = 102.934, p = 0.031,

r=0.117]. Figure 6 shows the descriptive statistics. For those who were currently in a

relationship, there was no difference in reported number of close friends between different

lengths of the relationship. For single people, there was no difference in reported number of

close friends between those who had most recently had a medium relationship and those who

most recently had a long relationship, however, those who most recently had short relationships

reported more close friends than both those who most recently had a medium or long

relationship. This effect is misleading for single people who most recently had a not very serious


or a somewhat serious relationship in which there was no difference in reported number of close

friends across different lengths of the relationship.

There is a significant interaction between relationship seriousness and relationship length

as they relate to the number of people the participant thinks would consider them a close friend

[F(4,504)=4.259, MSe=93.103, p=0.002, r=0.181]. Figure 7 shows the descriptive statistics. For

those who had a not very serious or a somewhat serious relationship, there was no difference in

the number of people the participant thought would consider them a close friend. For those who

had a very serious relationship, there was no difference in the number of people the participant

thought would consider them a close friend between those with a medium or long relationship

length, but those who had a short relationship, reported a higher number of people that they

thought would consider them a close friend than both those who had a medium or long

relationship. This effect is misleading for the participants who were still engaged in the

described relationship when the data was collected in which there was no difference in the

number of people that the participant thought would consider them a close friend across all

relationship lengths.

There is a significant interaction between relationship status and relationship seriousness

as they relate to the number of people the participants thinks would consider them a close friend


those who were still in the described relationship whether it was not very serious, somewhat

serious, or very serious, there was no difference in the number of people that the participant

thought would consider them a close friend. For those who were single, participants who most

recently had a not very serious relationship or a somewhat serious relationship, reported an

equivalent number of people who they thought would consider them a close friend, whereas


those who were most recently in a very serious relationship reported more people who they

thought would consider them a close friend than those who most recently had a not very serious

or somewhat serious relationship. This effect is misleading for those whose described

relationship was of medium or long length whether they were still in that relationship or single in

which there was no difference in reported number of people they thought would consider them a

close friend across all levels of relationship seriousness.

There is a significant interaction between relationship status and relationship length as

they relate to the number of people the participant thinks would consider them a close friend


those who were still in the described relationship, there was no difference in number of people

that the participant thought would consider them a close friend between all relationship lengths.

For those that were single, there was no difference in number of people that they thought would

consider them a close friend between those who were most recently in a medium or long

relationship, whereas those who were most recently in a short relationship reported a greater

number of people that they thought would consider them a close friend than those who were

most recently in a medium or long relationship. This effect is misleading for those who were in a

not very serious or somewhat serious relationship whether they were still in that relationship or

single, in which there was no difference in number of people that the participant thought would

consider them a close friend between all relationship lengths.

Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics for all main effects. There is a significant main

effect of relationship seriousness as it relates to reported number of close friends [F(2,505)=

11.834, MSe = 102.934, p < 0.001 , r= 0.212]. There was no difference in reported number of

close friends between those who were in a not very serious and somewhat serious relationship


and those who were in a very serious relationship reported more close friends than both those in

a somewhat serious or not very serious relationship. The main effect is misleading for single

people who were most recently in a medium or long relationship and for all people who were in a

relationship in which there was no difference in reported number of close friends across

relationship seriousness.

There is a significant main effect of relationship length as it relates to reported number of

close friends [F(2,505)= 7.861, MSe = 102.934, p < 0.001 , r= 0.174]. Overall, those with

medium or long relationships reported equivalent number of close friends and those with short

relationship lengths reported more close friends than both those with medium or long

relationships. This main effect is misleading for people who were in not very serious, somewhat

serious, or very serious relationship in which there was no difference in reported number of close

friends across relationship lengths. It is also misleading for single people who were most recently

in a not very serious or somewhat serious relationship in which there was no difference in

reported number of close friends across relationship lengths.

There is a significant main effect of relationship status as it relates to reported number of

close friends [F(1,505)= 7.053, MSe = 102.934, p = 0.008 , r= 0.165]. Overall, those who were

single reported more close friends than those who were in a relationship. This main effect is

misleading for those who were in a not very serious relationship for a short, medium, or long

time in which the number of reported close friends was equivalent for both those who were still

in that relationship and those who were single. The main effect is also misleading for those who

were in a somewhat serious relationship for a short, medium, or long time in which the number

of reported close friends was equivalent for both those who were still in that relationship and

those who were single.


There is a significant main effect of relationship seriousness as it relates to the number of

people the participant thinks would consider them a close friend [F(2,504)=7.454, MSe=93.103,

p=0.001, r=0.169]. Those who had been in a not very serious or a somewhat serious relationship

reported an equivalent number of people who they thought would consider them a close friend,

whereas those who had been in a very serious relationship reported a greater number of people

that they thought would consider them a close friend than both those who had been in a

somewhat serious or not very serious relationship. This main effect is misleading for single

people who were most recently in a medium or long relationship and for all people who were

still in the described relationship in which there was no difference in the reported number of

people that the participant thought would consider them a close friend across relationship

seriousness.

There is a significant main effect of relationship length as it relates to the number of

people that the participant thinks would consider them a close friend [F(2,504)=5.565,

MSe=93.103, p=0.004, r=0.147]. There is no difference in the number of people who the

participant thought would consider them a close friend between those who had been in a medium

or a long relationship, whereas those who had been in a short relationship reported more people

who they thought would consider them a close friend than those who had been in a medium or

long relationship. This main effect is misleading for those who were still in a not very serious

relationship, a somewhat serious relationship, or a very serious relationship and for those who

were single but who had been in a not very serious relationship or a somewhat serious

relationship in which there was no difference in the number of people who the participant

thought would consider them a close friend across all relationship lengths.


There is a main significant effect of relationship status as it relates to the number of

people who the participant thinks would consider them a close friend [F(1,504)=16.609,

MSe=93.103, p<0.001, r=0.179]. Those who were still in the relationship that they described

reported less people who they thought would consider them a close friend than those who were

not still engaged in the relationship in which they described. This main effect is misleading for

those who had been in a not very serious or somewhat serious relationship regardless of the

relationship length, and for those who had been in a medium or long very serious relationship in

which there was no difference in the number of people who the participant thought would

consider them a close friend.

Discussion

Both reported number of friends and number of people the participant thought would

consider them a friend have the same interaction of relationship status, relationship length, and

relationship seriousness. Single people who had been in a very serious relationship thought they

had more close friends and was a close friend to more people when their most recent relationship

had been short compared to medium or long which had equivalent friend numbers. For everyone

else, participants thought they had the same number of close friends and was a close friend to the

same number of people for all relationship lengths.

It is important to note the several power problems that are present in this 3-way ANOVA

when using reported number of friends as the dependent variable. For those who were currently

in a very serious relationship, when comparing those whose relationship was short to those

whose relationship was medium in length, there was less than .30 power, meaning that there was

more than a 70 percent chance of a Type II error in which we incorrectly retained the null

hypothesis that there was no difference in reported number of close friends between the two


conditions. In order to have adequate power of .80, allowing only a 20 percent chance of a Type

II error, we would have needed to have 60 participants in each condition. Also, for those who

were currently in a very serious relationship, when comparing those whose relationship was short

and those whose relationship was long, there was less than .60 power, meaning that there was

more than a 40 percent chance of a Type II error in which we incorrectly retained the null

hypothesis that there was no difference in reported number of close friends between the two

conditions. In order to have adequate power, we would have needed 60 participants in each

condition. Another power problem occurred when comparing those with medium and long

relationships for those who were single and had most recently been in a very serious relationship.

The power was less than .20 power which means there was over 90 percent chance that we

incorrectly retained that there was no difference in reported number of friends between the two

conditions. In order to have adequate power, we would have needed to have 172 participants in

each condition.

The 3-way interaction using the dependent variable of how many people that the

participant thinks would consider them a close friend also had power problems. Like the other

dependent variable, those who were currently in a very serious relationship, when comparing

short and medium relationship lengths, the power was less than .20 meaning there was more than

an 80 percent chance that a Type II error was made. In this case, we would have had 172 people

in each condition to have sufficient power. Another power problem occurred when comparing

short and medium relationship lengths of those who were single and whose most recently

relationship was somewhat serious. The result that the two groups had the same number of

people that they thought would consider them a friend had a more than 70 percent chance that

there was a difference in number of friends but that we missed it. To have sufficient power we


would have needed 172 people in each condition. Finally, for single participants who were most

recently in a very serious relationship, when comparing medium to long relationship lengths,

there was over a 60 percent chance that a Type II error was made and to have enough power we

would have needed 172 people in each condition.

Both dependent variables had the same patterns of interactions and main effects

excluding the interaction of relationship status and relationship seriousness. The following

summarizes the relationships of number of friends and number of people the participant thought

would consider them a friend with relationship status, relationship length, and relationship

seriousness. Disregarding relationship status, there was no difference in either dependent

variable when comparing relationship length except for those who were in a very serious

relationship in which they had more close friends and were also close friends to more people if

they were in a short relationship compared to a medium or long relationship where there was no

difference in either of the two dependent variable measurements. Disregarding relationship

seriousness, there was no difference in either dependent variable when comparing relationship

length except for single people in which those who were in short relationships had more close

friends and were close friends and were close friends to more people than those who had been in

a medium or long relationship in which there wasn’t a difference in either dependent variable.

The main effect of relationship seriousness showed that those with a very serious relationship

had more close friends and were close friends to more people than those with a somewhat serious

or not very serious relationship in which there was no difference in either of the two dependent

variables. The main effect of relationship length showed that those with a short relationship had

more close friends and were close friends to more people than those with a medium or long

relationship in which there was no difference in either of the two dependent variables. The main


effect of relationship status showed that those who were single at the time of data collection

reported having more close friends and being a close friend to more people than those who were

in a relationship at the time of data collection.

There was not an interaction between relationship status and relationship seriousness as

they relate to reported number of close friends, but there was an interaction between relationship

status and relationship seriousness as they relate to number of people the participant thought

would consider them a close friend. Overall the effect size of the interaction between relationship

status and relationship seriousness as they relate to reported number of close friends is small

enough to not worry about, and within the interaction, there are no power problems. There are no

power problems in the interaction between relationship status and relationship seriousness as

they relate to the number of people that the participant thought would consider them a close

friend. The difference in patterns of the two dependent variables shows that those who were

currently in a very serious relationship thought that they had more close friends than the number

of friends those in a somewhat or not very serious relationship thought they had, but that all

people who were currently in a relationship thought that they were close friends to the same

number of people.

This study does not support the claim that romantic relationships in adolescents did not

have an effect on close peer relationships since almost all of the interactions and main effects

were significant, but does support the claim somewhat because for people in a relationship there

is no difference in reported number of friends or number of people that they think would

consider them a friend (Laursen & Williams, 1997). The reason that people in relationships do

not show a difference in number of close friends or number of people they think would consider

them a close friend is probably due to power problems. The results do not support the finding of



Johnson and Leslie (1982) that as commitment to romantic relationships increase that

commitment to friendships decrease. Our study found that people who had very serious

relationships reported more close friends and more people that they think would consider them a

close friend than both those with a not very serious or somewhat serious relationship. Some

people may lose touch with their friends as a romantic relationship gets more serious, but as a

romantic relationship gets more serious, people are more likely to meet their partner’s friends

which could add to their close friend list. The finding that participants with short relationships

had more close friends than those with a medium or long relationship is consistent with Connolly

and Johnson’s (1996) finding that those in short relationship report more support from their best

friends than their partner, and those in long relationships report more support from their partner

than their best friends.

More research needs to be done on how relationships are associated with number of

friends on young people. More research is done focusing on adolescents and married couples, but

it is a concern for many young people on whether or not to be in a relationship because of the

effects that it has on their friendships. A study using more participants would solve the power

problems that showed up in the 3-way interactions. Studying the difference in results of the

interaction of relationship status and relationship seriousness for reported number of close

friends and number of people that the participant think would consider them a close friend may

help explain why the interaction of relationship seriousness and relationship status relates

differently to these two dependent variables.


References

Bios, P. (1967). The second individuation process of adolescence. The psychoanalytic study of

the child, 22, 162-186. Retrieved from http://digilib.bc.edu/

Carver, K., Joyner, K., & Udry, J. R. (2003). National estimates of adolescent romantic

relationships. In P. Florsheim (Ed.) ,Adolescent romantic relations and sexual behavior:

Theory, research, and practical implications (pp. 23-56). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Connolly, J. A., & Johnson, A. (1996). Adolescents’ romantic relationships and the structure and

quality of their close interpersonal ties. Personal Relationships, 3, 185–195.

doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1996.tb00111.x

Connolly, J., & Goldberg, A. (1999). Romantic relationships in adolescence: The role of friends

and peers in their emergence and development. In W. Furman, B. B. Brown, & C. Feiring

(Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on adolescent romantic relationships (pp. 266-290).

New York: Cambridge University Press.

Furman, W., & Buhrmester, D. (1992). Age and sex differences in perceptions of networks of

personal relationships. Child Development, 63, 103-115. doi:10.2307/1130905

Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (1993). Lovers as friends. Journal Of Social And Personal

Relationships, 10(3), 459-466. doi:10.1177/0265407593103011

Johnson, M. P., & Leslie, L. (1982). Couple involvement and network structure: A test of the

dyadic withdrawal hypothesis. Social Psychology Quarterly, 45(1), 34-43.

doi:10.2307/3033672


Kuttler, A. F., & La Greca, A. M. (2004). Linkages among adolescent girls' romantic

relationships, best friendships, and peer networks. Journal Of Adolescence, 27(4), 395-

414. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.05.002

Laursen, B., & Williams, V. A. (1997). Perceptions of interdependence and closeness in family

and peer relationships among adolescents with and without romantic partners. In S.

Shulman, W. A. Collins (Eds.), Romantic relationships in adolescence: Developmental

perspectives (pp. 3-20). San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.

Sprecher, S., & Felmlee, D. (1992). The influence of parents and friends on the quality and

stability of romantic relationships: A three-wave longitudinal investigation. Journal Of

Marriage And The Family, 54(4), 888-900. doi:10.2307/353170


Table 1

Summary of Reported Number of Friends as it is Related to Relationship Status and Relationship

Seriousness

Relationship Status In a Relationship Single

Relationship Seriousness Mean Std. Error N Mean Std. Error N

Not very 5.421 1.812 42 7.378 1.465 164

Somewhat 6.447 1.119 102 6.737 1.112 94

Very 10.756 1.588 104 20.402 3.101 17


Table 2

Summary of two Measures of Number of Friends for each Relationship Aspect

Relationship Aspects

Relationship Status

In a relationship

Single

Relationship Length

Short

Medium

Long

Relationship Seriousness

Not very

Somewhat

Very

Number of reported close

friends

Number of people think would

consider them a close friend

Mean Std. Error N

Mean Std. Error N

7.541 0.885 248

11.506 1.202 275

13.642 1.291 198

7.696 1.412 159

7.232 1.163 166

6.400 1.165 206

6.592 0.789 275

15.579 1.742 121

6.696 0.843 247

12.485 1.143 275

12.900 1.228 198

8.052 1.345 158

7.819 1.106 166

6.825 1.108 206

7.758 0.750 196

14.188 1.658 120


Figure 1. Number of reported close friends for those in a relationship as it relates to relationship length and relationship

seriousness.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

short medium long

Nu

mb

er

of

rep

ort

ed

clo

se f

rie

nd

s

Relationship Length

not very

somewhat

very

In a relationship

Relationship seriousness


Figure 2. Number of reported close friends for those who are single as it relates to relationship length and relationship

seriousness.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

short medium long

Nu

mb

er

of

rep

ort

ed

clo

se f

rie

nd

s

Relationship length

not very

somewhat

very

Single



Figure 3. Number of people those in a relationship thought would consider them a close friend as it relates to relationship

seriousness and relationship length.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

short medium long

Nu

mb

er

of

pe

op

le y

ou

th

ink

wo

uld

co

nsi

de

r yo

u a

clo

se f

rie

nd

Relationship length

not very

somewhat

very



Figure 4. Number of people those who are single thought would consider them a close friend as it relates to relationship


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

short medium long

Nu

mb

er

of

pe

op

le y

ou

th

ink

wo

uld

co

nsi

de

r yo

u a

clo

se f

rie

nd

Relationship length

not very

somewhat

very

Single



Figure 5. Number of reported close friends as it relates to relationship length and relationship seriousness.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

short medium long

Nu

mb

er

of

rep

ort

ed

clo

se f

rie

nd

s

Relationship length

not very

somewhat

very



Figure 6. Number of reported close friends as it relates to relationship length and relationship status.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

short medium long

Nu

mb

er

of

rep

ort

ed

clo

se f

rie

nd

s

Relationship length

In a relationship

Single

Relationship status


Figure 3. Number of people that college students thought would consider them a close friend as it relates to relationship


0

5

10

15

20

25

short medium long

Nu

mb

er

of

pe

op

le y

ou

th

ink

wo

uld

co

nsi

de

r yo

u a

clo

se f

rie

nd

Relationship length

not very

somewhat

very




status and relationship seriousness.

0

5

10

15

20

25

not very serious

somewhat serious

very serious

Nu

mb

er

of

pe

op

le y

ou

th

ink

wo

uld

co

nsi

de

r yo

u a

clo

se f

rie

nd


In a relationship

Single

Relationship status



status and relationship length.

0

5

10

15

20

25

short medium long

Nu

mb

er

of

pe

op

le y

ou

th

ink

wo

uld

co

nsi

de

r yo

u a

clo

se f

rie

nd

Relationship length

In a relationship

Single

Relationship status

Documents

How Romantic Relationships Influence Quantity of Friends