Did you know that psychologists have studied rebound relationships? I didn't, at least not until I encountered this summary of some rebound relationship research in Forbes. The title of the journalist's piece reads, "A psychologist explains 3 ways a rebound relationship can benefit your mental health."
It may interest you that this research goes against conventional wisdom. In this case, the conventional wisdom is that rebound relationships are bad for you, perhaps because they mean one is not adequately processing or mourning one's old relationship. However, you should be skeptical that the causal claim in the headline is actually supported by the studies.
We'll talk about two of the studies here. The first one suggests a rebound relationship might help "acceptance of your breakup". The summary reads:
Contrary to popular belief, the mental health of people who opt for rebound relationships isn’t really worse off than people who choose to remain single after a significant breakup. In fact, according to research published in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, people who went for new relationships shortly after ending one were more resolute about their decision to break up with their ex-partner.
The "people who" language that is used here seems to hint that we're dealing with a correlational study, not an experimental one. And that makes sense, right? It's unlikely we'd be able to manipulate the "rebound relationship" variable by randomly assigning some recently broken-up people to have a new sweetheart or not.
Let's walk through why this study is correlational.
a) In the text above, the first measured variable is contained in this phrase: "people who went for new relationships shortly after ending one". The variable could be named "how fast you entered a new relationship". What might this variable's levels be? Why is this variable probably measured?
b) the second measured variable is mentioned here: "were more resolute about their decision to break up with their ex-partner." The variable could be named "Degree of confidence in the break-up decision". What might this variable's levels be? Why is this variable probably measured?
c) Now sketch a scatterplot! Take your answers to a) and b) and put them on the x and y axes of a scatterplot. Then add the points. Will your dots slope positively? Or negatively?
d) Now think about causation. What might be the temporal sequence of these two variables? The journalist implies one direction (A --> B): that the quicker breakup came first, and caused people to become more resolute about their decision. But what about B --> A. Could that causal direction plausibly work here?
e) Another aspect of causation is internal validity, or third variable problems. Sometimes a third variable, C, might go with both A and B, and be responsible for their correlation. For example, maybe people whose previous relationships were shorter were more likely to date new people sooner, and people in shorter previous relationships were also more resolute about their decisions to break up. Can you think of another C variable that might be responsible? Explain how your C variable goes with both A (how fast they entered a new relationship) and B (degree of confidence in break-up decision).
The third study concerns how a rebound relationship might provide "a boost to your self-esteem". Here's the journalist's summary:
[After a breakup,] you may feel unattractive, lonely, and just generally low ...
Psychologist Claudia Brumbaugh told BBC in an interview that, according to her research, rebound relationships can help people feel “more confident, desirable, (and) loveable. Possibly because they had proven it to themselves. They had more feelings of personal growth and independence. They were more over their ex, they felt more secure. There were no cases where people who were single were better off.”
f) In this study, the levels of the first measured variable are contained in the phrases: "rebound relationships" and "people who were single". What might you name this variable? Think of a name that captures both levels at once. Why is this variable probably measured?
g) The second measured variable is mentioned here: "more confident, desirable, (and) loveable.." In fact, this probably represents three variables. What might be the levels of each of these variables? Why are they probably measured?
h) Now sketch a bar graph. Look back at f) and g) (picking just one of the variables in g for the y-axis). Then estimate the heights of the two bars. Why did we suggest a bar graph here, and not a scatterplot?
i) Now think about causation. What might be the temporal sequence of these two variables? The journalist implies one direction (A --> B): that the rebound relationship (or p0st-relationship singlehood) came first, and caused people to become more confident, desirable, and loveaable. But what about B --> A. Could that causal direction plausibly work here?
j) Another aspect of causation is third variables. Sometimes a third variable, C, might go with both A and B, and be responsible for their correlation. For example, maybe people who are more extroverted more likely to start new relationships, and maybe people who are extroverted were also more likely to feel confident and desirable. Can you think of another C variable that might be responsible? Explain how your C variable goes with both A (being in a rebound relationship vs. being single) and B (more confidence or desirability)?
