Research on relationships as a prelude to action: Response to commentaries

I respond to the three commentaries offered by Reis (2002), Muehlhoff and Wood (2002), and Hendrick (2002) in reaction to my article, Research on Relationships as a Prelude to Action. The central theme in the original article was that greater emphasis on research conducted with the goal of improving relationships would yield great dividends to relationship science, particularly by overcoming conceptual and methodological limitations now evident in the field. These three comments bring into focus several factors that may temper enthusiasm for a change-oriented research agenda, including uncertainty about which research findings ultimately will prove useful in devising interventions, value judgments associated with determining which kinds of changes and outcomes are desirable, and concerns that change-oriented research will undermine theory development. I argue that these factors may limit acceptance and complicate implementation of a change-oriented research agenda, yet they do not diminish the importance of such an agenda or the benefits it is likely to produce.