Romantic relationships as teams: Implications of holding a team perception of one’s romantic relationship for relationship functioning

People often describe their romantic relationships as “teams,” but relationship science has yet to systematically investigate the implications of perceiving one’s relationship as a team. Drawing on definitions of teams from multiple domains (e.g., sport psychology, organizational behavior, military psychology, and healthcare), which emphasize cohesion and collaboration as key features of teams, I conducted five studies (two pilot surveys and three main studies) investigating team perceptions among romantically involved adults. Across these studies, I examined the extent to which individuals do indeed perceive their relationship as a team using a newly developed measure of team perception of one’s romantic relationship (TEAM), examined the relations between this measure and measures of other prominent relationship constructs, and tested the implications of a team perception for relationship functioning. In Pilot Studies 1 (N = 279) and 2 (N = 149) and Study 1 (N = 197), the TEAM scale exhibited high internal consistency and high mean endorsement, indicating that people commonly view their romantic relationships as teams. However, there was also considerable variability, suggesting that people differ meaningfully in team perception. TEAM was correlated with other relationship constructs (e.g., relationship satisfaction, relationship quality, couple identity clarity, and shared reality) in theoretically expected directions, but exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses provided evidence that team perception is empirically distinct from these constructs. Moreover, regression analyses indicated that TEAM predicted unique variance in relationship functioning outcomes, such as perceived partner support and frequency of aversive conflict, beyond other relationship constructs (e.g., relationship quality). Using an experimental design in Study 2 (N = 265), I tested team perception’s links with relationship functioning, narrowing my focus to perceived partner responsiveness, an index of high-quality support. Participants randomly assigned to a “low team condition” reported lower state team perception than those in a control condition, rated a standardized hypothetical support message as lower in perceived partner responsiveness, and subsequently expressed less partner-oriented positivity, (love/affection and gratitude) as rated by coders. In Study 3 (N = 126 dyads), I examined the implications of team perception for perceived and coder-rated partner responsiveness in a dyadic interaction study. Support seekers who scored higher in team perception both perceived and received (as rated by coders) greater responsiveness from their partner, and these associations remained when controlling for other relationship constructs (e.g., relationship quality). Support seekers’ team perception also predicted the partner-oriented positivity they expressed, suggesting the possibility of reinforcing cycles of partner-oriented positivity and partner responsiveness among people high in team perception. Support providers’ team perception also showed links to the support they provided, although these effects were less robust than those involving seekers’ team perception. Together, these findings introduce team perception as a robust predictor of how romantic partners navigate key interpersonal processes (support and conflict), highlighting the relational consequences of perceiving one’s relationship as a team.