arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

If I cannot bounce back easily, can I handle the truth? Satisfaction in romantic relationships, resilience and preference towards prosocial lies

Sebastian Wnęk & Katarzyna Cantarero

Journal of Social Psychology2026https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2025.2607672article
AJG 1ABDC B
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

Although honesty is vital for trust and stability, individuals in romantic relationships may sometimes favor deception over harsh truths. This study examines the relationship between relationship satisfaction, resilience, and the preference for hearing prosocial lies from a romantic partner. We hypothesized that prosocial lies may be positively linked to relationship satisfaction, especially for less resilient individuals who rely on positive feedback to manage stress. First, we piloted scenarios depicting prosocial and egoistic lies in romantic relationships. Next, individuals (<i>N</i> = 672) chose whether they preferred their partner to lie or tell the truth. Results showed that lower relationship satisfaction was associated with a greater preference for hearing prosocial lies. This association was mediated by perceiving truth as harmful at mean and high levels of emotional resilience, indicating that prosocial lies are less desired in satisfying relationships but preferred in strained ones.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2025.2607672

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{sebastian2026,
  title        = {{If I cannot bounce back easily, can I handle the truth? Satisfaction in romantic relationships, resilience and preference towards prosocial lies}},
  author       = {Sebastian Wnęk & Katarzyna Cantarero},
  journal      = {Journal of Social Psychology},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2025.2607672},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

If I cannot bounce back easily, can I handle the truth? Satisfaction in romantic relationships, resilience and preference towards prosocial lies

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.