COMMUNICATION IN LONGDISTANCE RELATIONSHIPS
Patterns and relationships
DECEMBER 2023
BARUCH COLLEGE
Com 4906 by professor. Richard Wilkins
1
Introduction
My research topic revolves around the problems that occur in long distance dating relationships
and long-distance friendships. The research is meant to find more about what aspects of a
relationship are most affected by long distance and the conflicts that may arise as a result. In
addition to different coping techniques and problems of idealization and uncertainty. Concluding
with providing some solutions to the most occurring problems.
Li, S., Zhang, Y., & Zhao, D. (2005). A Longitudinal Study: Does Synchronous Channel Use Affect the LongDistance Relationship? Conference Papers -- International Communication Association, 1–18
This study focuses mainly on the importance of communication methods used in long distance
relationships and their relationship to satisfaction. The study compares the effectiveness of
synchronous vs asynchronous communication based on two variables, overall relationship
satisfaction and temporary communication satisfaction. The study has found that using preferred
synchronous channels was directly related to increased feeling of happiness and decreased
feelings of anger, which subsequently lead to higher levels of relationship satisfaction. Moreover,
researchers found that the results differ among the synchronous channels as there are
synchronous channels preferred and synchronous channels used, but not necessarily preferred
by both parties. In general, the study didn’t find a significant difference between synchronous vs
asynchronous channels used. However, there was noticeable positive relationship between
relationship satisfaction and synchronous channels preferred.
Kuske, M. R. (2020). Social Media Use in the Maintenance of Long-Distance Romantic Relationships in
College.
UWL
Journal
of
Undergraduate
Research
XXIII
(2020).
https://www.uwlax.edu/globalassets/offices-services/urc/juronline/pdf/2020/kuske.morgan.cst2020.pdf
The study focuses on the emerging dominance of social media usage in long distance
relationships communication. The study subjects were mainly college students who are the most
prone to experiencing long distance relationships because of relocating for college, in addition to
their high social media activity. The study compares the quality and type of communication
between LDRC (Long-Distance Romantic Couple) and GCC (Geographically Close Couple)
explaining that LDRC relies heavily on verbal communication to compensate for physical distance.
The study also addressed other problems faced by LDRC such as idealization, jealousy, and
uncertainty. The study compared the differences between selecting some specific social media
applications and their type of content, ease of usability, and lack of technical issues. It also
mentioned how sharing content on said apps in starting conversations and avoiding stagnation.
Hence, in this category, apps with news feed were preferred.
Nadin Kenawy
2
Studying relationships is a complex area in communication research. I'm particularly
interested in long-distance relationships because they heavily rely on communication to keep the
connection strong. Understanding how couples manage communication when they can't meet in
person is important.
My research focuses on figuring out how couples in long-distance relationships
communicate. I want to understand not just the usual communication patterns but also the problems
that might come up due to the distance. Additionally, I'm looking into different ways these couples
resolve conflicts to see how well these methods work for them.
A crucial part of my study is evaluating how satisfied people in long-distance relationships
are with their communication. I'm doing a detailed analysis of the happiness levels reported by
individuals in these relationships. Through this research, I hope to provide valuable insights into
how long-distance relationships function and how couples in these situations are doing.
In the next parts, I'll explain some ideas (hypotheses) I've come up with based on my research
questions. I'll use data from surveys and analysis to draw conclusions, aiming to contribute to a
better understanding of what goes on in long-distance relationships.
Hypothesis:
H0: The frequency of in-person meetings does not affect the extent of idealization between
couples.
Explanation:
This hypothesis is grounded in the idea that the way people communicate through various
media, such as phone calls, video calls, or chat, allows for a high degree of selectivity in what
individuals choose to reveal about themselves. In these virtual interactions, individuals can
Nadin Kenawy
3
carefully curate which aspects of their personality they present and which ones they may
intentionally conceal or emphasize.
Contrastingly, when couples meet in person, it provides an opportunity for a more
unfiltered view of each other's true personalities, even if attempts are made to hide certain traits.
The hypothesis suggests that face-to-face meetings offer a more authentic insight into a person's
character, which might not be fully conveyed or perceived during mediated communication.
Moreover, the hypothesis posits that communication through media may inadvertently contribute
to idealization, where individuals unconsciously overlook or downplay the shortcomings of their
partner. In essence, the communication medium may create a distorted, idealized image of the
partner, as individuals might choose not to acknowledge certain flaws, unintentionally placing their
partner on a pedestal.
In summary, the hypothesis posits that the frequency of in-person meetings does not exert
a significant influence on the degree of idealization individuals have about their partners. Contrary
to the notion that in-person interactions might reduce idealization, the hypothesis maintains that
neither the frequency of face-to-face meetings nor mediated communication significantly affects
the extent of idealization. Instead, it suggests that idealization may persist irrespective of the mode
of communication—whether in person or through mediated channels—due to the selective nature
of information sharing and perception.
The questions used to measure the relationship between those two variables are as follows:
The study used several questions to explore the connection between two variables:
1. Q4: How often do you meet your long-distance partner face to face?
Nadin Kenawy
4
2. Q16: How do you perceive your partner's actions or decisions, even when they make a
mistake?
3. Q6: How would you describe the impact of your partner's presence on your overall wellbeing and happiness?
4. Q18: How often do you discuss your partner's positive qualities with friends or family?
The frequency of face-to-face meetings (Q4) was used to gauge how often couples physically met.
Questions 16 and 18 (Q16 & Q18) were employed to assess the degree of idealization by
understanding how participants perceive their partner's actions, especially in moments of mistake,
and how frequently they discuss their partner's positive qualities with others.
The chi-square test results presented the observed number of individuals displaying tendencies
towards idealizing their partners, categorized by the frequency of face-to-face meetings. The data
was divided into two groups: those who meet frequently and those who don't. The test aims to
determine if there is a significant relationship between the frequency of in-person meetings and
the tendency to idealize a partner.
Observed
Meet frequently
Idealistic
Non-Idealistic couple
Totals
Meet Infrequently Totals
5
32
37
14
11
25
19
43
62
Expected
Idealistic
Non-Idealistic couple
Totals
Chi square test:
Nadin Kenawy
Meet frequently
Meet Infrequently Totals
11.33870968
25.66129032
37
7.661290323
17.33870968
25
19
43
62
0.000371359
5
The findings indicate that, given the chi-square value falling below 0.05, we have sufficient
evidence to reject the null hypothesis. This implies that there is, indeed, a statistically significant
relationship between the frequency of in-person meetings among long-distance couples and the
inclination toward idealization.
Visualized below is a graph illustrating both the observed and expected numbers of couples as
measured in this hypothesis.
Idealizing Vs. Non-idealizing couple
(Observed)
35
32
30
25
20
14
15
11
10
5
5
0
1
2
Idealizing couple
Non-idealizing couple
Idealizing Vs. Non-idealizing couple
(Expected)
Idealizing couple
30
Non-Idealizing couple
25,66129032
25
20
15
17,33870968
11,33870968
7,661290323
10
5
0
1
Nadin Kenawy
2
6
To further prove our findings, we have conducted a t-test or in this case a Z-test to test the
difference in the means between our two variables and the p-value result.
The difference in means between the two variables present the following results:
The mean of the first variable, which is the frequency of in-person meeting, is 2.4. Meaning
that most respondents are more likely to meet their partners infrequently.
The mean of the second variable which is how idealistic participants view their partners is
1.8, meaning that 1.8, which means that on average, respondents describe the impact of their
partner's presence on their overall well-being and happiness as very positive, leaning towards the
most positive end of the scale.
In addition, the p-value of 0.007, which is way below our significance level of 0.05, further
proves our earlier findings, proving that the two variables have a significant relationship with one
another, hence, they are dependent.
As for the correlation result of the t-test, the Pearson correlation coefficient is -0.46,
indicating a moderate negative correlation between the two variables. As the frequency of inperson meetings decreases, the idealistic view of the partner's impact on well-being and happiness
tends to increase (and vice versa).
Mean
Variance
Observations
Pearson Correlation
Hypothesized Mean
Difference
df
t Stat
P(T<=t) one-tail
t Critical one-tail
Nadin Kenawy
3
2.392156863
0.923137255
51
-0.463393631
0
50
2.540845918
0.007104294
1.675904967
1
1.862745098
0.600784314
51
7
P(T<=t) two-tail
t Critical two-tail
0.014208588
2.008559072
The second hypothesis examined in this research is as follows:
H0: There is no association between the frequency of in-person meetings and
relationship satisfaction among long-distance couples.
My rationale for this hypothesis stems from the belief that face-to-face communication
holds a unique value compared to mediated forms. In-person interactions reveal more authentic
human reactions, which are often less visible in chats or calls. People tend to express their emotions
and natural responses more openly in real-life encounters than behind screens. Consequently, my
hypothesis suggests that the infrequency of in-person communication may have a negative impact
on relationship satisfaction.
The variables for testing the second hypothesis were assessed using the following
questions:
1. Q4: How often do you meet your long-distance partner face to face?
2. Q21: When thinking about your relationship, which word best describes your feelings?
As previously mentioned, Q4 gauged the frequency of in-person meetings between
couples. Regarding Q21, participants were prompted to select one word that best encapsulated
their current long-distance relationship, with choices ranging from joyful to unfulfilled. The
combined responses from both questions were analyzed to investigate whether partners who meet
less frequently are more inclined to describe their relationship negatively, thereby determining if
there exists a connection between face-to-face meetings and relational satisfaction.
Nadin Kenawy
8
Below are the results of the chi-square test performed to measure the difference between
the observed and expected outcomes of measuring the relationship between the values.
Observed
6 months or less
6 months or more
Total
satisfied
Observed
6 months or less
6 months or more
Total
satisfied
Chi-square test:
0.567292636
dissatisfied
12
14
26
14
22
36
26
36
62
15.10
20.90
36
26
36
62
dissatisfied
10.90
15.10
26
The chi-square statistic yielded a value of approximately 0.57, surpassing the significance
level of 0.05. This indicates that the observed data does not provide sufficient evidence to reject
the null hypothesis, which posits no relationship between the variables. In simpler terms, the results
suggest that there is no statistically significant association between the frequency of in-person
meetings and relational satisfaction among long-distance couples.
In practical terms, this implies that couples who meet less frequently may not necessarily
experience negative feelings about the overall success of their relationship. The lack of statistical
significance suggests that variations in the frequency of face-to-face interactions do not reliably
predict changes in relational satisfaction, as observed in the study. Consequently, these findings
challenge the assumption that the frequency of in-person meetings directly correlates with how
couples perceive the success of their long-distance relationships.
Nadin Kenawy
9
Below is a paragraph that helps with visualizing the results of our findings,

Series 1: couples who meet every 6 months or less.

Series 2: couples who meet every 6 months or more.
In-person meeting & relational
satisfaction(observed)
25
22
20
15
14
12
14
10
5
0
1
2
Ряд1
Ряд2
In-person meeting & relational
satisfaction(expected)
25,00
20,90
20,00
15,10
15,00
15,10
10,90
10,00
5,00
0,00
1
2
Ряд1
Our third hypothesis is:
Nadin Kenawy
Ряд2
10
H0: There is no difference in the distribution of compromising and avoidance behaviors
between genders when facing disagreements.
The third hypothesis explores the potential influence of gender on the manifestation of
compromising and avoidance behaviors during disagreements within romantic relationships. The
assumption is rooted in the speculation that gender-based differences may shape individuals'
approaches to conflict resolution. Specifically, the hypothesis posits that there is an absence of
significant variation in the prevalence of compromising and avoidance behaviors between different
genders.
Compromising behavior involves finding a middle ground or mutually agreeable solution
during disagreements. This could manifest as a willingness to negotiate, consider the partner's
perspective, and reach a consensus that accommodates both parties. The hypothesis questions
whether one gender, on average, engages in compromising behavior to a similar extent as the other.
Avoidance behavior, on the other hand, encompasses strategies where individuals may
sidestep or evade conflict rather than directly addressing it. This could involve ignoring the issue,
withdrawing from discussions, or postponing conflict resolution. The hypothesis questions
whether there is a gender-related distinction in the propensity to employ avoidance behaviors
during disagreements.
To test the hypothesis, we used the following questions:
1. Q30: What is your gender?
2. Q13: How do you typically manage conflicts related to differences in future plans or goals?
These two questions were used to entail whether specific genders tend to have certain responses towards
relationship conflicts.
Nadin Kenawy
11
The chi-square test results that would show us whether there’s a significant relationship between the
variables being tested or not, and they’re at follows:
Observed
Male
Female
Totals
Observed
Male
Female
Totals
Avoidance behavior
Compromising behavior
7
0
7
8
25
33
Avoidance behavior
2.625
4.375
7
Compromising behavior
12.375
20.625
33
Chi square test:
Totals
15
25
40
Totals
15
25
40
0.000169569
Based on this result, we must reject the null hypothesis. Meaning, there’s a statistically significant
relationship between the two variables.
The chi-square test yielded a highly significant result (p = 0.000169), indicating a substantial
relationship between gender and the choice of avoidant or compromising behaviors in the context of
romantic long-distance relationships.
Female Participants:
Women demonstrated a clear preference for compromising behaviors, suggesting a tendency to
seek middle ground and find diplomatic solutions during disagreements. Notably, none of the female
participants exhibited a preference for avoidance behaviors, indicating a reluctance to avoid conflicts,
possibly rooted in their perceived diplomatic nature.
Male Participants:
Nadin Kenawy
12
In contrast, male participants displayed a higher inclination toward avoiding conflicts and showed
less tendency to adopt compromising behaviors compared to their female counterparts. This inclination
towards avoidance in men may be attributed to their affirmative nature, while the lesser inclination
towards compromising behaviors aligns with traditional gender expectations.
These findings underscore the presence of distinct patterns in conflict resolution behaviors based
on gender in romantic long-distance relationships. While women lean towards compromise and eschew
avoidance, men tend to exhibit avoidance tendencies and display less inclination towards finding middle
ground during disagreements.
Below is a graph visually representing the results:
Genter and compromise/avoidance
(observed)
30
25
25
20
15
10
8
7
5
0
0
1
2
Ряд1
Male
s
Female
Ряд2
Genter and
compromise/avoidance(expected)
25
20,625
20
12,375
15
10
5
4,375
2,625
0
1
2
Ряд1
Male
s
Nadin Kenawy
Ряд2
Female
13
The fourth hypothesis we’ll be presenting tests whether there’s a relationship between the quality
of communication and the frequency of disagreements in long-distance relationships.
H0: there's no relationship between couples’ communication quality and the frequency of their
disagreements.
This hypothesis is built on the conjecture that the quality of communication plays a pivotal role in
influencing the frequency of disagreements among couples in long-distance relationships. Given the
heightened reliance on communication in the absence of physical proximity, it is speculated that the
effectiveness of communication directly impacts the overall dynamics of the relationship.
The questions that were used to measure this relationship is as follows:
1. Q7: How often do you face disagreements in your long-distance relationship?
2. Q8: How would you describe the way you and your partner communicate?
Below are the chi-square results:
Observed
quality communication
Problematic
communication
Totals
Rarely disagree
Expected
quality communication
Problematic
communication
Totals
Rarely disagree
frequently disagree Totals
22.65
8.35
Chi-square test:
frequently disagree Totals
29
2
31
9
38
21
52
15.35
38
12
14
5.65
14
31
21
52
0.000052634362
The results of the chi-square test conducted on the two variables lead to a non-rejection of the
null hypothesis. With a chi-square p-value below the significance level, it indicates a statistically significant
Nadin Kenawy
14
relationship between the quality of communication in long-distance relationships and the frequency of
disagreements.
The responses to Question 7, ranging from 1 (Never) to 4 (All the time), gauged the frequency of
disagreements. Question 8, ranging from 1 (We communicate openly and frequently) to 4 (We rarely
communicate, and it's often problematic), captured the perceived quality of communication. The
statistical analysis suggests that the perceived quality of communication is linked to the frequency of
disagreements in long-distance relationships.
The answers to question 7 ranged between 1. Never to 4. All the time. As for question 8 the
answers ranged between 1. We communicate openly and frequently and 4. We rarely communicate, and
it's often problematic.
Below is a t-test performed to test the relationship between the two variables:
q7
Mean
Variance
Observations
Pearson Correlation
Hypothesized Mean
Difference
df
t Stat
P(T<=t) one-tail
t Critical one-tail
P(T<=t) two-tail
t Critical two-tail
q8
2
2.37254902
0.318431373
51
0.459568211
1
1.784313725
0.73254902
51
0
50
5.39163866
9.48757E-07
1.675904967
0.0000018975
2.008559072
The t-test results suggest a statistically significant relationship between the perceived quality of
communication and the frequency of disagreements in long-distance relationships. The mean difference
of 0.59 indicates that, on average, there is a substantial difference in how individuals perceive the quality
Nadin Kenawy
15
of communication when considering the frequency of disagreements. The extremely low p-value
strengthens the evidence, supporting the conclusion that the perceived quality of communication is
associated with the frequency of disagreements in the context of long-distance relationships.
Nadin Kenawy
16
References:

Li S, Zhang Y, Zhao D. A Longitudinal Study: Does Synchronous Channel Use Affect the LongDistance Relationship? Conference Papers -- International Communication Association. May
2005:1-18.
Accessed
December
13,
2023.
https://search-ebscohost-
com.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=18654896&site=ehost-live

Kuske, M. R. (2020). Social Media Use in the Maintenance of Long-Distance Romantic
Relationships
in
College.
UWL
Journal
of
Undergraduate
Research
XXIII
(2020).
https://www.uwlax.edu/globalassets/offices-services/urc/juronline/pdf/2020/kuske.morgan.cst2020.pdf

Cameron, J. J., & Ross, M. (2007). In Times of Uncertainty: Predicting the Survival of Long-Distance
Relationships.
Journal
of
Social
Psychology,
147(6),
581–606.
https://doi-
org.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/10.3200/SOCP.147.6.581-606

Pattie, B. (2009). The Impact of Conflict Management Styles on Relational and Communication
Satisfaction Comparing Long-Distance and Geographically Close Dating Relationships. Conference
Papers -- National Communication Association, 1.
Nadin Kenawy