"Why didn't you just say so?" People use indirect opposition to assess partner commitment

Rather than directly confronting their partners, people often use indirect strategies (e.g., making sarcastic comments, muttering under their breath, being passively aggressive). Yet, whereas directly confronting a partner can bring about desired change, indirect opposition tends to undermine relationship quality without bringing about subsequent change. So, why do people engage in indirect opposition? We suggest one reason is to obtain diagnostic information about their partner's commitment. We tested this idea using seven studies that were diverse in design (i.e., cross-sectional, experimental, longitudinal), method of assessment (i.e., observational, self-reports, reaction times), and type of sample (i.e., online crowdsourced, undergraduates, community couples). Across studies, people were more likely to use indirect (vs. direct) oppositional behaviors to the extent that they were uncertain, and motivated to obtain information, about a partner's commitment. Moreover, suggesting that people believe indirect opposition offers more diagnostic information about a partner's commitment, Studies 4 and 5 demonstrated that partners' responses to indirect opposition were perceived to be more authentic and thus reflective of their commitment than responses to direct opposition. Together, these studies suggest that people use indirect opposition to test a partner's level of commitment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).