Perceived Relationship Readiness on Self-Esteem with Gender-Based Analyses

by Tate Madison & Anthony Thomas

Abstract

Social feedback is widely prevalent in college settings, often with negative implications of students’ sense of self, confidence, and mental health. This study aimed to explore the impact of perceived relationship readiness, alongside gender differences, on self-esteem. We hypothesized that participants told they were ready for a relationship would show higher self-esteem than those told they were not; and that men would show higher self-esteem than women and nonbinary/prefer not to say groups. This study consisted of two self-esteem evaluations and a relationship readiness condition. We analyzed data from 51 undergraduate participants, with the majority being female. Our hypotheses were tested with a two-way ANOVA. Perceived relationship readiness did not predict self-esteem in either men or women. Gender did not predict their self-esteem scores. Additionally, their interaction did not predict self-esteem. These results were found to be inconsistent with our hypotheses. The pattern of our results were trending towards significance, despite the low sample size. A main limitation of our study was low sample size and lack of participant diversity. Future research could investigate the implications of social feedback in dating on the mental health and psychological well-being of college students.

---

Gender Differences in Perceived Relationship Readiness on Self-Esteem

College is often a student's first real experience with dating and relationships. People often receive social feedback from their friends and possible romantic partners. Social feedback may have both positive and negative impacts on self-esteem, well-being, and social relationships.

This study investigated the gender differences within the impact of perceived relationship readiness on self-esteem. We aimed to explore the impacts of social feedback in romantic relationship settings on self-worth and self-evaluation. 

Perceived Relationship Readiness

Perceived relationship readiness in this study is the assumption from an outside source that someone is or is not ready for a relationship. Prior research suggests that social feedback or interactions can be tied to self-esteem, psychological well-being, and outcomes in relationships. Changes in self-esteem from social acceptance or rejection have been shown to guide social behavior (van Schie et al., 2023). This study found that increases in self-esteem due to positive evaluation was associated with increased social learning, but decreased non-social learning. A decrease in self-esteem due to negative evaluation was associated with decreased non-social learning as well. They concluded that increases in self-esteem due to positive evaluation can induce a shift in the inclination to use social versus non-social information. 

Similarly, research has shown that individuals with low self-esteem suffer from poor relationship well-being and benefit less from positive social feedback (Hoplock et al., 2019). In this study, participants with low self-esteem felt undeserving of positive social feedback, which undermined their relationship well-being. 

Self-perceptions of readiness have also been found to correlate between relationship status and psychological well-being. Tan et al. (2023) found that coupled individuals higher in commitment readiness reported greater levels of well-being than single individuals, whereas coupled individuals lower in commitment readiness reported lower levels compared to their single counterparts. Self-reported commitment readiness in this study was shown to impact overall psychological well-being, with differences in coupled versus single individuals. These findings suggest that social feedback, and especially that related to social feedback within relationships, may have a significant impact on self-esteem and overall well-being.

Gender

Gender differences in this study is examined as a factor influencing individuals’ responses to social feedback and self-evaluation. Prior research has suggested that men and women respond differently to social interactions and these have varying implications on their self-esteem. Ratliff (2013) found that men’s self-esteem was negatively impacted by their romantic partner’s success, and furthermore that their self-esteem was negatively impacted by thinking about a romantic partner’s success both when the success is and is not relative. Women’s implicit self-esteem was unaffected by partner performance. The gender differences presented in this study have implications for understanding social comparison in romantic relationships. 

Additionally, Muratori et al., (2026) found gender differences in self-esteem, narcissism, and externalizing problems in childhood. In boys, narcissism was positively associated with externalizing problems only among those with high self-esteem, and oppositely only in girls with low self-esteem. These findings indicate that gender plays an important role in how individuals respond to social feedback and interact with each other.

Self Esteem

Self-esteem in this study reflects how individuals evaluate their self-worth in response to social feedback and social interactions. Research has shown that social relationships and self-esteem reciprocally predict each other over time (Harris & Orth, 2020). The effect of self-esteem on relationships slightly varied, being stronger for general relationships than for specific partners and stronger for self-reported than for informant-reported relationship characteristics. This supports the influence of social relationships on self-esteem; and emphasizes that the link between social relationships and self-esteem is consistently reciprocal and reflects a positive feedback loop between the two. Social comparison and interpersonal relationships have also been shown to have implications on self-esteem (Mann & Blumberg, 2022). Feared possible selves are an imagined, unwanted version of who you might become. This study found the relationship between gender and feared possible selves to be significant; women reported more feared possible selves related to interpersonal relationships than men. These findings suggest that self-esteem is dynamic and highly influenced by social feedback.

Study overview

This study aimed to address the gender differences within the impact of perceived relationship readiness on self-esteem for which there is no existing literature yet. Participants completed a survey containing two self-esteem evaluations and a relationship readiness condition. The conditions read short blurbs stating the participant is either ready for a relationship and positive affirmations or that the participant is not ready and encourage them to take time to reflect prior to pursuing one. Their self-esteem was tested before and after the readiness conditions, being scored in similar manners. 

We hypothesized that participants who were told they were ready for a relationship  would have higher self-esteem than participants who were told they were not ready for a relationship. Concurrently we also hypothesised that men in both relationship readiness conditions would have higher self-esteem than women & nonbinary/prefer not to say groups. We expect men in the readiness condition to have the highest self-esteem and women in the no-readiness condition to have the lowest self-esteem.

Methods

Participants

We had 64 total undergraduate students who participated in our survey. We excluded 13 participants due to outside circumstances such as 1 participant not filling out their age, as well as 9 participants not filling out the entirety of the survey. We also cut the 3 non-binary/prefer not to say participants from our data, due to the fact that their data wasn’t sufficient enough to use.The remaining 51 participants are undergraduate students who range from ages 19-23. The majority of our participants were women, women being 71% and men being 29%. With our participants, 64.71% were Caucasian, 13.73% were Asian, 11.76% were African American, 7.84% were Multiethinic, and 1.96% were Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish Origin. There were 4 that self described their race. Most participants were Psychology majors, but we also had participants that were Engineering majors, Communications majors, and Economics majors. 

Design

This research has two independent variables and one dependent variable for a 2x2 ANOVA study design. The first independent variable was perceived relationship readiness. The second independent variable was gender. The dependent variable for our study was self-esteem. 

Procedure

Participants who consented to participate in the study began to answer demographic questions. Demographics consisted of age, gender, race/ethnicity, and major.

Participants first encountered the pre-test. They responded to 18 questions in regard to relationships, friendships, emotional intelligence/maturity, and self-esteem. The self-esteem questions came from the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1979). Participants responded to all 10 of the questions in order, with filler questions in between about relationships, friendships, and emotional intelligence/maturity. The pre-test served as what they believed to decide their relationship readiness.

After completing the pre-test, participants were randomly assigned to a readiness condition. Participants in the Readiness Condition read a short blurb saying their responses showed they’re ready for a relationship and relevant positive affirmations. Participants in the ‘Not Ready’ condition read a short blurb saying that, based on their responses, they do not seem ready for a relationship, and encouraged them to take their time for reflection and growth.

Following the readiness conditions, participants completed a post-test. The post test consisted of a shortened version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale. It was six questions in randomized order. 

Ethical Process

Participants read the conditions of consent, and either selected “I consent” or “I do not consent”. Participants who did not consent were taken to the end of the survey.

At the end of the questionnaire, participants were taken to a debriefing page that thanked the participants, informed them that the condition they were assigned to was random and not representative of their actual chosen responses, and had a short summary of our study purpose.

Materials

Pre-test self-esteem

This was an 18-item questionnaire using the 10-item Rosenberg self-esteem scale (Rosenberg, 1979) which included statements such as :“ 1. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.”. To avoid suspicion, filler questions were also added with statements such as: “I have a good relationship with my parents”. They were then asked to rank each statement from 1 (strongly agree) to 4 (strongly disagree). To see full scale, go to Appendix A. 

Relationship Readiness Conditions 

Participants either encountered the relationship ready condition or the not ready for relationship condition, randomly assigned after the pre-test. This was done to ensure a clear difference in measuring self-esteem before and after the condition. 

Readiness Condition. “Based on your responses, you seem to be ready for a relationship. You seem emotionally mature, as well as open to maintaining and developing healthy relationships. Good luck out there, hope you find the one!”

Not Ready Condition. “Based on your responses, you do not seem ready for a relationship. You should try to do some reflection and growth before attempting to pursue a relationship. Take your time!”

Post-test self-esteem

This was a shortened questionnaire of the 10 item Rosenberg self-esteem scale (Rosenberg, 1979) which included statements such as: “I wish I could have more respect for myself.” To further decrease suspicion, we used a shortened questionnaire in a randomized order. They were then asked to rank each statement from 1 (strongly agree) to 4 (strongly disagree). To see full scale, go to Appendix B.

Results

Analysis techniques

For this study, we completed a 2 x 2 ANOVA to understand the effects of perceived relationship readiness on self-esteem with gender as a subject variable. In addition, we calculated two Cronbach’s alphas to assess the reliability of our pre and post-test (Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale) scales.

We found the Cronbach’s alpha for both pre-test results  (ɑ = 0.86) and post-test results (ɑ = 0.78). Both scales had a high score above ɑ = .75 and therefore had good reliability.

Self-Esteem

We hypothesized that men would have higher self-esteem than women. Concurrently, we hypothesized that participants in the ready condition would have higher self-esteem than participants in the no-readiness condition. We expected men in the readiness condition to have the highest self-esteem and women in the no-readiness condition to have the lowest self-esteem.

To measure the effect of perceived readiness condition on self-esteem we calculated the difference between self-esteem scores before receiving feedback and after.

These hypotheses were tested with a two-way ANOVA predicting self-esteem from gender and relationship readiness condition. Gender did not significantly predict self-esteem F (1,47) = 0.74, p = 0.4. Additionally, the not ready condition did not predict self-esteem Readiness Condition F(1,47) = 2.13, p = 0.15. The not ready condition and gender did not interact to predict self-esteem F(1,47) = 0.26, p = 0.61. These results were inconsistent with our hypothesis. For the visual results, see Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Self-Esteem Difference

Figure 1. Mean differences in self-esteem scores across gender and readiness conditions. The two-way ANOVA revealed no significant main effects for gender or readiness condition, and no significant interaction between the readiness condition and gender.

Discussion

Over the course of this study, we examined gender differences within the effects of perceived relationship readiness on self-esteem. We originally hypothesized that participants in the ready condition would have a higher self-esteem than participants in the not ready condition. 

Additionally, we hypothesized that male participants would have higher self-esteem than their female counterparts. Finally, we hypothesized that male participants in the ready condition would have the highest self-esteem, while female participants in the not ready condition would have the lowest self-esteem.

Overall, our hypotheses were inconsistent with our results, with none showing significance, with the perceived readiness condition not predicting self-esteem in either men or women. Additionally, the gender of participants did not predict their self-esteem scores, consistent with the null hypothesis. Perceived relationship readiness condition and gender did not separately, nor did their interaction, predict self-esteem.

Limitations

One limitation of this study is its small sample size. We were only able to analyze data from 51 participants. With such a small sample, it is difficult to accurately identify significant relationships in our data. Within this sample we had 15 male participants and 36 female participants. This is a drastic difference in gendered participants. With a larger sample size and a more even gender distribution within our participant sample, this would likely increase the accuracy of our results. Additionally, there were issues around data collection which further lead to a reduced participant sample size. For example, while 64 participants originally took the survey, we had to exclude 13 participants’ data, mainly due to incompleteness of the survey. We also had to discard 3 non-binary/prefer not to say participants, due to their number not being sufficient enough for use and analysis. Our results were trending towards significance, and this study redone with a larger population could possibly show significance.

Another limitation of this study is its online format. Participants may have less of an emotional reaction to perceived relationship readiness given to them by a computer algorithm, compared to a person giving them feedback face-to-face. Participants may have more care receiving feedback from a person than a computer. Additionally, they may be more likely to believe the credibility of their social feedback if they think it’s from a person assessing them. Participants may not have believed their readiness condition and that contributed to the lack of change in their self esteem. 

Future Research

Future research within this topic could investigate the impact of other social feedback, especially surrounding romantic relationships, on self-esteem, but given from a real person, as many people may be indifferent to a computer’s feedback from a short written survey. This alternative study could consist of a brief conversation and interview-style survey with more open-ended questions. This would allow the participants to potentially form a greater connection with their evaluator and possibly seek their approval, causing more emotional impact and an increased impact to their self-esteem. 

Moreover, this study could be repeated but with a larger age demographic, compared to solely undergraduate students. This may increase the generalizability of the results, and possibly have implications for dating and self-esteem in educational settings .

Conclusion

This study touches on the personal implications and feelings surrounding social feedback in college students. College is an extremely social environment and romantic relationships become increasingly prevalent in people's lives. With further research, studies could contribute to increased self-esteem, mental health, and psychological well-being among college students. Knowledge on how romantic relationships impact the self is crucial for healthy dating practices and personal wellness. Through further research, we can contribute to a healthier social environment for college students.

References

Harris, M. A., & Orth, U. (2020). The link between self-esteem and social relationships: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 119(6), 1459–1477. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000265

Hoplock, L. B., Stinson, D. A., Marigold, D. C., & Fisher, A. N. (2019). Self-esteem, epistemic needs, and responses to social feedback. Self and Identity, 18(5), 467–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2018.1471414

Mann, R. B.; Blumberg, F. Adolescents and social media: The effects of frequency of use, self-presentation, social comparison, and self esteem on possible self imagery. Acta Psychologica. 2022, 228, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103629.

Muratori, P.; Bertacchi, I.; Buonanno, C.; Levantini, V.; Pannunzi, L.; Coppola, G. The role of gender in the relationship between narcissism, self-esteem, and externalizing problems in children. European Journal of Developmental Psychology. 2025, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2025.2585983.

Ratliff, K. A., & Oishi, S. (2013). Gender differences in implicit self-esteem following a romantic partner’s success or failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(4), 688–702. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033769

Rosenberg, M. (1979). Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSE). In APA.org (pp. 61–62). American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/obesity-guideline/rosenberg-self-esteem.pdf

Tan, K., Ho D, & Agnew, C. R. (2023). Relationship status and psychological well-being: Initial evidence for the moderating effects of commitment readiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 24, 2563-2581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-023-00692-w

van Schie, C., Cook, J. L., Elzinga, B., & Ly, V. (2023). A boost in self-esteem after positive social evaluation predicts social and non-social learning. Royal Society Open Science, 10(5), 230027. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230027

Appendix A 

Self-Esteem Pre-Test

_____ 1. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.

I have a good relationship with my parents.

_____ 2. At times, I think I am no good at all. (R)

_____ 3. I feel that I have a number of good qualities.

I think the world would be better if more people were like me. 

_____ 4. I am able to do things as well as most other people.

I have good quality friends. 

_____ 5. I do not have much to be proud of. (R)

_____ 6. I certainly feel useless at times. (R)

I have high standards for a partner. 

I find it easy to open up.

_____ 7. I feel that I'm a person of worth.

I make friends easily.

_____ 8. I wish I could have more respect for myself. (R)

I am satisfied with my life. 

_____ 9. All in all, I am inclined to think that I am a failure. (R)

_____ 10. I take a positive attitude toward myself. 

I regularly spend time with myself.

Note. Respondents indicate the degree to which they relate to the statements on a 4-point scale (1 = Strongly agree,  2 = Agree, 3 = Disagree, 4 = Strongly disagree). Numbered questions are part of the Rosenberg scale.

(R) indicates that the item is reverse-scored.

Appendix B

Self-Esteem Post-Test

_____  1. I wish I could have more respect for myself. (R)

_____   2. I feel that I have a number of good qualities.

_____   3. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.

_____   4. I certainly feel useless at times. (R)

_____   5. I take a positive attitude toward myself. 

_____  6. I do not have much to be proud of. (R)

Note. Respondents indicate the degree to which they relate to the statements on a 4-point scale (1 = Strongly agree,  2 = Agree, 3 = Disagree, 4 = Strongly disagree).

(R) indicates that the item is reverse-scored.

Figure 1 - Self-Esteem Difference

Figure 1. Mean differences in self-esteem scores across gender and readiness conditions. The two-way ANOVA revealed no significant main effects for gender or readiness condition, and no significant interaction between the readiness condition and gender.