Title: Performative vs. Substantive Commitment: A Critical Analysis of Gender, Relational Investment, and the Semiotics of "Meaning" in Romantic Partnerships
Authors: Dr. Arinaitwe Julius, Asiimwe Isaac Kazaara
Volume: 10
Issue: 4
Pages: 330-340
Publication Date: 2026/04/28
Abstract:
This study examined the distinctions between performative and substantive commitment within heterosexual romantic partnerships, with particular attention to the mediating role of relational investment and the semiotic construction of relational "meaning." Drawing on a cross-sectional quantitative research design, data were collected from a purposive sample of 298 adults (149 males, 149 females) aged 18-55 years, using a structured self-administered questionnaire operationalising constructs including Performative Commitment Score (PCS), Substantive Commitment Score (SCS), Relational Investment Score (RIS), Perceived Meaning Score (PMS), Emotional Availability (EA), Long-term Relational Planning (LRP), and Conflict Resolution Behaviour (CRB). Univariate descriptive analysis established distributional characteristics, while bivariate Pearson correlation analysis mapped inter-construct associations. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) with maximum likelihood estimation was employed to test the hypothesised structural pathways. Findings revealed statistically significant gender differences across most commitment dimensions; males scored significantly higher on performative commitment (M=3.97, SD=0.68) whereas females demonstrated significantly greater substantive commitment (M=3.86, SD=0.74), relational investment, and perceived meaning. The SEM yielded excellent model fit (CFI=0.964, RMSEA=0.048), confirming that gender exerted a significant direct effect on relational investment (?=0.42, p<0.001) and an indirect effect on perceived meaning (?=0.31, p<0.001). Substantive commitment emerged as a stronger predictor of perceived meaning (?=0.67, p<0.001) than performative commitment (?=0.38, p<0.001), indicating that observable relational gestures carry less semiotic weight than deep investment behaviours. These findings carry implications for couples therapy, relationship education, and gender-sensitive relational interventions.