In this chapter, we compare minding to other global conceptions of relationship closeness. We have selected these conceptions because they represent influential positions on how people may achieve and maintain closeness and satisfaction in their close relationships. In teaching a course on close relationships, the first author has found the first three conceptions discussed to be quite cogent to students. The ideas in these analyses speak clearly to individuals about many of their relationship dilemmas. They offer thoughtful, timely, original responses to queries that defy easy solutions. For example, the merit of Merton's quote which opens this chapter is quite apparent in the logic of Beck (1988), who believes that passion can lead to trouble if not accompanied by care in thought and interpretation of behavior.

As we explain, these positions also have elements in common with the minding model. They do not reflect all of the possible relationship theories with which minding could be compared. They do, however, reflect representative lines of reasoning that pervade the contemporary relationship literature on closeness. These treatments include: Beck's (1988) contention that “love is never enough” to achieve and maintain closeness, Schwartz's (1994) description of the relationship of the '90s called The Peer Marriage, Wallerstein and Blakeslee's (1995) depiction of The Good Marriage, and Glasser's (1995) analysis of what he calls “control theory” in his book Staying Together.