social support, intimacy and well-being Flashcards
introduction
The concept of well-being refers to optimal psychological functioning and experience. Current research on well-being has been derived from two general perspectives: the hedonic approach, which focuses on happiness and defines well-being in terms of pleasure attainment and pain avoidance; and the eudaimonic approach, which focuses on meaning and self-realization and defines well-being in terms of the degree to which a person is fully functioning. While theoretical models differ in how they define optimal well-being, they all agree that deep and meaningful close relationships play a vital role in human flourishing.
who developed the Main effects model – stress buffering theory, and what does it state?
Cohen and Wills (1985) distinguished between social support’s stress buffering and main effects. Stress buffering occurs when social support protects (i.e., buffers) people from the bad effects of stress. A key idea is that in the absence of stress, social support is not linked to mental health. Main effects occur when people with high social support have better mental health than those with low social support, regardless of stress levels. However, the theory has important empirical limitations, the major critical problem is that stress buffering is observed inconsistently, compared to the easily replicable main effect between perceived support and mental health.
opposing study for stress buffering
For example, in Lakey and Cronin’s (2008) comprehensive review of studies of social support and major depressive disorder, nearly all studies found main effects, but one. Additionally, Brown et al. (1975) study used interview procedures to determine whether the respondent had access to a confiding relationship with another person. Researchers found buffering effects in a sample of women that were accounted for primarily by confiding relationship with husband or boyfriend: confidants other than these failed to provide protection from severe negative life events.
Supporting study for Main effects model
On the other hand, Wade and Kendler (2000), using two waves of interview data on female twin pairs from a population-based registry, examine the cross-sectional and longitudinal association of perceived social support and major depression. Risk for major depression in the last year was found inversely associated with supportive spouse and relative relationships, and directly associated with problems in these relationships (e.g., tension, disagreements). Significant cross-time associations were seen only for spousal variables. The study reported no evidence for stress buffering after extensive testing with large samples. Thus, many of the documented links between perceived support and mental health reflect main effects rather than stress buffering.
Limitations of the Main effects model – stress buffering theory
However, the theory has important empirical limitations, the major critical problem is that stress buffering is observed inconsistently, compared to the easily replicable main effect between perceived support and mental health.
Paragraph 2: close relationships can be bad for well-being
Some researchers have suggested that close relationships can be a source of strain as well as support. The presence of poor-quality support can have a negative impact on thriving, and the mere existence of a relationship (e.g., a marriage) is not enough to discuss thriving benefits.
close relationships can be bad for well-being: supporting study?
Newsom et al., (2008), in a national, longitudinal study of older adults, examined the association between stable negative social exchanges and health over a 2-year period. Trait-state-error models indicated that higher levels of stable negative social exchanges were significantly predictive of lower self-rated health, greater functional limitations, and a higher number of health conditions over 2 years after controlling for initial levels of health and sociodemographic variables. These results highlight the importance of examining continual and recurring interpersonal problems in efforts to understand the health effects of social relationships.
self-determination theory: who proposed it? what is it important for?
Deci and Ryan, (2000) proposed self-determination theory of human motivation and well-being which provides an important framework of how relationships influence personal growth and development.
self-determination theory: three basic psychological needs
The theory suggests that there are three basic psychological needs that underlie human growth and development; autonomy, competence and relatedness. Autonomy refers to action that are self-initiated, willingly endorsed and experienced as wholeheartedly engaged and volitional (act of willing, choosing). Competence refers to the propensity to have influence on the environment and is experienced as mastery and challenge in activity. Relatedness or ‘need to belong’, refers to the human tendency to form strong, stable interpersonal bonds.
self-determination theory: first evidence
Evidence from daily diary studies confirms the importance of need fulfilment for overall well-being. Sheldon et al., (1996) after measuring positive and negative moods, vitality and physical symptoms, found that satisfaction of autonomy and competence needs relate to well-being both at trait level and in day-to-day fluctuation.
self-determination theory: second evidence and conclusion
Reis et al (2000) used hierarchical linear models to examine the hypothesis that daily variations may be understood in terms of the degree to which three basic needs—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—are satisfied in daily activity, across 2 weeks of daily activity and well-being reports controlling for trait-level individual differences. Results strongly supported the hypothesis. It was found that daily variation in emotional well-being may be understood in terms of the degree to which all three needs are satisfied in daily activity, such that each of the needs showed independent contributions to daily well-being. Thus, it seems that needs are universally important but are shaped by social environment. Social environment is key towards understanding whether needs are facilitated or enhanced or whether optimal functioning will be impeded.
