W7: Relationships Flashcards
Relationship overview
Attraction
Liking
Relationship formation
Relationships: definitions and types
Need to belong/affiliation (Baumeister & Leary, 1995)
Seeking connectedness
fundamental human need to form and maintain strong, stable interpersonal relationships:
1) Early in development, children try to affiliate and form bonds with others
2) People readily form social attachments under a range of conditions and resist the dissolution of relationships
Relationship and
Kinds of relationships (3)
Relationship: an association between two or more people (interpersonal rs: between 2 ppl)
Kinds of relationships:
Family, friend, romantic partner, colleague …
Dimension: Close - distant
One way of classifying:
patterns of exchange between relationship partners
according to which relationship partners exchange rewards and punishments
Relational Models Theory Alan Fiske (1992)
1) Different RS are governed by different rules of interaction/’exchange’
2) Four ‘relational models’ patterns of exchange used to think abt RS
Model:
1) Communal Sharing (CS)
2) Authority Ranking (AR)
3) Equality Matching (EM)
4) Market Pricing (MP)
Relational Models Theory Dominant exchge rule and related concept Model: 1) Communal Sharing (CS) 2) Authority Ranking (AR) 3) Equality Matching (EM) 4) Market Pricing (MP)
1) Communal Sharing (CS)
Each according to need
Care – family
2) Authority Ranking (AR)
Superior decide for subordinates
REspect - military
3) Equality Matching (EM)
Equal proportions/direct reciprocity
Equality -peers
4) Market Pricing (MP)
Benefits proportional to cost
Equity – business
Relational Models Theory
Clarifications
Many relationships are mixed-model:
1) Romantic partner: mostly CS, but EM concerns sometimes creep in
2) Parent-child: CS and AR
Different stages of the same relationship can be characterized by different exchange rules
E.g., some may begin as EM and move towards CS
Relational models theory covers other classification schemes
1) Walster et al., (1978): equity theory (MP and EM)
2) Clark & Mills (1979): communal (CS) vs exchange (EM)
Relationship formation:
attraction and liking
Attraction: desire for a voluntary relationship
Liking: positive evaluation of an object (here another person)
Factors that influence attraction and liking (3; PSP)
Physical attractiveness
Similarity
Positive interaction:
Proximity, familiarity and mimicry
S16
Affect each other, all linked to liking and liking links back
Factors that influence attraction and liking:
Physical attractiveness
We like those who are physically attractive
Characteristics viewed as physically attractive vary across cultures and time periods
Effects of physical attractiveness:
Stereotype that physically attractive people are warm, friendly, …
Can become self-fulfilling
Physical attractiveness Contributes to self-fulfilling prophecy:
Snyder, Tanke, & Berscheid (1977)
Men and women have a ‘getting acquainted’
phone conversation
Men who believed that they were talking to
attractive woman -> more sociable, sexually warm,
interesting, humorous…
->women to reciprocate
=> This increased mutual liking
Stereotype influences men’s behavior, -> influences women’s behaviour, -> reinforce the stereotype.
Factors that influence attraction and liking:
Similarity:
Condon & Crano (1998)
Similarity increases liking (similarity-attraction principle):
looks, attitudes, personality, activities…
Reasons:
encourages positive interaction over common interests, etc.
Validate our beliefs and attitudes (positive reinforcement)
We assume similar others like us: inferred reciprocal attraction (we also like ppl tt like us)
Factors that influence attraction and liking: Positive interaction (Proximity)
Festinger, Schachter & Back (1950)
tend to like the people we frequently interact with
(proximity or propinquity)
63% of friends lived within 2 apartments
Why? Proximity increases: Frequency of + interaction Familiarity Similar people may live/work near each other
Internet -> leading to an emphasis on ‘psychological’ over ‘geographical’ proximity
Factors that influence attraction and liking: Positive interaction (familiarity)
Moreland & Beach (1992)
Details:
Similar looking women:
Attend a class:
0, 5, 10 or 15 times during a semester
attractiveness increase as attendance increases
Factors that influence attraction and liking: Positive interaction (mimicry)
Chartrand & Bargh, 1999
Ftf interaction -> possibility of non-verbal processes to impact liking
Non conscious mimicry:
- Participants interacted with face-rubbing or foot-shaking confederates
- Participants non-consciously mimicked
confederates’ actions
Mimicry increases liking
Building close relationships:
Self Disclosure
Process of revealing information about the self
As a relationship develops self-disclosure increases in:
1) Breadth: more topics
2) Depth: level of intimacy
Self-disclosure can deepen and strengthen relationships because:
S19
1) Self-disclosure increases liking:
mutual self-disclosure increase perceived similarity
!!depth needs to be calibrated to relationship stage
Wortman et al (1976)
2) Signals trust in relationship partner (eg: via vulnerability)
3) Better enables behavioural coordination:
Working towards common goals is easier when relationship partners know about each others’ preferences and abilities
Variabilities in who discloses
Gender & culture
Reis (1986)
Schug et al (2010)
Woman > man
Especially regarding feelings and emotions
Reis (1986)
individualistic > collectivist cultures: Partly because of relational mobility
Schug et al (2010)
Relational Mobility:
how much freedom and opportunity a society or social context affords individuals to choose and dispose of interpersonal relationships based on personal preference
Interdependence and close relationships
S21
Increasing interdependence
Close relationship: A relationship involving strong, frequent interdependence
1) Cognitive, behavioural and affective
2) Not defined in terms of positive feelings
Cognitive interdependence:
(Aron et 1992)
Smith, Coats and Walling (1999)
1) Self-other representations overlap
Intertwining of concepts of self and partner
Inclusion of Other in Self (IOS)(Aron et 1992)
Smith, Coats and Walling (1999)
Describe themselves and partners: Rate closeness with IOS
RT task: classify traits as partner-descriptive (yes/no)
Correlated with reported closeness
Affective interdependence:
Intimacy:
positive emotional bond that includes understanding and support
With increasing closeness, relationships move beyond mere reciprocal disclosure to deeper relations of
1) Acknowledgment
2) Acceptance/understanding
3) Emotional responsiveness
4) Increasing sensitivity and care
Affective interdependence is a primary base of important social support functions
Commitment
Definition and char
Long-term orientation towards a relationship, with the intention to maintain it over time and foster lasting strong emotional bond to partner
Commitment develops over time
This allows partners to trust that the other will be there: Projects interdependence into the future
Rusbult’s (1980) Investment Model of Commitment 1) Satisfaction level 2) Quality of alternatives 3) Investment size S27
Satisfaction level: recognition of net cognitive, affective and behavioural benefits provided
Quality of alternatives: desirability of alternatives to relationship
Investment size: resources put into the relationship (time, money, emo energy…)
+satisfaction +investment with fewer viable alternatives increases commitment.
Satisfaction ≠ Commitment
commitment is more than just satisfaction
Rusbult & Martz (1995)
Investigated:
Abusive relationships
More likely to be committed to, thus stay with partners if fewer viable alternatives and higher investment
Satisfaction had less impact
Components of love Sternberg’s (1986) 3 Intimacy Commitment Passion
Sternberg’s (1986) triangular theory of love
Intimacy:
feeling close, connected, bonded and interdependent
Commitment:
longer term orientation to relationship
Passion:
physical and sexual attraction, intensity of emotional connection
Kinds of love
S32
(7)
Love triangle Love I C P nonlove - - - Liking + - - Infaturated - + - Romantic + + - Companionate + - + Fatuous - + + Consumate + + +
Relationship threat
External and Internal
External
1) Financial strain
2) Gender roles (expectations)
3) Rivals
Internal
1) Illness
2) Change/mismatch in preferences/expectations
Baxter’s (1986) relationship rules
If parties are in a close relationship,
then they should
8
Female > male
1) Autonomy:
live beyond rs
2) Openness:
be open, genuine and authentic w partner
3) Equity:
reap rewards proportionate with their investments
male > female
4) Romance:
experience a mysterious and inexplicable ‘magic’
Both 5)Similarity display: similar attitudes, beliefs, values and interests 6)Supportiveness: enhance self worth and self esteem 7)Loyalty/Fidelity: remain loyal and faithful 8)Shared time: substantial shared time together
Managing conflicts
Accommodation:
2 processes of responding to a negative action by the partner
Destructive accommodation
- Criticism
- Contempt
- Defensiveness
- Stonewalling
Constructive accommodation
- Open discussion
- Patience
- Forgiveness
Consequences of accommodation strategies:
Rusbult et al (1991)
S37
Constructive vs destructive
Active vs passive
Constructive accommodation is aided by:
3
Commitment
Idealization of partner
Implicit theories:
beliefs about how the world works
Implicit theories: related to fostering constructive accommodation
Growth vs Destiny theories about relationships (Knee and colleagues):
Growth beliefs foster constructive accommodation
Incremental vs Entity theories of personality:
Kammrath & Dweck (2006)
Incremental theories foster active, entity theories, passive, processes
Importance of RS
Relationships and well-being
The costs of loneliness
Relationships and well-being
Holt-Lunstad et al (2010)
Close relationships provide us with social support:
Emotional and physical coping resources provided by people
Social support is associated with great psychological and physical well-being:
Effects on mortality risk are comparable to other significant factors like smoking/alcohol…
The costs of loneliness
Negative feelings arsing from unmet needs for affection and self-validation (more of a sense of isolation)
Loneliness increases risk of negative health conditions, cognitive decline and impaired executive functioning
Loneliness: processes and interventions
Cognitive-behavioural loop
Cacioppo & Hawkley (2009)
S41
Exacerbated if internal, dispositional attributions are made
if one attributes loneliness to
inherent shyness or unattractiveness
Interventions targeting this maladaptive loop are most effective (Masi et al., 2011)
E.g., psychological reframing targeting attributions
