08
Feb 23

Comprehending Infidelity

What is it about infidelity that has made it one of the top reasons why relationships and marriages don’t work out in the United States? Do people thrive off the rush of meeting an attractive stranger? Are their partners just not doing it for them anymore? Maybe it’s not even that big of a deal to them, or maybe they can just blame it on the alcohol. A popular saying suggests that “once a cheater always a cheater,” but applied social psychology could possibly help this change this behavior. At the very least, it’ll help those prone to infidelity recognize why this is so.

The theory of planned behavior, i.e., “theory of reason action” informs the reasoning behind the factors that influence people’s intention to engage in certain behaviors. (Gruman et al., 2016, p. 72). These intentions are able to be modified over time by evaluating three aspects that influence people’s behavioral intentions: 1) what is a person’s attitude towards infidelity? 2) How do people’s peers feel about and respond to infidelity? 3) How much self-control does a person feel that they have in high-risk situations (Gruman et al., 2016)? Let’s say that someone has a very lackadaisical attitude towards infidelity. They might not necessarily feel monogamy is important or feel that one person can’t satisfy all their needs. If this same individual has peers who hold the same attitudes towards infidelity, combined with the lack of perceived self-control is someone who is at high risk for engaging in extradyadic affairs without their partner’s knowledge.

Knopp et al., reviewed data that identified risk factors associated with the likelihood that one would engage in extradyadic affairs (2017). These include lack of commitment to the relationship and a decline in sexual satisfaction, having liberal attitudes towards infidelity, being around social norms that agree with the behavior, and certain personality characteristics, are all factors that increase the risk of infidelity (Knopp et al., 2017). This study examining the likelihood of prior infidelity being a factor in future infidelity, also found that not only are people at high risk of engaging in extradyadic relationships who have previously done so, those who had knowledge of a previous partner infidelity or had a suspicions, were also at high risk of having those same experiences (Knopp et al., 2017)!

Obviously, those who happen to engage in serial infidelity can greatly benefit from assessing these three dimensions of behavior intentions: their attitude toward the behavior, social norms about this behavior, and how much self-control one has towards this behavior (Gruman et al., 2016). But those who seem to find themselves on the unfortunate end of dealing with an unfaithful partner could also benefit from using this same framework to evaluate their attitudes and its possible effect on their tolerance for the behavior. If these techniques don’t seem to work, an ethically non-monogamous relationship may be the one for you!

References

Gruman, J. A., Schneider, F. W., & Coutts, L. M. (2016). Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems. SAGE Publications.

Infidelity rates by country 2023. (n.d.). 2023 World Population by Country (Live). https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/infidelity-rates-by-country

Knopp, K., Scott, S., Ritchie, L., Rhoades, G. K., Markman, H. J., & Stanley, S. M. (2017). Once a cheater, always a cheater? Serial infidelity across subsequent relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(8), 2301-2311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1018-1

 


18
Oct 21

How Much Does Smartphone Use Affect Relationships?

My teenage son and I were watching a TV show together one evening when I found myself getting frustrated that he kept glancing down at his phone to reply to texts. Did it mean that he wasn’t enjoying our time together? Why couldn’t he focus on the show we were watching? He seemed perfectly happy to split his attention between the TV show and his phone, so why was it bothering me so much? When I brought it up with him, he pointed out that I do it too. From my perspective, the two scenarios are different; I feel that I only do it if I receive an important text or email that I need to reply to urgently whereas he is much more distracted by his phone. But was my perspective correct? It seems that we believe that others’ smartphone use interrupts our time with them and damages our relationships but that our own smartphone use does not!

Although each persons’ actions may be identical, there is a discrepancy in perception – we attribute our own smartphone multitasking behaviors to situations (an external attribution) but attribute other people’s multitasking to behavior patterns and intentionality (an internal attribution) (Amichai-Hamburger & Etgar, 2016). A classic case of the Fundamental Attribution Error! This is the tendency to ignore situational reasons for other people’s behaviors and instead assume that their behavior is a reflection of their personality and internal character. This is because their situational reasons are not as salient to us, for instance, I don’t know if my son is replying to urgent emails or just looking at memes. Whereas, with our own behaviors, we have access to all the information related to the situation and so it is easier to take this into account when judging our own choices.

I know that I am not intentionally phubbing (snubbing someone because one is focused on one’s phone) my son; I want to spend time with him but occasionally might need to quickly look away to attend to something important on my smartphone. However, even though his behaviors are identical to mine, when he appears distracted by his phone, I feel that he is uninterested in our time together and is intentionally phubbing me; an internal reason. This actor/observer difference means that, even if both people spend similar amounts of time distracted by their phones, individuals can perceive the other person’s responsiveness to them as intentionally bad, creating conflict and a poorer quality of relationship (Amichai-Hamburger & Etgar, 2016).

if the multitasking behaviors of the person we are with make us believe they are uninterested in us, it is understandable that this can negatively affect the relationship. It seems this is especially true in more intimate relationships such as romantic relationships, close friendships, and parent-child relationships (Malle, 2006). In fact, studies show that, whilst technology has many benefits, one downside is that there is a cost to our face-to-face relationships and in-person interactions (Sbarra, Briskin, & Slatcher, 2019). Being phubbed is associated with decreased satisfaction in the relationship and increased conflict (Sbarra, Briskin, & Slatcher, 2019). However, it seems that, as aware as we are of how much others’ smartphone multitasking behaviors are negatively affecting the relationship, we are equally unaware of how much our own multitasking smartphone use also affects the relationship.

References:

Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Etgar, S. (2016). Intimacy and smartphone multitasking—A new oxymoron? Psychological Reports, 119(3), 826-838.

Malle, B. F. (2006). The actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: A (surprising) meta- analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 895–919.

Sbarra, D. A., Briskin, J. L., & Slatcher, R. B. (2019). Smartphones and close relationships: The case for an evolutionary mismatch. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(4), 596-618.

 


15
Nov 19

Master of optimism 

My husband is an optimist. Last year was the toughest year of our lives, but mostly his. He had an open heart surgery and unfortunately he suffered a stroke as a complication. He has come a long way since then and is recovering well with a few hiccups here and there. However, 99% of the time he has been upbeat and always sees the silver lining in everything. I attribute much of his recovery to his attitude. I don’t know anyone who had to endure such tragedy yet come back winning like him. As Schneider et al. (2012) state that optimists make external attribution for bad events. That’s what I think my husband does. He didn’t blame himself or anyone for the surgery and the stroke. Instead, he attributed that to a situational occurrence that while he can’t change it, he can recover from. On a tough day he seems to always find a way to tilt the balance and make optimism outweigh pessimism, something that I still have to learn (Schneider et al., 2012). Affleck, Tennen, and Apter’s (2001) study suggests that the day-to-day levels of happiness of people who suffer from rheumatoid, arthritis, asthma, and fibromyalgia are positively related to their optimism (as cited in Schneider et al., 2012). Additionally, Affleck et al. (2001) assert that optimists can regulate their moods better than pessimists (as cited in Schneider et al., 2001). I found this to be true with my husband. Not that he is never sad or discourage. He is at times. However, he acknowledges his feelings and attributes his sadness and discouragement to external events such as lack of sleep, dehydration, a tough day at the gym, etc. Thus, he constantly teaches himself to be optimistic. Furthermore, he also seems to have mastered the art of problem-focused coping which refers to engaging behaviors that target to correct the stressful situation that is perceived to be controllable and amenable to change (Schneider et al., 2012). Everyday, he focuses on what he can control, his recovery, and let go of what he can’t control, his stroke. More importantly, he is surprisingly really good with emotion-focused coping as well, as he is actively doing everything he can to regain his emotional stability back. Emotional-focused coping is a behavior and cognition that does not directly address the source of stress but targets to reduce an individual’s level of emotional distress (Schneider et al., 2012). He meditates, does yoga, and listens to music to divert and reduce his emotional distress. All of these help him, and in turn help us, cope with our misfortune and make us appreciate life and each other even more. Whenever we are down, we spend time counting our blessings, which are fortunately in abundance, and disputing our misfortunate, which luckily are very few, similar to what Schneider et al.(2012) suggest. We have learned first handed that optimism will take you far and at times it’s the only thing you have left. So, be an optimist. If you are not, the good news is that optimism can be learned and with enough practice everyone can master it. Become one. 

 

References

Schneider, F.W., Gruman J.A.,  & Coutts, L.M. (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems. Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. 


07
Nov 19

How Long Love Lasts?

How long do you think love lives? One French writer called his novel, “Love Lasts Three Years”, but Is it true?

Three years usually lasts a candy stage of relations; a period of passion and love. When the heart beats more often, the future is radiant, the lovers are concentrated on each other and much is forgiven to the partner; and it seems that it should always be so. But no. The enchanting extravaganza fades away, and somewhere in the depths a spark begins to flare up a true love; but after violent passions and vivid experiences can it be very difficult to feel it. True, mature love develops and is realized gradually; and for its disclosure, the internal development of a person is necessary. Immature people often do not discover this gift in themselves. It is the mental immaturity of partners that ultimately leads the union to cataclysms.

Broken boats of love

Psychologists know that almost a third of people suffer from problems in relationships, such as distrust, suspicion, addiction, betrayal. The art of love is almost forgotten. This is the ability to accept and appreciate and consider a partner as his property, without the conditions and expectations that these relationships are forever and ever. Even those who parted with their partner are usually given a chance to meet a new suitable person. That is, never was it about one single half. However, if people didn’t “grab” their life companions with a death grip, then there would be much fewer problems in relationships, partings. Moreover, women are especially afraid of changes in their personal lives.

How to get through some of the relationship’s problems:

  • Relationships in a pair – this is only a matter of two. No need to let outsiders into this space, even if they are relatives and friends. Especially if they perceive your partner negatively, and this even applies to children – tactfully, gently, but do not let the child stand between you, quarrel you.
  • Discuss all the problems that arise in the family: monetary, related to relatives, ex, friends, as well as your feelings and doubts, etc.
  • Try not to focus your attention on your partner’s annoying habits: eat on the go, don’t wash dishes, etc. Otherwise, the internal accumulating tension can one day explode, and starting from a trifle, turn into a grand scandal.
  • None of the partners should consider their desires more important than the needs of another. Suppression, domination destroy the family. Relationships require respect.
  • Show your feelings more often so that loved ones understand that you are dear. Try to avoid reproaches, claims, claims. Show your love right now – then it may be too late. And “turn off” criticism in yourself, thinking about a partner, you can always find something to complain about, only this destroys the relationship.

Crisis management

There are age crises of each partner when you want changes and novelty, family crises in changing circumstances (birth of a child, death of relatives, forced relocations, etc.) and crises of development of life together. At such moments, it is important to maintain the internal unity of the couple, respect and affection for each other. And do not succumb to erroneous, usually formed in childhood emotional reactions, such as: the habit of feeling sorry for oneself (usually accompanied by reproaches from others), the desire to take responsibility for malfunctions in relationships (based on guilt, for example, because of the fact that feelings have cooled), removal from a partner (due to fatigue, etc.). With the right approach, respect and appreciation, love will keep growing and you can be sure: will last very long.

 

References:

Durayappah-Harrison, A. (2011, February 3). Brain Study Reveals Secrets of Staying Madly in Love. Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/thriving101/201102/brain-study-reveals-secrets-staying-madly-in-love

Gregoire, C. (2014, December 24). The Psychology Of Loves That Last A Lifetime. HuffPost. Retrieved from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/psychology-of-lasting-love_n_5339457

Harra, A. (2014, September 27). 7 Ways to Save a Struggling Relationship. HuffPost. Retrieved from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/love-and-relationships_b_5624213?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAAxisiqyJcy3K-YMecXl181egMQUDKLNbvMcdXlcfZz8mJmcnLk5Pxtwxlbs5_MOSAerHZuyhBqut3aHDx2-GuPxHKy7rIhgQQplI6PpJ327CEQBu0EAglI-JiFIRFbKKgTF6ODyHfFtNk4TfZSZmWtv1SOiuVrij7QNKpl1vgHQ

Johnson, S. (2010, June 1). Can Love Last a Lifetime? Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hold-me-tight/201006/can-love-last-lifetime


07
Apr 19

Contempt Kills Relationships

We are made to connect with others, to socially interact, to click with certain people more than others.  Attachment is one of the primary needs of infants; without it they will die.  That need for connection continues throughout life.  Why then would some of us threaten the very lifeblood of our relationships?  Mutual care and concern, safety and love create strong resilient relationships.  We all at our core want that.  Every human has the need to be included, to feel liked and feel a sense of control over their own life.  But for some people, they find that over and over their relationships break up.

John Gottman from The Gottman Institute has identified four primary behaviors that destroy relationships: contempt, criticism, defensiveness and stonewalling, with contempt being the best predictor of divorce (Gottman, 2002).  What does contempt do?  It is the exact opposite of love and care and it creates an environment that is anything but safe.

Social cognition refers to the ways that people think about themselves and others in terms of social behaviors (Social cognition, 2018).  Contempt is defined as thinking negatively about someone over whom we feel superior (Contempt, 2018).  It includes not recognizing the true value of ourself or others and seeing how important mutual respect is.  When our social cognitions of others include contempt, it shows up regularly in our words and behavior.  Negative social cognitions about self and others leads to abusive words and behavior.  Social learning theory states that children will learn beliefs and behavior from the adults who model for them both the behavior and the reinforcement or consequences (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts,  2012).  They learn what is acceptable, what is not, and what are the underlying beliefs held especially by parents.  Many children of alcoholic or abusive families learn negative beliefs such as: it is okay to treat a spouse with contempt, blame another for one’s actions and hurt those you say you love.  They learn conditional love, based on performance and they learned to people please rather than form strong moral beliefs.  They may even learn to align themselves with the one who does the hurting, the one in power, and they learn that having power over another is the safer place to be.  They may learn hatred of men from an abusive father or hatred of women from a manipulative mother.  All of this becomes their view of the world, of relationships, of self and others and leads to lifelong relationally debilitating beliefs unless they consciously choose to correct those beliefs.

Gottman (2002) has stated that verbal communication is the foundation of relationships.  He has theorized that within relationships, people put out “bids” for attention and connection.  By studying thousands of marriages, he has found that people tend to respond in three ways to bids for connection: turning toward, turning against, and turning away.  Turning toward includes responding positively in a verbal or physical manner.  This style leads to strengthened relationships with resiliency when there is conflict or times are tough.  Turning against is an argumentative style in which one or both spouses may use contempt in the form of put downs and negative language.  Turning away is basically ignoring one’s spouse, a type of contempt that is intended to show the other that they are meaningless.  This leads to hostility and defensiveness, followed by suppression of feelings and early divorce (Gottman, 2002).

Within the “turning against” style of communicating, there can be both conflict and abuse.  Conflict is when there is generally a balance of power and both spouses turn against each other.  They have different views on a particular topic and don’t readily agree.  Some conflict is normal even in healthy relationships.  Abuse on the other hand is when one partner sees him or herself as above the other in some way and takes a power stance shown by putting the other down.  If it’s within the context of an argumentative conflict, this is when the partner starts berating and using derogatory language, in an effort to force the other to comply, rather than using healthy communication skills.

But much abuse is not about conflict at all.  It has instead to do with the unresolved trauma in a person’s life, as well as the entitlement they learned.  A man who has had an unsafe childhood through abuse or neglect or through witnessing abuse of his mother for instance may act out towards his wife in hurtful ways that have nothing to do with conflict.  In this case, he may lash out at her at times when they are not even involved in conversations.  He may devise ways to hurt her proactively to keep her dependent on him, fearing that she will leave.  Or he may put her down to make himself feel better.  While his inner self is one of low self esteem, he projects an outer self of superiority and has always to show her that he is better, he is right, he is not to be disobeyed.  He may or may not use anger as part of his control over her but the underlying feelings are not anger; they are things like feeling abandoned, feeling unsafe or unloved, feeling the instability from childhood.  It is this misconception that anger and conflict are at the root of abuse that leads men to justify their actions and causes women to hesitate to come forward.  Let me explain.  If a woman is told that conflict is part of the problem then she will continually evaluate her role in the “conflict.”  Her husband will also do this, pointing out her role repeatedly rather than looking at himself.  You end up having two people that are both focused on her (pointing out faults, blaming/self-blaming), rather than on him where the true problem lies (trauma resolution).  If he or his behavior is focused on, he may say that the root of the problem lies with his anger.  He may do anger management counseling to talk about his anger towards his wife for the “justifiable” things he has against her.  In reality, all of this is surface talk designed to prevent him from accessing the deep painful wounds from his childhood, which has led to the contempt of self and others.

Contempt is greater in marital relationships in which one partner has experienced childhood sexual abuse (Walker, Sheffield, Larson, & Holman, 2011).  This trauma affects a person’s perception of self and partner in negative ways.  They tend to have a poor body image, low self-esteem and higher levels of contempt for themselves and their spouse.  They also tend to be more defensive and judgmental, again both of themselves and others, especially their spouse.  Along with this is a feeling of having a low level of control in their interpersonal relationships while simultaneously having a greater need for power and a greater fear of power (Walker et al., 2002).  They experience higher levels of stress, arousal and traumatization, all leading to more pathological views and behavior.  Especially in men, childhood sexual abuse increases the risk that they will see themselves or their partners in a contemptuous or defensive way (Walker et al., 2002).

Trauma leads to reactive behavior, which may include angry outbursts but may also include fear, withdrawal, depression and many more relationally debilitating factors.  This can be the case with either partner (abuser and victim), but the solution is to deal with each partner’s own behavior and underlying trauma separately.  Most of the struggles within marriages come from the wounding of individual people that happens in childhood.  As trauma is resolved, negative social cognitions become healthy, reactive behavior including contempt is lessened and relationships improve.

 

References

Contempt.  (2018).  APA Dictionary of Psychology.  Retrieved on Apr. 6, 2019 from: https://dictionary.apa.org/contempt.

Gottman, J. (2002).  The relationship cure: A 5 step guide to strengthening your marriage, family, and friendships.  New York: Three Rivers Press.

Schneider, F., Gruman, J., & Coutts, L.  (2012).  Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Social Cognition.  (2018).  APA Dictionary of Psychology.  Retrieved on Apr. 6, 2019 from: https://dictionary.apa.org/social-cognition.

Walker, E., Sheffield, R., Larson, J., & Holman, T.  (2011).  Contempt and defensiveness in couple relationships related to childhood sexual abuse histories for self and partner.  Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 37(10)


02
Apr 19

True Love

Love is fundamental human need; so, with the rise of the internet came the rise of dating services. Heard of Bumble, Tinder, Hinge, OK cupid? Most likely, even if you have never used a dating app, you have at least heard of one, if not all, of these apps. According to the Pew Research Center, 27% of 18- to 24-year-olds use online dating services (Pew Research Center, 2016). Online dating is actually the second most popular way to meet a partner, which makes sense when you really think about it (Anderson, 2016). We are a society of smartphone users and we do love our apps. It is also easier, and less time-consuming, to swipe through some pictures on an app every-so-often than it is to go out to a social event and meet new people (Anderson, 2016). However, as with anything on the internet, there are some serious flaws with online dating.

The most common issue with dating services is that the profiles you see are not necessarily accurate portrayals of the individuals who created them. According to a study by OpinionMatters, 20% of women post pictures of their younger selves in order to appear more desirable and 40 % of men lie about their financial situation in order to be more attractive to prospective partners (Anderson, 2016). As with social media, dating services provide an environment where you are encouraged to present your ideal self rather than your true self.

The other big issue is differences in intent. Many women go on dating apps in the hopes of finding a romantic partner. Many men, however, go on dating apps looking for someone to have sex with (Anderson, 2016). This is not to say that this is the case for all men or all women, but there is definitely a disconnect in the reasons for using a dating app.

There is also the fact that relationships started online last for shorter periods of time. Couples who meet online are 3 times as likely to divorce than those who met face to face and online daters are 28 % more likely to split from their partners within the first year (Knapton, 2015). As Ayesha Vardag, a divorce lawyer, puts it “there is a greediness involved in online dating” (Knapton, 2015). If you are discontent with a partner, why bother with them when you have an app full of other potential partners? Because there are so many choices, people are less willing to give a relationship the chance it needs to develop (Knapton, 2015). One reason that online dating is less successful, besides the large number of potential partners, is that we cannot rely on our biological cues in an online environment. In an evolutionary perspective, genetic compatibility is very important, so our bodies have evolved to subconsciously evaluate the suitability of our potential partners (Knapton, 2015). These biological triggers, which are very important in informing our choice of partner in the real world, are rendered useless in the online world, which makes us vulnerable to choosing a partner we might not actually connect with in the real world (Knapton, 2015).

While dating apps have increased in popularity in recent years, this does not mean that they are better than meeting someone face-to-face. In fact, the costs of online dating may very well outweigh the benefits. Finding a life-long partner is a serious undertaking, so we should be willing to put more effort into our search than just swiping left or right on someone’s picture. The ease and convenience of dating apps is alluring for sure, but is it worth it?

 

References:

Anderson, R. (2016, September 6). The Ugly Truth About Online Dating: Are We Sacrificing Love for Convenience. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-mating-game/201609/the-ugly-truth-about-online-dating

Knapton, S. (2015, January 20). The Science of Dating: Why We Should Stop Dating Online. Retrieved from https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/15/the-science-of-dating-why-we-should-stop-dating-online/

Smith, A., Anderson, M. (2016, February 29). 5 Facts About Online Dating. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/29/5-facts-about-online-dating/

 


12
Nov 17

Proximity, Familiarity, and Relationships

Growing up, my best friends were Madison R., Sarah T., Charlotte T., and Lauren W.  My sister ended up dating the boy that sat next to her in history.  My best friend dated a family friend and then the boy in her small college study abroad program.  Another close friend married a man she saw at church each week. Despite the fact that all of these events seem relatively isolated, they actually have some elements in common.  Specifically, each of these relationships seems to have been developed with the help of the proximity effect and the familiarity effect.

Originally proposed by Leon Festinger and his colleagues in 1950, the proximity effect is the idea that physical and/or psychological closeness increases interpersonal liking and attraction (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts., 2012).  Interestingly, this phenomenon has been shown to be powerful in the creation of everything from friendships to life-long partnerships.  Similarly, Schneider et al. (2012) note that increased exposure to someone can increase preexisting opinions about them, but, in the absence of preexisting opinions, increased exposure results in positive feelings due to familiarity and perceived similarity.  Familiarity has been shown to be positive and reassuring for most people, while perceived similarity results in the assumption that people have more in common, facilitating warmer, more comfortable interactions (Schneider et al., 2012), all of which facilitate attraction.

So, let’s take a close look at how the proximity and familiarity effects have impacted the relationships detailed above.  First, we have my best friends growing up: Madison R., Sarah T., Charlotte T., and Lauren W.  With a W last name, myself, I was often seated by these girls in classes.  In fact, my two closest friends from this time, Madison and Sarah, and I shared a locker in first grade (due to alphabetical order), and Madison, who is still my best friend to this day, lives about two minutes from my house.  This is where we can see the proximity effect in action.  Due to our last names, Madison, Sarah, Charlotte, Lauren, and myself were frequently in contact with one another.  This allowed us to talk to one another and learn about one another, leading to comfortable interactions.  Then, because we had so much contact with one another, the familiarity effect came into play.  Positive feelings were enhanced and friendships were solidified.  Interestingly, the closest of these friendships was that of Madison, Sarah, and myself, who, as “locker buddies” for an entire year, had the most contact with one another.

Moving onto my sister’s relationship with the boy she sat next to in class and my friend who dated the boy in her study abroad program, we can again see the effects of the proximity effect.  The example of my sister is extremely similar to the example provided by Schneider et al. (2012) of Chris and Lee.  Like Chris and Lee, my sister and this boy did not really know one another, but ended up sitting together in a history class in college.  Due to this proximity, they began to become more comfortable with one another and learn more about each other, eventually breeding attraction.  Similarly, when my best friend studied in London, she and another boy had schedules that were exactly the same.  They lived in the same building and were in the same classes and groups during this semester.  Like my sister and the boy in her history class, this close proximity led to easy conversation and eventual attraction.

We can also see the familiarity effect at play in my best friend’s relationship with her family friend and my other friend’s marriage to the man from her church.  My best friend’s family friend was at their house very frequently, played on the same hockey team as her brother, so was often at the rink when she was, and went to the same school as her brother, so was often at events there, as well.  While their eventual relationship was definitely helped by his proximity to the family, it seems that the frequent contact between the two is what truly made a difference.  It increased familiarity and, subsequently, their mutual liking of each other.  Similarly, my friend and the man from her church came in contact with one another frequently at church events, in which they were both extremely active.  Again, this increased familiarity, as she became comfortable with him and saw him at a variety of different events.  She also (correctly) assumed that they had a lot in common, another impact of the familiarity effect.

Essentially, it seems that when we really dig into it, many relationships, both romantic and friendly, can be traced back to some type of proximity and/or familiarity effects.  As we saw with my close friends, they all had last names in similar regions of the alphabet, leading to us being grouped together frequently, increasing our proximity and leading to friendships.  When we look at the romantic relationships of my friends and family, we can see similar effects, as well.  My sister dated a boy because he sat near her, my best friend dated a boy because they lived near one another and had similar schedules and another because he was familiar to her, and another friend married the man she was familiar with because of church.  Learning about how proximity and familiarity can impact our relationships is fascinating and definitely makes a person think about their own relationships.  Moving forward, keeping these ideas in mind can definitely impact how we view others and develop relationships.

 

References

Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Understand and Addressing Social and Practical Problems (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

 


08
Apr 17

Is Jealousy Healthy or Problematic in the Nature of Relationships?

         Allport (1985) conceptualizes social cognition as, “the process of thinking about ourselves and other people to understand and explain how the thoughts, feelings, and behavior of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others.”  Interpersonal magnetism is fueled by a strong desire for tête-à-tête.  Anticipation of favorable experiences sparks excitement while enduring relations with your significant other.  All of a sudden, partner infidelity may come on as a surprise during your relationship.  In other words, deep feelings for your companion may stimulate a strong emotional response that many of us are familiar with.  Jealousy can be experienced at different intensities depending on the situation.  In fact, desirous feelings could promote relationship quality.  For instance, one of the partners may respond to jealousy as being a direct threat to the relationship in which they value their relationship enough to protect it.  Except that is not always the case in most relationships affected by jealous emotions.  Many similar instances are influenced by misunderstanding a situation or failing to emphasize the importance of communication between partners.

        Most relationships experience three distinct types of jealousy including – reactive, anxious, and possessive (Pfeiffer & Wong, 2007).   These forms are distinguished between whether they reside with emotional, cognitive, or behavioral attributions.  John Wiley (2007) explored relations between different types of jealousy, as well as self and partner perceptions of relationship quality.  He defined Reactive Jealousy as, “the degree to which individuals experience negative emotions, such as anger and upset, when their mate is or has been emotionally or sexually unfaithful (Wiley, J., 2007).”  Furthermore, Anxious Jealousy is when a partner creates false perceptions and images in their head in which they begin feeling distrustful or worried.  Finally, Possessive Jealousy involves an individual taking excessive measures in order to prevent their partner from socializing with anyone of the opposite sex, and forbidding them to socialize with others.  According to Buunk’s typology, reactive jealousy relies on emotional  aspects, anxious jealousy consists of cognitive elements, and possessive jealousy is attributed to behavioral components (Buunk & Dijkstra, 2006).  Relatively, Andersen et al. (1995) discovered that cognitive jealousy negatively impacts relational satisfaction.  Whereas, Pfeiffer and Wong (1989) specified emotional jealousy to be positively associated to love.  Determining relationship quality should always take into consideration both partners’ feelings toward how they feel, and how their partner feels, engaging in their interpersonal connection.

          Relationship quality is determined by interaction between two partners.  Communication between each other is a key component for maintaining an open and sound relationship.  Many people are too invested in wanting to just express how they perceive a situation, and will disregard how their partner feels.  In a relationship, one of the best things I have learned is that there are always three sides to a story – their side, your side, and the real side.  Also, do not try to discuss a tense topic unless you are both rational enough to respectfully listen to each other.  Relatively, jealousy affects the content of the communication (what they communicate), as well as the type of communication they engage in (how they communicate) (Wiley, J., 2007).

         High levels of intimacy and affection is associated with how well you and your partner respects the others’ feelings, understand each other, refrain from negative sources of jealousy, and be a companion to your significant other.  Do not try to compete or evoke feelings of jealousy in your partner to cover your own insecurities.  Take into account that you are your partner are a team and are in this together.  If you both want to keep your commitment, then refrain from problematic experiences, and rather enhance your relationship quality.

        Do you ever experience jealousy in your relationship?  What are some ways that you strive to improve the quality of your relationship?  If you are not in a relationship, what are some things you would want to try for relationship satisfaction?

Thanks for reading!

Barelds, D. P. H., Barelds-Dijkstra, P. (2007). Relations between different types of jealousy and self and partner perceptions of relationship quality. Clinical Psychology and Psychopharmacology. Retrieved April 8, 2017 from

http://rebeccajorgensen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/25353937Types-of-Jealousy-and-Relationship-Quality.pdf

Lesson 12 Commentary (n.d.). Relationships/Everyday Life. Retrieved April 8, 2017 fromhttps://psu.instructure.com/courses/1834710/modules/items/21736698


15
Nov 15

50/50

Attachment changes over time. When we are first born, we become attached to our parents and the people who are around us. This is a healthy attachment, because it helps us adapt to people and learn skills (some good ones, some not so good). As we grow older, what we need from people changes. Once we develop sexual attraction, we look for healthy attachments to other people. What we learned growing up from our parent’s and friends is what helps us develop romantic and sexual attachments with others.

 

What matters when it comes to relationships? According to our text, there are several, but I want to talk about physical looks. We make split-second judgments that help us select potential mates. But once we’ve found someone that we find attractive, how do we understand what our attachment looks like?

But, what is a healthy attachment when it comes to relationships? It’s often said that relationships are a 50/50 situation. But sometimes it’s 60/40. This is because there are times when we need more than what we can give, and that’s okay, because we are people and not robots. There should be nothing wrong with that; however, it seems that in our binary society, the male has to stand firmly at the head of the household and the woman steps behind him. These are ideas we’ve adopted from biblical times; in those times, it may have been helpful, but today, we need to adapt to the times. Relationships are about give and take.


15
Nov 15

Relationships

I would not consider myself the expert on relationships since I have only ever been in one. My current and only relationship has gone very well for today’s society. My boyfriend and I have been together for 4 years now, and had lived together for two of those years. Eventually we will get married, but obviously not rushing things. Reading the class textbook I found that we have a very comfortable, and trustworthy relationship which obviously has had rocky times, as do all relationships. When I go shopping I always see the women magazines with the raunchy titles for hot sex, how to keep your man, is he cheating on you, can you trust him. These magazines make me laugh because most of the time the authors are middle aged women coming out of a divorce and or a twenty something who has gone through 20 different men in the past year. Now that works for some people, but for serious relationship advise for people who want a committed relationship they are not a good resource.

My boyfriend and I met in high school during junior year. Honestly I thought he was the largest ass in the school. It wasn’t until the last months of senior year when we starting getting along. When we first starting dating the honeymoon phase set in until six months in when things started to get rocky. I was a very strong willed, outgoing, and social while he was very reserved and hated new experiences. Our personality differences caused huge rifts in our relationships, so I brought it up. Communication in relationships is a huge part of their success. With communication comes trust, and security. Not only do you know what is going on in the other person’s head, but you also learn their needs. Each individual has different needs and in a mate those needs should be met.

When my relationship was having problems I became very insecure about if I was doing something wrong, or if he was cheating on me and every other thought that ran through my head. After talking with him about all of my worries things were settled, and I never questioned any other of my insecurities and our attachment style has been strong and secure. There is no need to force a ring on my finger, or buying a house because I have a partner who listens, and makes me a better person.


16
Nov 14

Grandparents Raising Grandchildren

It can happen so quickly; boy meets girl and along comes baby and perhaps another. Sometimes things work out. Other times, the boy and girl are not ready to raise a child. Maybe they are still adolescents or emerging adults not ready to handle the responsibility. Perhaps they are adults but struggling with substance abuse or other behavioral health issues. Our current United States culture believes children are best raised by birth parents when possible and so these not yet capable caregivers usually attempt to parent the children. When things go wrong, it is then that Grandma and Grandpa often step in and attempt to raise the grandchildren.

Credit: Alan Rogers | Star-Tribune

In doing so, grandparents typically have their work cut out for them. Children often end up in grandparents’ care only after birth parents have tried unsuccessfully. Sometimes the children are abandoned. Other times, the courts play a part or the grandparents simply step in and request custody. In any case, the children involved typically suffer from insecure attachment styles from the early days with their birth parents (Schneider, Gruman & Coutts, 2012, p. 360). These attachments set them up for difficulty in forming healthy relationships throughout the lifespan. Additionally, these children probably have faced other adverse events, such as substance abuse, that led them to the different custody situation. It is not surprising then that children raised by custodial grandparents are prone to behavioral problems (Kelley, Whitley & Campos, 2011).

Credit: UCLA Center for Health

Sometimes elderly, grandparents have passed the age of child rearing. Their social networks consist of others, like themselves, who are retired and done raising children. Their incomes are typically limited by retirement and social security payments. Additionally, as they age, these elderly folks are prone to their own health problems. This time in life is a far cry from the younger days of raising children.

When grandparents become caregivers of grandchildren, social isolation tends to set in. Their social networks are no longer available because they no longer share the same interests (Hayslip & Kaminski, 2005). This social isolation has been cited as a major stressor for custodial grandparents (Hayslip & Kaminski, 2005). Additionally, these retired folks have fixed incomes and typically do not have the financial resources necessary to raise children in the world today. If one or both suffers age related health issues, along with the financial stress, lack of support, and troubled relationships with the grandchildren, the grandparents are likely to struggle immensely.

Credit: doingdrugs-darta.blogspot.com

What then should society do for these vulnerable families? Luckily, the answer is not entirely bleak. While more studies are necessary, increasing social support, financial resources, and offering (grand)parenting education could mediate some of the poorer outcomes that are exacerbated by issues the families face (Hayslip & Kaminski, 2005). We should continue to look toward social supports for these alternative family models as it appears that the trend of grandparents raising grandchildren when the parents cannot, will continue.


Hayslip, B., Jr., & Kaminski, P. L. (2005). Grandparents raising their grandchildren: A review of the literature and suggestions for practice. The Gerontologist, 45(2), 262-269. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geront/45.2.262

Kelley, S. J., Whitley, D. M., & Campos, P. E. (2011). Behavior problems in children raised by grandmothers: The role of caregiver distress, family resources, and the home environment. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(11), 2138-2145. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.06.021

Schneider, F., Gruman, J., Coutts, L. (2012). Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.


14
Apr 14

Is Premarital Counseling Becoming a Necessity?

Is Premarital Counseling Becoming a Necessity?
With the ever increasing rate of divorce among first, second, and even third marriages, the effort to “not become another statistic” is more widely-discussed than ever.  As the honeymoon lens wears off and we see our new spouse in a new marital light, it is not uncommon for us to not find them as attractive a partner as originally thought.  Among the options to help minimize this discomfort is premarital counseling.  Premarital counseling is by no means a new phenomena, however, it is no longer only popular among those with devout religious beliefs or among those looking to get the blessing of their pastor or priest.  Does it really work?
According to one study, premarital counseling that focuses on assessing each partners’ traits and behaviors before walking down the aisle may be extremely beneficial (Larson and Thomas, 1994).  Taking the time to notice whether our intended spouse displays abnormally high anxiety or bouts of irritability that may be a precursor to further marital discontent is key to deciding whether to move forward with wedding plans (1994).  This study sheds light on the importance of discussing each partner’s attitude toward their new marital role and their overall long-term commitment to the relationship (1994).  Actually taking the time to get to know the partner in the context of marriage and not just a token toward a dream wedding is key to future marital bliss.  After the guests go home and we look at our partner, are we disappointed in what we see?
Another study further emphasizes the benefits of premarital counseling for couples intent on walking down the aisle.  Taking part in premarital counseling sees statistically significant increases in relationship satisfaction compared to couples who forego this option (Carlson, Daire, Munyon, and Young, 2012).  This important counseling may not just benefit the couple, but each partner independently.  Premarital counseling was also found to significantly decrease individual distress after the wedding among men (2012).  These benefits along with the fact that participating in premarital counseling lowers divorce probability and relationship conflict while increasing relationship quality makes it a no-brainer (2012).
In a world that is more selfish than ever, it is important to make sure we are making life-altering decisions for the right reasons, not just because it will look great in a Facebook status update.  A big, impressive wedding may be a terrific experience to plan and show off to friends and loved ones, but it is also necessary to do our due diligence to make sure the person we come home from the honeymoon with is someone we want to spend the rest of our vacations with.  Otherwise, we run the risk of becoming “just another statistic”.
References:
Carlson, R., Daire, A., Munyon, M., and Young, M.  (2012).  A comparison of cohabiting and noncohabiting couples who participated in premarital counseling using the prepare model The Family Journal April 2012 20: 123-130, doi:10.1177/1066480712441588
Larson, J. H., & Holman, T. B. (1994). Premarital predictors of marital quality and stability. Family Relations, 43(2), 228.  Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/213936389?accountid=13158

Skip to toolbar