Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Close Relationship Across the Life Span (VARIATION IN CLOSE RELATIONSHIP…
Close Relationship Across the Life Span
CLOSE RELATIONSHIP DEFINITION
What are close relationships?
Close relation with people that share emotional interaction and their bond grow stronger
Social exchange Theorist
Cost and Benefit from the level of commitment
Attachment Theory
Strong affective bonds: "2 individuals get together in space across time"
Attachment relation
probability of loss show deep grief (parent to children)
BAUMEISTER AND LEARY
Relationship is formed by the "need to Belong"
Convoy Model of Life Span relation
Subgroups of bigger network of relationships that individual interact
serie of 3 side by side circles, depending the level of importance in one's life
EMPIRICALLY
individual nominate them according the closeness (spouse, parents, etc)
DEVELOPMENT OF CLOSE RELATIONSHIP
How do close relations develop?
Socioemotional selectivity theory
While time decrease, individual invest resources into important goals
CARSTENSEN (1992-2006)
Socioemotional selectivity Theory
More close network within time, changing motivation to interact
LANG added that is the force to change patterns
individual choose their relationship to achieve goals
1.) Goal of belonging
Affiliations, intimacy, security, emotion regulation
2.) Goals of Social Agency
dominance, achievement, independence,
Differences in specific relations from young to old
KAHN & ANTONUCCI (1980)
Convoy model of Social Relations
emerge from social support network, social roles and attanchments
Fluid , dynamic nature of individual social network trough life course
Related to attachment theory
Difference: larger social relationship involve
Comparable with Takahashi ARM
Difference: CM is less tied to specific function
this model show relations around the individual from beggining of their life
Base in Life course Theory
Frame personal situation and social roles in:
Normative
Confrontig expectation, demands, challenges (school, marriage retirement)
Non-Normative Transition
Occur to prevent life trajectory (sudden disability)
LEVITT (1991)
Social expectation Model
Direct interaction with partner= behavior expectation
Relationship continue and change acroos specif relations in life
Rrelationship expectation from first social attachment
TAKAHASI (1990)
Affective Relationship Model
Interpersonal affective relationship, satisfy needs:
emotional
attention
protection
Related to attachment theory
Affective, hierachical relationship with multiple people
Measure to asses Hierarchical Figure:
For Children
Picture Affective Relationship (PARTS)
For Adolescent
Affective Relationships Scale (ARS)
Fast expand of relationships in childhood
School: socialization is important
Structures evolve over time, various relations in childhood
Adolescent-adulthood: changes in affective relation, transitions and emotional demands
Social Expectation Model of close relationship
Close relationship are formed with familiar processes from past
"Support Bank"
supportive exchange of information for later use
Social expectation are created interaction with relationship
BOWLBY (1969-1997)
Attachment Theory
Children-parent evolutionary connected for their survivval
Problem: no evidence of continuity as children have more attachments
VARIATION IN CLOSE RELATIONSHIP
Individual Differences
TAKAHASHI's types of structures
Friend focus type
Well adjusted (e.g. school transition
Lone wolf type
lack of focal figure
Family focus type
CONVOY Model Framework
Pattern of support in late childhood and early adolescent
2.) Close & extended family members
3.)limited support from close family
1.) From close family & friend
Patterns of attachment behavior
Insecure-avoidant
Infant: Avoid mother at reunion
Insecure-resistance
ambivalent behavior at reunion
Secure
Childhood: Socioemotional competences
Adolescent: Romantic intimacy & friendship
Infant: mother as secure base
young-older adult: emotion regulation
BIRDIT & ANTONUCCI
Relationship quality profile
High quality profile
Best friends
older people have this type of relationships
Related to Socioemotional theory
Family member
Low quality relationship
Close Relationship as function role
Role difference to social norms
Biosocial evolution roots contrast
Permitted sexual relation out of marriage
Prohibit sexual relation parent-chil
Romantic and Marital Relationship
love style relationships
Passionate love
decline over time
companionate love
no much foundings
Marriage (differ by culture)
Romantic involvemnet
Arrange marriage
Marital satisfaction (pattern not apply to all)
early years
High Satisfaction
Childbearing
Low satisfaction
Long term marriage
U-Shaped
Empty nest
Higher satisfaction (socioemotional selectivity related)
Variation Factor in Marriage
Marital Longevity
Marital dissolution
divorce at first year
Low support expectatio
Negative interaction
transition to chilbirth
Development of romantic relationship
Adolescent and young adulthood
progressively important
family and peer experience
determine future romantic relationship quality
Middle childhood
Emerge
Sibiling Relationship
close or conflict relation
factor for quality relation
Older adul sibling relationship
distant due parent relationship
closer due life event (parnt loss, retirement
Good sibling relationship: adolescent-young adulthood
compensate poor parent-relation
Help in emotion regulation
Poor sibling relationship
Adulthood depression
From childhood to lifetime
Parents and Children
children see parents as important figure, but decline in time
Children-parent transition
Adolescent Conflict increase
Adulthood conflict decrease
Grandparents & Grandchildren (closest dyad)
Factor affectin dyad
gender
education
marital status
health
Grandparents age
proximity
Types of relationships
3.) Passive
2.) Supportive
Taking parental (role due custody)
4.) Authority
5.) detached
1.) Influential
mentoring due college transition
if contact decrease due life event
poor emotional-physical health
lower quality of life
long lasting grief
General Conclusions regarding Relational Roles
2.) differences in individuals
3.) cultural effects are difficult to categorize and analyze
1.) Culture in constant changes
Politically
Historically
Economically
4.) Confusion: different period of time and other variables
minority-majority status
migration patterns
economic condition
geographically
social class
