User:MandaG/Lecture week10

Relationships, be they friendships or more intimate are tricky. As social beings we naturally seek out contact and belonging with others and strive to maintain lasting relationships. This need to belong may explain why when relationsihps end we are left upset and troubled leading to the occasional crying session with a tub of ice cream watching a sad movie.

The need to Belong: The notes suggest that belongingness consists of regular social contact with others that is close, stable and mutual. That people typically seek 4-6 close relationships and generally do not continue to form relationships after reaching that point. I know its not scientifically based, but in my personal experience I find it very hard to believe this theory. My uni friendship group consists of 11 people that satisfy the ideas of belonging and then I have work friends and sporting friends who also meet the criteria set out for belonging and I know many people in similar social situations to myself.

Marriage The idea of Happily married people living longer is kinda sweet. However, sweet as it may be (unless of course you're not married and afraid of dying alone, earlier and not as happy), I would be interested in seeing research on whether other social connections also play a major role.

Similarity, Reinforcement Theory and Reciprosity The idea of opposites attract, is quite well attractive to me. I like the idea of opposing views and constant debating (note different to arguements), however it is suggested that a prolonged period of confliction may result in cognitive disonance. Self-monitoring suggests that we may change ourselves to be more similar with those that we interact with, thus I suppose if the partner acts in a way that opposes our own beliefs it is plausible to see how the dissonance would arise. I'm not sure how much of a part culture plays in our choices of interaction, although research suggests that due to culture there is a greater need for "complementarity" and I guess that makes sense as there would not be cultural barriers, I wonder whether in Australia given our multiculturalistic (not sure if thats a word...)society it is less important than it would be in say China? Reinforcement theory I guess basically operates the smae way in a relationship as in other types of behaviour and is very logical, we are likely to repeat behaviour that has been positively reinforced (operant) and associate things that are attractive to positive outcomes(classical). Now according to our notes reciprocity plays a huge part in relationships, this whole liking begets liking thing. Well while true in many cases I think this theory is flawed in that it doesn't account for abusive relationships, stalkers and of course my inevitable marriage to Johnny Depp who I'm pretty sure does not know me or that he loves me yet.

Playing Hard To Get? Oh yeah this has a special heading purely because I think it's hilarious in our notes James has put that attractiveness increases as bar closing time approaches. I find it hilarious because I have noticed this happening to myself and friends frequently and have often wondered if everyone else notices to...apparently they have. I also note that we are more likely to be attracted to those that are "moderately selective." Not to offend anyone but I think this whole area of research is ridiculous as I fail to see how individuals perceptions of other individuals can be made into a theory as surely it is hugely varied and dependent on other variables to?

Attractiveness and Beauty I am very hesitant to tackle this area as I think there are many factors that are not considered. Superficially we can base attractiveness and beauty at a glance and I think it is unique to the individual as to what is thought to be attractive and admittedly culture does certainly play a part. However, yes a cliche, I honestly believe it is inner beauty that is most attractive in a person. Some people it is impossible to see as beautiful due to their exceptionally ugly nature and personality.

Social Rejection and Loneliness Bad news for all the recluses out there, apparently not satisfying the need to belong leads to a higher death rate (I assume that means more premature...) and more physical and mental problems. I think the problem in ideas such as these is that they are very generalised. I am and have always been more about the individual in psychology rather than the groups or context, and I don't think everyone has the same "need" to belong, I suggest that perhaps the level varies with the individual. With that in mind I struggle to understand how more mental and physical problems in those without "good" social networks is viewed. Perhaps one who had significant problems in life only had a social network of 2, but perhaps that is all they needed and the problems relate to some unknown cause, how have the researchers assesed enough people and their relationships and needs to enable such an accepted idea? To me the idea of not belonging differs from rejection primarily in the way that rejection is an active rebuff of an attempt to belong. Rejection can lead to rejection sensitivity, the expectation of rejection and hypersensitivity to possible rejection. If an individual is sensitive to all the possible scenario's in which they may be rejected ostracism and isolation is almost a guarantee. It is also suggested that rejection of an individual initiates feelings of emotional numbness, interferes with psychological and cognitive functioning, a decline in intelligent thought, skepticism, impulsiveness and typically the individual tends to be less co-operative and helpful while more willing to break the rules. I suppose if this is indeed the case then the poor people feeling this through hypersensitivity to rejection are struggling with those emotions a great deal of the time? In saying that as a law student with a relatively black and white view on crime I still rejct this idea as a defence to any illegal activity. Loneliness affects everyone at times and it is particularly evident through tranisition stages. Loneliness occurs generally when the atcual level of contact is below the desired level, and just to throw my own thoughts out there I think that it doesn't just have to do with the number of people or time of contact playing into the addage of being surrounded by people yet being entirely alone, but also and I'm not quite sure how to word this, but I'm sure you are all familiar with or have seen friends fight with other another friend or break up with their boy/girlfriend and no matter how much you're there for them they are still lonely? well that kind of scenario.

Love's me, Love's me not, Love's me as a companion? Ever been told I love you but I'm not IN love with you? I've always though this was a lame man way of escaping a relationship, however Sternbergs "Triangular Model of Love" suggests that there may be some validity to this statement. Passion- Physiological arousal, longing, sexual attraction Intimacy- Closeness and sharing, support, understanding, concern Commitment- Concious decision, willing to define as love, long term. Having all these three factors is more likely to lead to succesful relationship while having a missing component may burst that relationship bubble. My history with relationships has allowed me to be in or observe a relationship with a missing element. Loving someone but not being in love with someone suggests the passion is laggaing. Intimacy, in my view is closely related to trust and the freedom to be yourself and without it...well I'd be giving up fairly quickly. And lastly the for some people deal breaker. If both parties in a relationship are not willing to define what they have as love and be in it for the long haul the relationship lifespan is cut down significantly.