Class Notes (838,404)
Canada (510,881)
Psychology (7,812)
PSYC18H3 (334)
Lecture 10

Lecture 10: Chapter 9

7 Pages
Unlock Document

Michelle Hilscher

Page 1 PSYC18 Psychology of Emotion Lecture 10: Outline: 1. Emotions in Intimate Relationships - What is intimacy? - Three ways to build intimacy - Threats to intimacy 2. Emotions Within Groups - Assertion strategies - Popularity and peer relations Intimate Relationships - Differences between intimate & non-intimate relationship? - 6 domains to consider: 1. Knowledge: o secret-sharing, confidential information. 2. Caring: o affection, motivated by affiliation. J help them not because you are obliged to 3. Interdependence: o strong, enduring impact on each other. - Make time for each other 4. Mutuality: o ^J_L}š^Ç}µL/[_: o qualities that are unique to you, and qualities that you both share o The parts that you share J that are most important to you, think of yourself in terms of that person 5. Trust: o ^š]‹µšš_L}o}L2Œ‰‰o]Z: o Sharing passwords, no longer constrained by etiquette (no longer tit-for-tat) 6. Commitment: o Presumed partnership. o Emotional & monetary investment follows that expectation. o Assume that the relationship will continue into the future o You invest yourself, make long term emotional + monetary investments How to Build Intimacy? - Often the domain of pop psychology, advice columns, self-help books. - Usually only focus on intimacy in romantic relationships. - you should do little nice things (ex: share your weaknesses, should be patient) - But not much backing to these ideas (anger can actually be helpful) Will You Be There For Me When Things Go Right? Supportive Responses to Positive Event Disclosures Gable, Gonzaga & Strachman (2006). In Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. - ^For better or worse_; }LÀLš]}Lo} µZ}L^}ŒÁ}ŒZ_: - µšZ}ŒZo}}lššZ]Z]LšŒKZ}^ÀLš]Z o}ZµŒZ_ o event disclosure J an opportunity for the other partner to tell them about a negative or positive event that happened to them and seeing how they react - ,}Á}Z‰ŒšLŒ[ZŒZ‰}LZš}L2š]Àe/positive disclosures pertain to intimacy and overall well-being? J It[s not just how you respond to negative events but positive events too - Page 2 Before the Going Gets Tough 1) Quality of intimacy correlates with expectation that partner will provide solid support in times of distress. When the Going Gets Tough - Partners offer each other support. Does it Help? 2) Feeling supported by partner buffers against harmful effects of stress. 3) Negative effects to self-esteem can arise. - social support due to poor coping ability? - Positive effects - Offer encouragement, financial support etc. - negative effects J can lower their self-esteem (feel like they are not able to support themselves) }LZ‹µLšoÇÁZLšZ2}]L22šZš}µ2Z; - Zµ‰‰}Œš]L2}L[Z‰ŒšLŒ]ZL ZZŒÇÇš challenging. - ÁŒ}L2šÇ‰}Zµ‰‰}Œš LZµŒš]Lš]K Ç; µZšZŒ ]‰]LšKÇo]LŒ]}Œš}šZ‰ŒZ}L that gives them support J correlated to lower relationship satisfaction, intimacy How to Help Without Incurring Costs? - Offer invisible support. - slip money into their bank account (not really invisible) - But how realistic is this? - Alternate strategy: focus also on successes - Emotional support that is comforting J in responding appropriately to small things that go right (has to make sense in the situation, the right type, the right amount of positive reinforcement) The Current Study - Participants: o 79 dating couples, University of California o Minimum 6 months together, 43% cohabitating. - Basic procedure: o 4 interactions o 9}ZšZ} Àoµš]}LZÇšZ^]Z o}ZŒ_ o Follow-up with couple in 2 months o Let these people talk to each other, disclose positive and negative events that happened to them, evaluates the quality of the response given by her partner The Interactions - Each partner describes 1 positive & 1 negative event. - Z‰ŒZ}L]Z^]Z o}ZŒ_L^ŒZ‰}LŒ_šÁ] : - 4 critical interactions. - What type of events qualify? o Individual experiences o Past, present, future o Ex: physical event only the discloser has lived thru - independent of the other person o Ex: something I am hoping will happen in the future o Ex: lost a job, losing a pet when I was a child, fight with the parent, promotion at a job, complete a marathon The Post Hoc Evaluations - ^]Z o}ZŒ_ÀoµšZ^ŒZ‰}LŒ_šŒ Z]LšŒ š]}L9 í:Z]Z[Z~îìì3) Responsiveness scale - ,}ÁµLŒZš}}7Ào]š7 Œ}Œ^]Z o}ZŒ_oš: - Level of agreement with items such as: o ,ljŒšLŒZÁšZ^ŒoK_; o ,ljŒšLŒ} µZ}LšZ^ZšZ]_}K; Page 3 o ,ljŒšLŒÀoµKÇ]o]š]ZL}‰]L]}LZ; The Follow-up - 2 months after study. - Relationship Quality Measures: 1. How good is your relationship compared to most? 2. Commitment level 3. Desire for Affection = composite score computed Æ Relationship Well-Being Regression Analysis - Outcome variable: Relationship Well-Being 2 months later - Predictor 1: Responsiveness to negative event - Predictor 2: Responsiveness to positive event - Is relationship well-being predicted by the quality of feedback provided to you by your partner when you described a positive and negative life event? Regression reveals different predictive models for men and women. - For Men: - Relationship well-being jointly accounted for by: o Ko‰ŒšLŒ[ZŒZ‰}LZ]ÀLZZš}Z Œ]‰š]}L}‰}Z]š]Àand negative event. o Both positive predictors. - For Women: - Relationship well-being only predicted by: o ,o‰ŒšLŒ[ZŒZ‰}LZ]ÀLZZš}Á}KL[ZZ Œ]‰š]}L}‰}Z]š]ÀÀLš: What Predicted Break-up? = Passive Destructive Feedback - What interactions observed in couples who broke up within 2 months of study? - Ratings of videotaped footage reveal some clues. - Four types of feedback in ŒZ‰}LZš}‰}Z]š]ÀÀLšZ; a. Active-Constructive J over the top enthusiastic and not shy about offering praise b. Passive-Constructive - }ŒZ }L2Œšµoš]}Lµš}L[šKlZµ2o}µš}]š c. Active-Destructive - }ZL[š oŒššZÀLš7 Œ]š] ]ÌZšZÀLš7ŒK]LZšZKšZŒ are negative events attached to a positive event d. Passive-Destructive - ‰ŒšLŒ}ZL[šÀLL}š] 7Œoš]ÀoǵLŒZ‰}LZ]À7]Z]LšŒZš Conclusions - o[Z^}ŒššŒ}Œ Á}ŒZ_ZšµÇZZ}Á9 1. Important to tell partner about good and bad events. 2. Low responsiveness to good events is common yet particularly damaging. Segway to Next Study - Everyday wisdom suggests that commiserating builds intimacy in romantic relationships. o Commiserate J share challenges, so partner can empathize with you - Research emphasizes importance of recognizing successes. - What about negative emotions in non-romantic social contexts? Positives of Negative Emotions? Graham et al. (2008). In Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin - Does the expression of negative emotions hurt or promote interpersonal relationships? - Not just romantic relationships this time. - A series of studies. Study 1: Participants read vignettes: Blind Date vs. Homesickness - IVs (independent variables?) that might contribute to decision: Page 4 1. Emotion type (Blind date = anxiety, Homesickness = sadness) 2. Expression (yes, no) - Finding: Explicitly expressing anxiety or sadness promotes the desire to help! o Whether or not the character in the scenario is expressive of emotions o You will be less willing to help when the character is not expressing Study 2: Speech - What about real-life not imagination? - Actual helping vs. intenti
More Less

Related notes for PSYC18H3

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.