Peer Response 1

froggermom02

08CH_Bevan_Interpersonal.pdf

Home >Education homework help >Peer Response 1

8Maintaining Interpersonal Relationships

Stephanie Deissner/F1online/Getty Images

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, you should be able to

ሁ Understand key elements of relationship maintenance and the differences between positive and negative relationship maintenance behaviors.

ሁ Identify the role of interpersonal communication in the commitment and intimacy processes. ሁ Explain how empathy and social support contribute to relationship maintenance. ሁ Describe challenges of relationship maintenance, including restoring equity, geographic distance,

and interactions via mediated channels. ሁ Apply strategies for competent relationship maintenance communication.

Introduction

Introduction In his acceptance speech after winning Best Picture at the 2012 Academy Awards for the film Argo, actor and director Ben Affleck thanked his then-wife, actress Jennifer Garner, by saying “I want to thank you for working on our marriage for 10 Christmases. It’s good. It is work, but it’s the best kind of work, and there’s no one I’d rather work with” (Zadan & Meron, 2013). This seemingly innocent statement instantly ignited a firestorm, with many reporters and media outlets criticizing Affleck’s choice of words and some even going so far as to question whether Affleck and Garner’s marriage was in trouble at that time (they have since divorced).

However, the very notion that marriage—and any other close relationship—does not require work is inaccurate. Melissa Wall, a blogger for the online dating website HowAboutWe.com, wrote a post that stood up for Affleck and Garner the next day, calling his statement “moving and authentic” (2013, para. 1). Wall (2013) continued her post by noting that individuals who decide to get married make an enormous “emotional leap of faith” upon conducting an analy- sis of the costs versus benefits of marriage and deciding that the positives are greater than the negatives. She goes on to describe the rewards that we hope to garner from marriage:

But at no point can we ever assume that these rewards will come without putting in the work to achieve them. We’re signing up for a daily struggle— some days it’s a small struggle, some days larger—and a distinct set of tasks that must be completed in order to keep the whole thing from falling apart. . . . Large or small, it’s still work—there is no way around that. And failing or refusing to do this work means the death of the relationship, maybe not today, but eventually. (Wall, 2013, paras. 7–8)

As we have discussed throughout this text, one of the most fundamental human needs is to experience close, mutually caring, and supportive relationships. They are safe havens in times of trouble and can provide comfort and support in times of need. To some degree, you have been shaped and molded by how you communicate in your relationships with your parents, siblings, and other family members, as well as your interactions with your romantic partners, friends, and professional colleagues. You will most likely maintain a number of these relation- ships throughout your life because they provide you with innumerable positive experiences. The excerpt from Wall’s blog post emphasizes many of the concepts that we are going to discuss in this chapter, including relationship maintenance messages, equity, social support, and commitment. Most importantly, Wall highlights the importance of putting in consistent effort—often via communication—to sustain a relationship that is important to us.

Your interpersonal communication skills are some of the most important tools when building a strong relationship. Competent communication patterns and skills are important character- istics of a quality relationship. Other specific factors that contribute to building and maintain- ing strong relationships include the following (Lang, Fingerman, & Fitzpatrick, 2003):

• commitment to one another • willingness to work together to maintain the relationship • exchanges of social support • intimacy • empathy

Section 8.1Relationship Maintenance

In this chapter, we build on concepts discussed in Chapter 7 related to initiating interpersonal relationships and explore how to maintain relationships. We explore how each of the above relationship and communication concepts factor into relationship maintenance. We will also discuss a number of things that can challenge our ability to maintain a relationship, along with strategies for improving your relationship maintenance competence.

8.1 Relationship Maintenance As we have just noted, relationship maintenance is crucial but is too often overlooked or viewed merely as work—a word that often has a negative connotation. Until just over 20 years ago, communication and social psychology researchers also ignored relationship main- tenance processes in favor of understanding how relationships were formed and ended. However, in 1991, communication researchers Laura Stafford and Daniel Canary formally established relationship maintenance as a distinct and important form of interpersonal com- munication. Since then, hundreds of studies have increased our understanding of how we use communication to preserve our relationships. How do you show your relational partners that you care about them? Do you help your romantic partner by washing the dishes before they get home from work? Do you post a link about an inside joke on your best friend’s Facebook wall? Do you call your parents on their wedding anniversary to tell them that you are thinking of them? When we behave in these ways, we are engaging in relationship maintenance— actions and interactions that sustain or preserve the desired states of our relationships (Din- dia & Canary, 1993).

To better understand the complexity of the various messages and actions that are a part of relationship maintenance, Kathryn Dindia and Daniel Canary (1993) conducted an analysis of how researchers defined relationship maintenance. They determined that there are four common relationship maintenance definitions, identified in Table 8.1.

Table 8.1: Common definitions of relationship maintenance Definition Explanation Example

Keeping a relationship in existence

Partners sustain the presence of the relationship and avoid its termination

Keeping up agreed-upon daily routines and tasks, such as tak- ing out the trash or making sure to ask how the partner’s day was

Keeping a relationship in a spe- cific condition or state

Partners believe certain qualities and aspects are important for maintenance so that the relation- ship is not terminated

Agreeing with a friend that you are “just friends” and nothing more

Keeping a relationship in a satis- factory condition

Partners experience satisfaction, in addition to stability, and desire to maintain this status

Feeling consistently content with the partner and the relationship

Keeping a relationship in repair Partners keep a relationship in working condition or fix a rela- tionship that is in disrepair

Being willing to talk about issues if the relationship begins to have problems

Source: Adapted from Dindia, K., & Canary, D. J. (1993). Definitions and theoretical perspectives on maintaining relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 163–173.

Section 8.1Relationship Maintenance

Overall, these definitions of relationship maintenance can overlap with one another and are applicable to relationship maintenance in a variety of relationships, including romantic, friend, family, and professional. The first, keeping a relationship in existence, is the most basic definition of relationship maintenance because it only involves sustaining the presence of the relationship and avoiding its termination (Dindia & Canary, 1993). This definition thus does not acknowledge the changing and shifting nature of relationships, nor does it account for the variety of maintenance behaviors and messages partners can use. The second defini- tion, keeping a relationship in a specific condition or state, includes the relationship qualities or aspects that the partners believe are important for maintenance, such as intimacy, trust, stability, and commitment, so that the relationship is not terminated. The third definition, keeping a relationship in a satisfactory condition, emphasizes the belief that relationships can be maintained when both partners experience satisfaction, in addition to the basic stabil- ity that is the focus of the second definition. The fourth and final relationship maintenance definition is keeping a relationship in repair. There are two aspects of this definition: fixing a relationship that is in disrepair and keeping a relationship in working condition (Dindia & Canary, 1993).

It is important to understand how relationship maintenance is defined, but it is also crucial to determine what behaviors or communication messages assist in the maintenance process. Relationship maintenance behaviors are the actions, messages, and tasks that assist with maintaining, managing, or repairing a relationship (Burleson, Metts, & Kirch, 2000). These behaviors and messages are conscious and strategic and specifically involve how to define and establish the parameters of the relationship and manage the tensions and threats to the relationship’s integrity and existence (Burleson et al., 2000; Stafford, Dainton, & Haas, 2000).

There are many benefits to using relationship maintenance behaviors and messages. For example, the more spouses engage in relationship maintenance, the greater the marital sat- isfaction (Stafford & Canary, 2006). In addition, the more romantic partners employ main- tenance behaviors and messages, the less likely they are to terminate their relationships (Guerrero, Eloy, & Wabnik, 1993). As with the definition of relationship maintenance, these behaviors and messages can occur in a number of close relationship contexts.

The next sections identify the variety of behaviors and messages that we can employ to main- tain our relationships. There are both positive and negative behaviors for maintaining close relationships, which suggests that relationship maintenance is a complex interpersonal inter- action that is not just confined to happy, satisfied couples. In other words, we may choose or even be required to sustain and preserve a relationship that we have with another person, such as a family member, that one friend in a tight-knit group that we don’t get along well with, or a coworker.

Positive Relationship Maintenance Behaviors Wall’s (2013) blog post about marriage, described at the beginning of the chapter, highlights the importance of relationship maintenance messages in a successful marriage. The same is true for other types of relationships. Conscious actions, such as cheerfully saying “good morn- ing” to your colleagues at work or supporting a friend or loved one when a parent passes away, are examples of positive maintenance behaviors. There are seven positive or construc- tive behaviors that can be strategically used to maintain relationships. The first five behaviors were identified by Stafford and Canary (1991), and the remaining two behaviors were added by Stafford and colleagues (2000):

Section 8.1Relationship Maintenance

• positivity: being optimistic, cheerful, pleasant, not criticizing your partner, and showing affection and appreciation for the other person and the relationship

• openness: balancing self-disclosures and honest communication about the relationship

• assurances: expressing commitment, love, faithfulness, emotional support, and messages that imply that the relationship has a future

• social networks: seeking and providing support from common family and friend networks

• sharing tasks: performing one’s fair share of joint jobs and responsibilities in the relationship

• advice: expressing partner-related emotions and cognitions and the willingness to communicate opinions

• conflict management: using constructive and positive behaviors such as cooperat- ing, listening, and apologizing when in conflict or disagreements with the partner

Let’s consider these positive maintenance behaviors in relation to the communication between Sidney and Jaime, a couple who have been married for 12 years. Sidney and Jaime work full-time and have two children. In addition, Jaime is taking online business courses in order to move up in his company. In other words, they are a typical, busy adult couple. However, despite all of these family and professional responsibilities, Sidney and Jaime make conscious efforts to main- tain their relationship. They communicate all of the above positive maintenance behav- iors: They tell each other “thank you” when one does something nice for the other (posi- tivity), and they discuss issues and are truthful and kind to each other when they disagree (openness and conflict management). Sidney and Jaime try to be clear about who completes which task, such as emptying the dishwasher or running errands (sharing tasks), and they ask Sidney’s sister, who lives nearby, for help with the kids when Jaime is working on his courses (social networks). Finally, Sidney and Jaime make sure to tell each other that they love each other, and they express that love by offering support and by seeking out and listen- ing to each other’s advice when work or parenting issues arise (assurances and advice).

Using these positive maintenance messages in your close relationships can have a number of payoffs. Spouses who were more committed to their relationships also used maintenance behaviors more frequently (Stafford et al., 2000). It certainly seems that Sidney and Jaime have a close, committed, and satisfying marriage, in large part because they treat each other with respect and kindness by virtue of the above seven positive maintenance behaviors. In addition, using assurances is most strongly related to positive relationship characteristics (Stafford et al., 2000). In both heterosexual and same-sex romantic relationships, the most frequently used relationship maintenance behavior is sharing tasks (Dainton & Stafford, 1993; Haas, 2002). Positive maintenance behaviors thus help both partners preserve a satis- fying relationship.

Stanislav Komogorov/iStock/Thinkstock ሁ Using positive relationship maintenance

behaviors can help partners preserve a satisfying relationship.

Section 8.2How Communication Helps Support Commitment and Intimacy

Negative Relationship Maintenance Behaviors Though it is preferable to focus on the positive behaviors that we can use to maintain our relationships, sometimes partners use negative behaviors. For example, expressing jealousy or engaging in avoidance can be used to retain a specific relationship status. Marianne Dain- ton and Jamie Gross (2008) explored such behaviors and identified six negative, antisocial behaviors that can be used to maintain romantic relationships:

• jealousy induction: flirting with and commenting on others’ attractiveness to elicit the partner’s jealousy

• avoidance: sidestepping discussions about a specific topic or evading the partner • spying: checking up on the partner by looking at the partner’s e-mails and phone or

talking to others for information • infidelity: flirting with others and engaging in affairs to keep from being bored and

dissatisfied with the relationship • destructive conflict: being controlling, starting fights, and bossing the partner

around • allowing control: giving the partner control in the relationship by not seeing other

people and letting the partner make decisions

Think back to the example of Sidney and Jaime. Consider what their relationship might look like if they used negative maintenance behaviors instead of positive ones. For example, instead of being kind and respectful in their everyday interactions and when they are arguing, Sidney instead seeks to control and manipulate Jaime by threatening him and saying negative things about him to their children (destructive conflict). Sidney also accesses Jaime’s e-mail and mobile phone to see who else he is talking to and what they are discussing (spying). To keep the peace and keep their marriage and family intact, Jaime tries to avoid Sidney and lets her make most major household decisions (avoidance and allowing control). In essence, Sidney and Jaime are maintaining their marriage with these negative maintenance behaviors but are doing so in a much more destructive manner.

Overall, as you might predict, communicating via negative relationship maintenance is related to decreased liking, commitment, sharing of responsibility, and respect, and such behaviors tend to be used more by individuals who are insecure and have negative views of themselves (Goodboy & Bolkan, 2011; Goodboy, Myers, & Members of Investigating Communication, 2010). In addition, the more partners use these negative relationship maintenance behav- iors, the less satisfied they are with their relationships (Dainton & Gross, 2008). In the case of Sidney and Jaime, if they rely on negative relationship maintenance behaviors, they are likely to view each other, as well as themselves, with dislike and disrespect and be dissatisfied with the very marriage they are trying to preserve. Thus, it is advisable to avoid consistently using these negative messages to maintain your close relationships; instead, try to integrate more positive maintenance messages with those to whom you are closest.

8.2 How Communication Helps Support Commitment and Intimacy

In addition to relationship maintenance, commitment and intimacy are two essential factors for building and fostering interpersonal relationships (Lang et al., 2003). Communication is important because it allows partners to express how they feel about each other and the

Section 8.2How Communication Helps Support Commitment and Intimacy

relationship that they share. This section thus discusses how communication supports com- mitment and intimacy.

Commitment If you are committed to a relationship, you are dedicated to your partner and are unlikely to leave if something goes awry. In other words, commitment is one’s “long-term orientation toward a relationship, including feelings of psychological attachment and intentions to per- sist through good and bad times” (Cox, Wexler, Rusbult, & Gaines, 1997, p. 80). Partners in a committed relationship make the extra effort to work at and improve their relationships, and, in turn, this increased commitment benefits the relationship because it is associated with increased relationship quality (Byers, Shue, & Marshall, 2004).

However, if you are not committed to a relationship, you are unlikely to protect it if difficul- ties arise. For example, romantic partners who are more committed to the relationship are less likely to give each other the silent treatment and are more likely to admit they are upset (Wright & Roloff, 2009), which can then initiate discussions about an upsetting issue. In the next sections, we explore commitment in two different forms: first as a central component of a theory about relationship maintenance, and second as a motivating force for how one com- municatively responds to dissatisfaction in one’s interpersonal relationships.

The Investment Model One of the primary theories used to understand how and why individuals remain in and work to maintain close relationships is the investment model (Dindia, 2000). The investment model predicts that our commitment to a relationship is the most helpful relationship char- acteristic for determining if a relationship will continue and remain stable or deteriorate and end (Rusbult, 1980). Specifically, Caryl Rusbult (1980) stated that relationship commitment is enhanced by three relationship components:

• high relationship satisfaction, which involves positive emotion and attraction toward the relationship

• high investment in the relationship, which involves tangible and intangible resources such as children, property, or shared feelings and experiences that improve the relationship

• low quality of relationship alternatives, which are options other than the relation- ship, such as other partners, spending time with friends, and even being alone, that could be viewed as more appealing than being in the relationship

Research has determined that the structure of the investment model can help explain ele- ments of heterosexual and homosexual romances and friendships; it is also applicable in other situations and contexts where commitment is relevant—such as professional organiza- tions and educational settings (Le & Agnew, 2003).

Think again about the example scenarios for Sidney and Jaime. In one scenario, the couple is maintaining their relationship with positive messages such as sharing tasks and assur- ances. As we noted, communicating using these positive relationship maintenance behaviors helps Sidney and Jaime feel more satisfied and committed to their marriage. According to the investment model, the more satisfied and invested Sidney and Jaime are in their relationship

Section 8.2How Communication Helps Support Commitment and Intimacy

and the fewer quality alternatives to their relationship they perceive, the more committed they are to their relationship.

The investment model has also been a useful theoretical structure for understanding a vari- ety of interpersonal communication situations and contexts. The model has helped research- ers identify connections between commitment and predicting the continuation of different types of relationships in the following situations:

• why dating partners forgive each other and communicate shortly after committing relationship transgressions such as infidelity, deception, and dating or flirting with someone else (Guerrero & Bachman, 2008, 2010)

• how friends communicate with one another (Eyal & Dailey, 2012) • if supervisors use verbal aggression toward employees at work (Madlock & Dillow,

2012)

In the relationships that are important to you, you can apply the tenets of the investment model by considering your levels of satisfaction and investment and the extent to which you perceive that you have alternatives to the relationship. How does each of these contribute to your overall commitment to the relationship? Could focusing on improving one specific rela- tionship factor—such as becoming more invested in the relationship—increase your commit- ment? What might this mean for the relationship and your communication with your part- ner? (The Web Field Trip feature gives you a chance to put the investment model into practice.)

Communicative Responses to Dissatisfaction Rusbult and her colleagues (1982) next sought to examine how relationship commitment connects with communication when a partner is unhappy or dissatisfied in the relationship. They created a typology of four responses that is based on how partners communicated their dissatisfaction. The responses varied on two sets of related factors: (1) positive versus

Web Field Tr ip: Apply ing t he Pr inciples of t he Invest ment Model Luvze (https://www.luvze.com/) is a website that features content edited and written by academics who study, research, and teach about different aspects of relationships. The editors and contributors to this site, who hold advanced degrees in many different fields of study, emphasize the importance of presenting readers with information and advice that is backed by scientific evidence. Search for an article titled “Why Do Victims Return to Abusive Relationships?” Consider the information presented, assessing how the content relates to the material in this chapter, and then address the following questions.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. What specific types of resources and opportunities (i.e., alternatives to the abusive relationship) could be provided to women to increase the likelihood that they will not return to the abusive relationship?

2. In what other ways could the investment model be applied to other relationship situations?

Section 8.2How Communication Helps Support Commitment and Intimacy

negative (i.e., how kind or constructive versus how hurtful or destructive one acts), and (2) active versus passive (i.e., how direct or dynamic versus how avoidant or static one’s behav- iors are). Each of the typologies is identified and explained in Table 8.2.

Table 8.2: Responses to relationship dissatisfaction

Typology Active versus passive

Positive versus negative Examples

Exit Active Negative Breaking up, threatening to leave, or moving out

Voice Active Positive Discussing issues, suggesting solu- tions, or entering into therapy

Loyalty Passive Positive Being patient and waiting out prob- lems that might arise

Neglect Passive Negative Ignoring the partner, refusing to discuss issues, or spending less time together

Source: Adapted from Rusbult, C. E., Zembrodt, I. M., & Gunn, L. K. (1982). Exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect: Responses to dissatisfaction in romantic involvements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 1230–1242.

Based on the above descriptions, Rusbult and her colleagues (1982) found that voice and loy- alty behaviors were more likely when romantic partners were more committed to each other and had greater satisfaction with the relationship before the problems arose. Conversely, exit and neglect were less likely in committed and satisfied romantic relationships, and express- ing dissatisfaction via voice or loyalty also resulted in positive immediate and later conse- quences, including greater satisfaction and commitment over the long term (Rusbult et al., 1982). In addition, Farrell and Rusbult (1992) found that using voice and loyalty—and not using exit or neglect—when expressing dissatisfaction in the workplace was also associated with higher employee job satisfaction.

These studies indicate that using positive and active responses, specifically voice responses, are the best course of action when partners are dealing with issues but want to preserve their relationship. Whether active or passive in nature, positive messages are more direct and show consideration. Though loyalty behaviors can have the same benefits, such actions might go unnoticed because they are less direct and thus more difficult for a partner to detect (Drigotas, Whitney, & Rusbult, 1995).

Intimacy Relationships rarely remain static. One important change can be growth toward greater inti- macy. The root meaning of the word intimacy is “making known to a close friend what is innermost” (Kasulis, 2002, p. 24). Intimacy involves growing closer by verbally and nonver- bally sharing your deepest thoughts, feelings, and ideas with another person. All relation- ships—romantic, friend, family, and even professional—have the potential for intimacy. Social psychologist Karen Prager (2000) even goes so far as to say that intimacy is “the distinguish- ing mark of a person’s most important and valued relationships,” contributing to the greatest levels of satisfaction, trust, closeness, and love (p. 229).

Section 8.2How Communication Helps Support Commitment and Intimacy

As its definition suggests, communication is inherent in intimacy; in fact, Prager (2000) argues that intimate relationships become so as a result of intimate interac- tions that are characterized by frequent, emotional, personal, and private disclo- sures. Though we can have an intimate conversation with someone whom we do not know well, such as sharing personal information with a seatmate on an airplane or someone we meet on vacation, we can- not have intimate relationships without personal and private disclosures (Prager, 2000). In other words, intimate communi- cation is a necessary condition for having an intimate relationship.

What messages do you use when you want to convey intimacy to your close relational partners? Most likely, you use a combination of words, gestures, facial expressions, and touch. Indeed, research consistently finds that verbal and nonverbal communication each uniquely contributes to our experiences in intimate rela- tionships. Self-disclosure, an idea covered in Chapter 7, is the primary verbal message that characterizes intimacy. Not only does disclosing private and personal information about you foster intimacy, it also serves as a tool for building intimacy in newly formed relationships (Prager, 2000). Self-disclosure can particularly amplify partners’ intimacy when it

• focuses on topics that are particularly personal and private; • uncovers feelings, emotions, and meanings of events, in addition to the events

themselves; • involves immediacy behaviors that show that both partners are attentive to and

focusing upon the interaction; and • is met with verbal responsiveness and interest from the listener (Prager, 2000).

Nonverbal communication is also important for building and sustaining intimacy. Prager (2000) points out that involvement behaviors, which show that you are attentive, inter- ested, and active in the conversation, are important when showing intimacy. Examples of spe- cific nonverbal involvement behaviors that convey intimacy include

• sharing mutual eye gaze; • having open body posture; • leaning forward toward your partner; • gesturing; • smiling and being facially animated; • nodding your head while speaking and listening; and • touching your partner, particularly on the face or the torso area of the body

(Prager, 1995).

In the sections we have just concluded, we illustrated the importance of interpersonal com- munication in commitment and intimacy processes. Quite simply, we cannot experience inti- mate, committed relationships without engaging in personal disclosures and close, involved

Comstock Images/Stockbyte/Thinkstock ሁ In an interpersonal relationship, intimacy can

grow over time as partners begin to share more about their innermost thoughts, feelings, and motives.

Section 8.3Empathy and Social Support

nonverbal behaviors. We turn now to the role of empathy and social support in maintaining interpersonal relationships.

8.3 Empathy and Social Support The next two important relationship characteristics that contribute to relationship mainte- nance are empathy and social support. As you will see, these two concepts are considered together in this section because both emphasize the importance of taking your partner’s per- spective instead of focusing solely on your own. Empathy and social support also highlight the importance of assisting and understanding each partner and his or her respective needs in the relationship. Each can help in creating shared meaning and in contributing to you being a more active and effective listener.

Empathy If you have access to your feelings and understand them, you can develop the ability to under- stand and be sensitive to the feelings of others as well. This sensitivity can bring you closer to people and enable you to feel empathy for them. Empathy is defined as putting yourself in another person’s shoes or imagining another person’s thoughts, feelings, and perspec- tives. When you feel empathy for another person, you identify with him or her and accurately understand his or her thoughts and feelings (Rogers, 1957).

Empathy is different from sympathy, where you convey sorrow for what a person is going through without identifying with or relating to what the person is dealing with. In other words, sympathy means that you feel for the other person, but you do not necessarily know what they are experiencing. To be empathic, you must take the other person’s perspective and consider his or her thoughts and feelings. When someone shares their feelings with you, try to recall experiences you have had that have generated similar feelings for you. Your identifica- tion of a similar feeling or experience in yourself can help you understand others. In turn, this can help you and your conversation partner better achieve shared meaning, even when you are not drawing from the same experience.

For example, suppose your friend Jake tells you that he is terrified of flying in an airplane. If you love to fly, you may have a difficult time understanding why Jake feels fear on a plane. It is important here not to devalue or judge Jake’s experience. Instead, try to recognize it and identify a similar experience of yours that will allow you to better understand and talk with Jake about how he feels. Specifically, think of an experience that terrified you—for example, when you saw a rattlesnake in front of you while walking on a trail. Think about the fear you had then, and you will be able to better understand the feeling Jake experiences when on an airplane and empathize with him when discussing it. However, do not focus too much on your own experience, as this could take away from your ability to empathize with your friend.

Expressing Empathy One of the primary benefits of relational partners sharing their thoughts and feelings with each other is that doing so helps each partner understand the emotions of the other per- son. It is for this reason that researchers call empathy “a central and crucial” component of healthy romantic couple functioning (Busby & Gardner, 2008, p. 232). Dean Busby and Brandt

Section 8.3Empathy and Social Support

Gardner (2008) found that expressing empathy positively influenced couples’ relationship satisfaction one year later—evidence of the power that empathy can have in sustaining close relationships.

Empathy is clearly an important quality to have in interpersonal communication with others. Being empathic also helps one view the world in a more balanced and objective way. There are many different ways to express empathy in close relationships. Generally, communication that is helpful and supportive of others can be considered empathic. Here are some specific guidelines that will help you be a more empathic communicator (Orban, 2001):

• Be an active listener—one who listens long enough to form a perspective before ask- ing questions or responding with your reaction.

• Attend to the interaction and use supportive and engaged body language. • Show the other communicator that you are sensitive to his or her feelings. • Put yourself in the place of the other communicator to see how you would feel in a

similar situation. • Ask questions—ones that are relevant to the situation and that attempt to clarify

your view of the situation. • Once you have identified the other communicator’s feelings, reply in a way that is

consistent with his or her emotions. • Indicate that you are willing to assist or help, if doing so is appropriate. • If you disagree with the other communicator, be honest and express your differ-

ent opinion while also acknowledging the person’s right to feel the way that he or she does.

Another specific way to communicate more empathically is to engage in active-empathic listening (AEL), which occurs when a listener is genuinely focused and emotionally involved in a particular interaction and when this “involvement is conscious on the part of the lis- tener but is also perceived by the speaker” (Bodie, 2011, p. 278). When AEL is being properly employed, both communicators recognize that the listener is being actively empathic dur- ing their conversation. According to Graham Bodie (2011), and further described by Weger (2018), AEL has three stages:

• Sensing: The listener indicates that she is actively involved and taking in the infor- mation provided by the speaker. Focusing on the speaker’s nonverbal messages can assist with understanding the content and relational meanings of the message.

• Processing: The listener shows engagement by remembering what the other says and clarifying points made by the speaker. In essence, the speaker’s message is evaluated by the listener.

• Response: The listener asks questions, paraphrases, and nonverbally indicates involvement in and understanding of the interaction.

According to one study (Weger, 2018), in the college classroom, greater AEL on the part of the instructor—as perceived by their students—was positively related to perceived nonverbal immediacy of the instructor and negatively linked to a higher number of uncivil communica- tion behaviors from students, such as texting, leaving class early, reading nonclass material, and even being disruptive by talking loudly or swearing. Thus, listening empathically can be a modeling behavior that sets a tone for the interpersonal communication in a classroom set- ting to be one of courtesy and respect (Weger, 2018). In this way, AEL can be linked with the competent interpersonal communication principle of respecting others as well as oneself.

Section 8.3Empathy and Social Support

Take the Self-Test in the following feature to determine how active-empathic a listener you are in your conversations with your relational partners.

Self-Test: Bodie’s Ac t ive-Empat hic Listening Sc ale Indicate how frequently you perceive each of the following statements to be true of you using a seven-point scale, where

1 indicates never or almost never true of me

. . .

4 indicates occasionally true

. . .

7 indicates always or almost always true

1. I am sensitive to what others are not saying.

2. I assure others that I am receptive to their ideas.

3. I assure others that I will remember what they say.

4. I am aware of what others imply but do not say.

5. I assure others that I am listening by using verbal acknowledgments.

6. I summarize points of agreement and disagreement when appropriate.

7. I understand how others feel.

8. I keep track of points others make.

9. I ask questions that show my understanding of others’ positions.

10. I listen for more than just the spoken words.

11. I show others that I am listening by my body language (e.g., head nods).

Scoring

Sensing: Add up the totals for items 1, 4, 7, and 10 and divide by 7.

Processing: Add up the totals for items 3, 6, and 8 and divide by 7.

Response: Add up the totals for items 2, 5, 9, and 11 and divide by 7.

The higher your scores are for each AEL stage, the more you are an active-empathic listener. Source: Bodie, G. D. (2011). The active-empathic listening scale (AELS): Conceptualization and evidence of validity within the interpersonal domain. Communication Quarterly, 59, 277–295. Reprinted by permission of Eastern Communication Association, www.ecasite.org

Consider Your Results

Perhaps you responded to the statements above in relation to a specific relationship you have with someone or in regard to a specific topic that others frequently discuss with

(continued on next page)

Section 8.3Empathy and Social Support

Types of Social Support When you are upset or have had something bad happen to you, one of your first instincts is likely to reach out to others. When talk- ing to those around you about your thoughts and feelings in response to a painful situa- tion, you hope that they will listen, validate you, offer you a shoulder to cry on, and even be willing to help out or assist in some way. These behaviors are all examples of social support, which most communication schol- ars recognize as a fundamental reason why we communicate with one another—one that is as important as sharing information, forming relationships, and persuading oth- ers (Albrecht & Goldsmith, 2003). Specifi- cally, social support occurs when people who are confronting daily problems or major life stresses turn to others in their social network who can “provide informa- tion, comfort, perspective, and aid” (Gold- smith, 2004, p. 11); this act of social sup- port then bolsters one’s ability to effectively cope and respond to the situation. We cope when we are able to manage stressful situ- ations by changing what can be changed through problem solving and by adapting and adjusting to what we cannot change (du Pré, 2009).

Communication researchers have been instrumental in advancing scholarly understanding of social support. These scholars have identified the different types of social support that peo- ple can use. Athena du Pré (2009) examined this social support research and identified two

John Warburton-Lee/AWL Images/Getty Images ሁ A desire for social support is a fundamental

reason that we communicate with one another. We turn to others for information, comfort, and guidance when we encounter difficult or painful situations.

Self-Test: Bodie’s Ac t ive-Empat hic Listening Sc ale (cont inued) you. Or perhaps you asked someone else to take the test on your behalf to see how active- empathic a listener they perceive you to be. Either way, review the following questions and ref lect upon your results.

1. Was there a specific stage that you scored higher or lower in?

2. If your score was lower than you anticipated, what do you think you could do to be a more active-empathic listener?

3. If someone else took the self-test on your behalf, how did their perception of your active-empathic listening match up with your own perceptions?

Section 8.3Empathy and Social Support

broad categories of social support, each with its own individual social support types. We will explain each by using an example of a situation where social support is extremely important in a close relationship: a husband named JaBari providing support to his wife Emma, who has been diagnosed with breast cancer. The first category is action-facilitating support, which involves support that is tangible and problem solving in nature. Action-facilitating support includes two specific types of support. The first is instrumental support, in which support is provided by performing tasks and favors for the person in need. Informational support, on the other hand, entails collecting and organizing information.

In our example, JaBari provides instrumental support to Emma when he runs errands such as picking up her prescriptions from the pharmacy. He offers informational support when he writes down information during Emma’s medical appointments and researches her diagno- sis and treatment options on the Internet. Terrance Albrecht and Daena Goldsmith (2003) point out that action-facilitating support is most helpful in particularly serious and stressful situations such as a major health crisis like JaBari and Emma’s. In minor or less severe social support situations, such as simply having a bad day, using these types of social support could actually be viewed as criticizing or intrusive in nature.

According to du Pré (2009), the second broad social support category is nurturing support, which focuses on helping the person in need to cope and feel better emotionally. There are three types of nurturing support:

1. Esteem support, in which the individual in need is made to feel competent and val- ued. Esteem support includes offering encouraging words and supportively listen- ing, which many who need support find to be more valuable than being given advice. When JaBari tells Emma that she is strong and will get through this, and also tells her that he is there to listen when she simply wants to talk, he is providing her with esteem support. In fact, messages of praise and expressions of love and concern when offering esteem support can have a beneficial impact on the person in need’s self-esteem. (Holmstrom, 2012)

2. Emotional support involves acknowledging and understanding what the person in need is feeling and providing care, empathy, trust, and love. Emma is seeking emo- tional support from JaBari when she tells him how she feels, and he listens and tells her that those feelings are OK.

3. Social network support refers to ongoing relationships that are maintained before, during, and after a crisis. JaBari can provide social network support by staying with Emma as she battles her cancer. He can also ask others—their family and friends—to assist them, or he can accept their offers to help.

These types of nurturing support, especially emotional support, are viewed as helpful and valuable across many different social support situations, from minor to extremely severe (Albrecht & Goldsmith, 2003).

How do we actually employ these various types of social support? Albrecht and Goldsmith (2003) offer five forms of supportive communication that can be helpful in a variety of social support situations:

• Assist the person in need to gain perspective about the situation, particularly if it is beyond the person’s control.

• Enhance the person in need’s skills or training relevant to the stressful situation.

Section 8.3Empathy and Social Support

• Promote actions or behaviors that provide tangible assistance without the person in need feeling an excess obligation to reciprocate in the future.

• Offer the person in need the option to engage in private disclosures or to vent their pent-up emotions and thoughts.

• Offer accepting and reassuring messages for the person in need’s sense of dignity, face, and self-worth.

One other important caution regarding how and when we provide social support to others is to remember that more is not always better; du Pré (2009) cautions against engaging in over- support, in which excessive, unwanted, and unnecessary help is provided, including offer- ing unsolicited advice, providing too much information, and empathizing too much with the person in need. Instances of oversupport can overwhelm the person in need and make the person feel exhausted and overly dependent on others.

Social Support and Health Not only can social support help someone feel better emotionally and psychologically, this form of communication also benefits physical health and well-being. As we discussed in Chap- ter 1, many different forms of communication can be linked to improved health, and social support is one of the most significant of these beneficial factors. Research has found that receiving support from others can be an important factor in the improved functioning of three of our physiological systems: (1) the cardiovascular system, which includes heart function- ing and blood and lymphatic circulation; (2) the immune system, which buffers our bodies against the effects of diseases and illnesses; and (3) the endocrine system, which consists of the glands that secrete hormones such as adrenaline and norepinephrine into the blood- stream and that control our stress reactions and metabolism. Social support also improves our ability to recover from an illness, cope with and adapt to a chronic illness, remain healthy, and reduce our mortality (DiMatteo, 2004). For example, in one study, when husbands received more social support from their wives after having coronary artery bypass surgery, they needed less pain medicine, were discharged more quickly from the intensive care unit, and returned home from the hospital sooner than husbands receiving less spousal social sup- port (Kulik & Mahler, 1989).

Albrecht and Goldsmith (2003) suggest a number of ways in which social support and physi- cal health can be linked:

• Receiving social support encourages the person to more adaptively and usefully cope with stress.

• Social support from others can improve the health behaviors of the person in need; in essence, the individual is encouraged to live healthier by eating better, exercising more, or following their doctor’s treatment regimen.

• Receiving social support helps the individual feel better psychologically, contributing to the person’s self-esteem and positive view of life.

• Social support can give the individual hope for the future and a deeper sense of life purpose.

Returning to the example of JaBari and Emma and her breast cancer diagnosis, if Emma knows that she can rely on JaBari and their family and friends, she can focus on getting well and following through with her treatment rather than on being stressed and feeling unable to cope with her cancer diagnosis. Knowing that others are there for her and that she can depend on them can also make Emma feel good about herself, which can then make her even

Section 8.4Challenges of Relationship Maintenance

more determined to beat her cancer. Social support can be thought of as a protective net that catches and holds the person in need, allowing the individual a safe place to heal or cope. Being there for someone you care about can therefore assist in maintaining your relationship with the person and can also contribute to the person’s improved psychological and physical health.

8.4 Challenges of Relationship Maintenance Thus far in this chapter we have focused on the many things that we can do to maintain our relationships. We have discussed the importance of relationship maintenance and considered how using positive relationship maintenance behaviors—intimacy, commitment, empathy, and support—can benefit ourselves and others in all types of relationships. Now we consider some situations where preserving the relationship can be difficult. These situations—which include having an inequitable relationship and navigating a relationship via mediated chan- nels or over a geographic distance—are important to understand and manage so that the relationship does not deteriorate or end entirely. We thus consider each with regard to rela- tionship maintenance.

Restoring Equity One of the most basic things we want out of our interpersonal relationships is to feel rewarded. We seek to benefit from our relationships, and our partners also seek rewards in return. The forms of these rewards can be tangible, such as money, jewelry, and material wealth, or intan- gible, such as feelings of love, understanding, security, and joy.

Though the idea of rewarding relationships sounds simple and logical, relationship scholars initially had difficulty formally explaining the role of these tangible and intangible rewards in forming and maintaining relationships. Social exchange theory was therefore proposed by Harold Kelley and John Thibaut (1978) as a way to extend the economic notion of rewards versus costs to our relationships with others. According to the theory, we seek to maximize our rewards and minimize our costs in our relationships. Initially, social exchange theory was hailed as an intuitive, simple explanation for what we seek to get out of relationships. Over time, however, the theory proved difficult to test. For example, what one couple might consider a reward (e.g., “Money is helpful to us because we agree that we can use it to put a down payment on a house”), another could see as a cost (e.g., “We can’t agree on money issues, and it is causing us a great deal of conflict”). In addition, those who seemingly receive very few rewards and are shouldering great relational costs (e.g., those who are being physi- cally abused by their partners) do not always leave the relationship, as the theory predicts they would.

Elaine Hatfield and her colleagues (Hatfield, Traupmann, Sprecher, Utne, & Hay, 1985) pro- posed equity theory as a way to reconsider the concept of a relationship reward. Equity the- ory considers relationship rewards in relation to fairness, providing an alternative to social exchange theory. Equity theory formally asserts that relational partners attempt to balance the amount of rewards they each receive with the amount received by the other partner in order to maintain equity within the relationship. In other words, equity exists when both partners subjectively believe that they are putting in and obtaining equal or similar levels of relationship rewards. When inequity arises in a relationship, there is a discernible imbalance

Section 8.4Challenges of Relationship Maintenance

for one or both partners that can take one of two forms: being underbenefited, gaining fewer rewards than one’s partner, and being overbenefited, obtaining more rewards than one’s partner.

We might see many different inequities in our relationships. For example, maybe your parents allowed your brother to do some- thing that you weren’t allowed to do, or perhaps your friend consistently shares less about themselves than you do about your- self. Even the difference in annual salaries between a husband and wife is an example of inequity in a relationship. When inequity is detected, it is often an upsetting experi- ence for both partners. Underbenefited individuals feel unhappy, hurt, angry, and resentful toward their partners, are less satisfied in their relationships, and are less likely to like their partners. Overbenefited partners experience guilt, believe that they do not deserve these rewards, and, despite receiving the most out of the relationship, feel less satis- fied and content than those in equitable relationships. It is thus no surprise that inequitable relationships are more likely to end. In contrast, individuals in equitable relationships feel emotionally rewarded and are relationally satisfied.

One way to restore equity is to change behavior—either your own or your partner’s. A study by Catherine Westerman, Hee Sun Park, and Hye Eun Lee (2007) found that individuals in inequitable coworker relationships dealt with their inequity in this manner. Westerman and her colleagues noted that their findings fit the pattern that underbenefited individuals would feel disadvantaged and thus seek change, and overbenefited people would feel the need to change how they acted because they felt as if they were taking advantage of their partners. Specifically, the study revealed that underbenefited coworkers were more likely to ask their overbenefited partners to act differently, while the overbenefited coworkers responded to the inequity by changing their own behaviors (Westerman et al., 2007).

Though it seems somewhat cold and businesslike, we do have a tendency to evaluate our close relationships in terms of having equitable rewards and costs with our partner. You encounter a significant challenge when you find yourself in a relationship where you are consistently overbenefited or underbenefited. However, you might be able to restore the equity in the relationship by changing how you engage in relationship maintenance or by changing the behaviors and communication messages—both yours and your partner’s—that are primarily responsible for the imbalance.

Distance We first discussed geographic distance in Chapter 1, where we described long-distance rela- tionships (LDRs) as having a unique set of communication patterns and challenges. We return to distance here because it is specifically relevant to how we maintain our close relationships. Long-distance relationships are a common experience today, with commuter marriages;

Ingram Publishing/Thinkstock ሁ Equity exists in a relationship when both

partners feel they are putting in and obtaining similar levels of relationship rewards. If an imbalance exists, one way to restore equity in a relationship is to change one’s behaviors.

Section 8.4Challenges of Relationship Maintenance

geographically separated romantic, family, and friend relationships; and military deploy- ments contributing to this growth (Merolla, 2010a). Those in LDRs must adjust how they maintain their relationships and communicate intimacy and satisfaction to one another to account for the miles between them. However, rather than giving up, LDR partners often show extra motivation to make up for the distance between them by communicating in specific ways, such as scheduling specific times to talk to and visit one another, making a point to engage in intimate and positive conversations, and using multiple forms of social media and technologies such as texting and video chatting (Jiang & Hancock, 2013).

Though the common belief is that individu- als in LDRs have lower relationship quality than those in geographically-close relation- ships, research has found this is actually not the case. A 2010 review of research by Laura Stafford, a communication scholar who spe- cializes in distance and relationship mainte- nance, determined that the relationships of distant romantic partners are as trusting, satisfying, and stable as those of romantic partners who are in close proximity to each other. There were also no differences in relationship satisfaction and closeness between distant and close college-age friends (Johnson, 2001). In fact, in one study, LDR partners were in longer roman- tic relationships, had more intimate interac- tions, and reported greater commitment to each other than did geographically-close partners (Jiang & Hancock, 2013).

When distance relationships were compared with geographically-close relationships, there were no significant differences for the openness, positivity, and assurances relationship main- tenance behaviors (Johnson, 2001). However, there were certain distinctions related to other maintenance behaviors between geographically-distant and close relationships:

• Long-distance romantic partners in ongoing, unresolved conflicts engaged in more constructive and direct conflict strategies (e.g., calm discussions) and avoided the conflict more than geographically-close partners (Cionea, Wilson Mumpower, & Bassick, 2019).

• Geographically-close friends used the social network and joint activities behaviors more, whereas distant friends relied more on sending cards and letters and calling to maintain their relationships (Johnson, 2001).

• Wives of deployed U.S. soldiers noted that their attempts to maintain their relation- ships were often complicated by communication environments that were not pri- vate, preventing intimate conversation, and that placed restrictions and time limits on communications; they also indicated they would prefer more frequent interac- tions (Merolla, 2010b).

• Partners in LDRs uniquely maintain their relationships by thinking about the previ- ous times they were geographically close and looking forward to the times that will be spent together in the future (Merolla, 2010a).

Blend Images/Ariel Skelley/Vetta/Getty Images ሁ Relationship maintenance might be more

complicated overall for partners in long-distance relationships, but the quality of such relationships is more similar to geographically-close relationships than different.

Section 8.4Challenges of Relationship Maintenance

Together, the research on LDRs shows that relationship quality in such relationships is more similar than different to geographically-close partnerships. This conclusion goes against the prevailing belief about the difficulty of managing LDRs, suggesting they may not be as much of a challenge as is assumed. However, LDR partners do use a number of positive relational maintenance behaviors and messages that are different from those used by proximal part- ners, suggesting that people in both types of relationships work to maintain their relation- ships, but in different ways. Relationship maintenance overall may also be more complicated for distant partners, which could present a challenge for some individuals in LDRs. But, if partners acknowledge the difficulty of distance and strive to compensate for it, LDRs have as much a chance for success as geographically-close relationships.

Mediated Communication Think about the interactions that you had today with your friends, family, and romantic part- ner. How many were face-to-face? How many involved some form of mediated communica- tion, such as a mobile phone or the Internet? How many involved a combination of both? It is likely that mediated communication comprises at least half of your interactions on a given day. We now rely on many different communication channels in our day-to-day conversa- tions with those who are close to us. In fact, we frequently use mediated channels of com- munication such as cell phones and text messaging to communicate with romantic partners, and when we wish to express affection to our romantic partners, we choose these channels most often (Coyne, Stockdale, Busby, Iverson, & Grant, 2011). It is thus not surprising that mediated communication has become an instrumental tool for developing and maintaining relationships.

Interacting via mediated channels has many benefits: It is convenient, allowing us to commu- nicate from almost anywhere and with almost anyone we wish; we can use it to keep in touch and maintain relationships with friends and acquaintances from different periods of our lives or with those who live far away; and we can meet people whom we would otherwise never have met. However, despite these benefits, there are a number of challenges associated with maintaining relationships via mediated communication channels.

First, communicating via text messaging or e-mail can leave too much room for interpretation, causing miscommunication. Texting or e-mailing can also cause frustration because thoughts, feelings, and ideas cannot be fully expressed through these channels, which have traditionally been mostly limited to written text or basic symbols. The upgrades in both of these technolo- gies, though, now allow us to share photos, live and recorded videos, emojis, and gifs, which offer a wider form of expression and narrow the likelihood that miscommunication will occur and shared meaning will not be achieved.

Second, maintaining relationships by way of social networks such as Facebook may contrib- ute to stress, compromised health, and difficulty in adjusting to parenthood, though research on the topic is inconsistent. Almost 86% of Facebook users in one study reported experi- encing Facebook-induced stress (Campisi et al., 2012). In addition, the more new mothers checked their Facebook accounts and managed what they uploaded and posted on their Face- book pages, the more stress they experienced about parenting (Bartholomew, Schoppe-Sul- livan, Glassman, Dush, & Sullivan, 2012). However, a more large-scale study of public health data in California determined that individuals with Facebook accounts were 12% less likely to die in any given year when compared to non-Facebook users (Hobbs, Burke, Christakis, & Fowler, 2016). The authors of this study noted that the online social networks seem to

Section 8.5Strategies for Communicating Competently When Maintaining Interpersonal Relationships

have the same link to our health that off-line social networks do, particularly for individuals with more online friends (Hobbs et al., 2016). It is possible that we may have initially been overwhelmed by the increasing number of relationships we felt we must maintain due to the exponential growth of mediated communication but have learned to better manage and inte- grate this channel into our lives.

Third, when we communicate via mediated channels, we are often creating a permanent record of our messages. Research has found that self-disclosure is an important part of online relationship maintenance (Craig & Wright, 2012). Yet, revealing private and personal information online can be risky because the disclosures could be shared with others or used against you. Self-disclosure online is also linked to increased predictability about that partner, which could become boring for the other partner over time (Craig & Wright, 2012). Step- ping away from mediated channels, however, can allow us to feel less overwhelmed with the constant ability to interact with and maintain relationships with others. Elizabeth Craig and Kevin Wright (2012) recommend that relational partners supplement their online interac- tions with face-to-face communications to clarify misunderstandings and that they use other relationship maintenance behaviors. These are sensible suggestions that would be wise to use with all forms of mediated communication. Communicating via a mixture of online and off-line interactions is beneficial to maintaining close relationships.

8.5 Strategies for Communicating Competently When Maintaining Interpersonal Relationships

This chapter has shown the importance of behaviors in maintaining close, loving relation- ships: We must consistently show our partners that we care about them through our behav- iors and our communication. We also can tell our partners that we care for them by being empathic and offering them social support when they need it. If we do not maintain our rela- tionships in the communicative ways described in this chapter, the relationship quality will undoubtedly suffer. We thus close this chapter by offering some specific strategies for improv- ing your relationship maintenance competence.

Strive to Engage in Positive Relationship Maintenance Behaviors Research has shown that actions and messages that we may usually consider routine, even mundane, are important for preserving the relationships that are important to us. In addition, communication competence is strongly related to using positive maintenance behaviors in your relationships (Hwang, 2011). Reflect on how you (and your partner) use maintenance behaviors and messages in your close relationships, particularly the sharing tasks and offer- ing assurances strategies. Try to use positive maintenance behaviors, which enhance relation- ship satisfaction and liking, rather than negative maintenance behaviors, which can damage the very relationship that you are trying to preserve. Remember that assisting with even the smallest tasks and telling your partner that you care about him or her can go a long way!

Consider Your Relationships We saw in this chapter that a number of relational characteristics can contribute to under- standing whether a relationship will succeed or fail. Now that you have a better grasp of the importance of intimacy, commitment, satisfaction, quality of alternatives, and investment in

Summary and Resources

close relationships, use this knowledge to help determine why you communicate the way that you do with your relational partners. Consider specifically how much (or how little) you experience these five relationship characteristics and how your levels may or may not cor- respond with your partners’ levels. If you are experiencing reduced levels of one or more of these characteristics, think about how it might be improved. How might distance or the exces- sive use of mediated communication be contributing to these reduced levels? How might you communicate differently to improve your relationship’s long-term outlook? How can your partner do the same?

Engage in Social Support, but Don’t Oversupport Social support clearly has many positive implications, for relationships, for individuals, and for one’s health. It is also a fundamental reason why we communicate with others. But it is important to verify that someone needs or is seeking social support before offering it, even in less stressful or ordinary situations. Recall that providing too much support or the wrong type of support can make the situation worse and can cause the person in need to feel even more stressed and overwhelmed. It is always best to step back and evaluate the social support situation to see how you can best contribute. Consider the different types of social support discussed in this chapter, and try to tailor your support to the situation by offering one or two types that seem as if they will be most beneficial. You might do this by asking the person in need or others close to the person what you can do to assist. Be empathic in order to under- stand the needs of the person you are trying to help.

Summary and Resources How we treat each other and the way that we communicate once we are in a close relation- ship is the most important way that we can keep a relationship going. Relationship main- tenance involves how you act in ways that sustain and repair your relationship so that it is satisfying to you, and it can be accomplished using both positive and negative maintenance behaviors. Use of positive maintenance behaviors enhances relationships, whereas negative maintenance can be relationally damaging.

Two additional relationship components that can be shaped by communication are commit- ment and intimacy. According to the investment model, being satisfied with and invested in the relationship and having few quality relationship alternatives increases one’s relationship commitment, which then increases the willingness to stay in the relationship and communi- cate in positive ways. When an individual experiences dissatisfaction, he or she can respond to it via exit, voice, loyalty, or neglect. Voice and loyalty are more often used in committed and satisfying relationships. Communication is also inherent in intimacy, which involves sharing thoughts and feelings with another person and can be expressed in both verbal and nonverbal messages.

Empathy and social support are two important ways to maintain a relationship because both prompt you to consider your partner and his or her perspective. Empathy involves identify- ing with someone by putting yourself in the other’s shoes. It can be expressed by actively listening, being involved in the interaction, showing sensitivity, asking targeted and relevant questions, replying while considering his or her emotions, and indicating a willingness to help. We can also use social support to help individuals in need cope with and confront stress- ful situations. Social support has multiple health benefits and can even decrease mortality and contribute to psychological well-being. This support can be both tangible, by providing

Summary and Resources

instrumental or information support, and intangible, by providing emotional and esteem sup- port. Individuals offering social support should be careful to offer the type of support that is most appropriate to a particular situation and to not oversupport the person in need.

We should also keep in mind the three challenges to relationship maintenance. The first is restoring equity. According to equity theory, we strive to gain the same level of rewards from the relationship as our partner. When there is inequity, one or both partners receive more or fewer benefits, and relationship maintenance and quality can suffer. Second, geographic distance can be a maintenance challenge. However, if the long-distant partners acknowledge that distance must be accommodated and make a greater effort or engage in unique forms of relationship maintenance, that challenge can be overcome. The third challenge is maintaining relationships by way of mediated communication channels. Though convenient, relying on mediated channels to maintain relationships can cause stress and be overwhelming.

Critical Thinking and Discussion Questions 1. Take a moment to evaluate one of your own relationships or the relationship of

someone close to you. What types of relationship maintenance behaviors are used in this close relationship? Are different ones used in different relationships? Why?

2. Why might someone use negative relationship maintenance behaviors? Do you think such actions could be beneficial for a relationship?

3. Which relationship characteristic—intimacy, commitment, relationship satisfaction, investment, or quality of relationship alternatives—do you think is most important for maintaining a close relationship? Why?

4. Think of a time when someone provided you with social support. Which type(s) of social support did they use? Was it appropriate for the situation?

5. What are some specific messages or behaviors you might use to restore equity in a close relationship? How would you use different messages or behaviors if you were underbenefited versus overbenefited?

6. As discussed in this chapter, a relationship can encounter different challenges. How do you work to maintain your relationships when confronted with one or more of the three discussed?

Key Terms action-facilitating support A broad social support category involving support that is tangible and problem solving in nature.

active-empathic listening (AEL) Listen- ing that occurs when a listener is genuinely focused and emotionally involved in a par- ticular interaction.

advice A positive relationship maintenance behavior that involves expressing partner- related emotions and cognitions to the partner and giving opinions.

allowing control A negative relationship maintenance behavior that involves giving the partner control in the relationship.

assurances A positive relationship main- tenance behavior that involves expressing commitment, love, and emotional support.

avoidance A negative relationship main- tenance behavior that involves not talking about a topic and evading the partner.

Summary and Resources

commitment Long-term attachment to a relationship that persists through both good and bad times.

conflict management A positive relation- ship maintenance behavior that involves employing constructive and positive behav- iors such as cooperating and apologizing when in conflict with the partner.

cope The ability to manage stressful situ- ations by changing what can be changed or adapting to what one cannot change.

destructive conflict A negative relation- ship maintenance behavior that involves being controlling and starting conflict.

emotional support A type of nurturing support that involves acknowledging and understanding what a person in need is feeling and providing care, empathy, trust, and love.

empathy The ability to put oneself in another person’s shoes or to imagine another person’s thoughts, feelings, and perspective.

equity When both partners subjectively believe that they are putting in and obtain- ing equal or similar levels of relationship rewards.

equity theory A theory that proposes that relational partners attempt to balance the amount of rewards they each receive with the amount received by the other partner in order to maintain equity within the relationship.

esteem support A type of nurturing sup- port through which the individual in need is made to feel competent and valued.

infidelity A negative relationship mainte- nance behavior that involves flirting with others and having affairs.

informational support A type of action- facilitating support in which one collects and organizes information for the person in need.

instrumental support A type of action- facilitating support in which one performs tasks and favors for the person in need.

intimacy A state of closeness achieved by verbally and nonverbally sharing one’s innermost thoughts, feelings, and ideas with another person.

investment Tangible and intangible rela- tionship resources such as children, prop- erty, or shared feelings and experiences.

investment model A relationship model that predicts that our commitment to a relationship is the most helpful relationship characteristic for understanding if a rela- tionship will continue and remain stable or will deteriorate and end.

involvement behaviors Actions that exhibit one’s attentiveness, interest, and active participation in interactions; impor- tant aspects of intimacy.

jealousy induction A negative relationship maintenance behavior that involves flirting with and commenting on others’ attractive- ness to elicit the partner’s jealousy.

nurturing support A broad social support category that involves helping the person in need to cope and to feel better emotionally.

openness A positive relationship main- tenance behavior that involves self-disclo- sures and direct relational discussions.

overbenefited A relationship scenario in which one partner is obtaining more rela- tional rewards than the partner.

oversupport Help that is excessive, unwanted, and unnecessary.

Summary and Resources

positivity A positive relationship mainte- nance behavior that involves being optimis- tic, cheerful, and pleasant.

quality of relationship alterna- tives Attractive options other than the rela- tionship, such as other partners, spending time with friends, and even being alone.

relationship maintenance Actions and interactions that sustain or preserve the desired states of our relationships.

relationship maintenance behaviors The actions and tasks that assist with maintain- ing, managing, or repairing a relationship.

relationship satisfaction Positive emotion and attraction toward the relationship.

sharing tasks A positive relationship maintenance behavior that involves per- forming one’s fair share of joint jobs in the relationship.

social exchange theory A theory that proposes that we seek to maximize our rewards and minimize our costs in relationships.

social network support A type of nurtur- ing support derived from relationships that are maintained before, during, and after a crisis.

social networks A positive relationship maintenance behavior that involves the reli- ance on the support of common family and friend networks.

social support The experience of turn- ing to others in one’s social network when confronting daily problems or major life stresses.

spying A negative relationship mainte- nance behavior that involves checking up on the partner.

sympathy Conveying sorrow for what a person is going through without identifying with or relating to what the person is deal- ing with.

underbenefited A relationship scenario in which one partner is gaining fewer rela- tional rewards than the other partner.