Relational intimacy is a primary determinant of satisfaction with social support. Interdependence acts at emotiocognitive level as trust. Interdependence is a regularly cited way that relaters enact intimacy.
Value of relationship and positive affective tone Meta-theme that characterizes both interdependence and presence Intimacy has been defined as the positive presence and interdependence of interlocutors
Intimacy in Familial Dyads Presence Grandparent/grandchild relationships improve when grandchild initiates contact or disclose private information (Harwood & Lin, 2000) Step-parent/stepchild relationships improve when step-parents are empathetic Interdependence Martial support helps to protect against reduced closeness during stressful situations (Gardner & Cutrona, 2004) Negations of interdependence impacts the degree of closeness between parents and children (Laursen & Collins, 2004) Positivity Family intimacy often approached through relational dialectics Presence and interdependence are both positive and negative in family dyads “Family members discursively produce their families as subjects through practices of interdependence and become intersubjective with the family-subject through practices of presence.” (Foley & Duck, 2006, pg. 191)
Intimacy with generalized other rather than the particular other Particular others are specific others whose roles we internalize (Mead, 1934) Interdependence Joint psychosocial tasks like maintaining the house help define family (Koerner & Fitzpartrick, 2004) Family solidarity (cohesion) is created through instrumental and affective support (Bengtson & Roberts 1991) Presence Storytelling is a way to create an internalized family image (Laing, 1971) Rituals create deep feelings of mutual understanding (Turner, 1982) Positivity Family intimacy is legitimatized through cultural narratives (Jorgenson & Bochner, 2004) Intimacy and distance are equally important for developing positive family experiences (Sillars, Canary, & Tafoya, 2004)
Personal dedication involves one’s internal devotion to the relationship Constraint commitment – factors that bind people in relationships regardless of devotion Importance of enacting commitment talk
Self-disclosure is when someone reveals something about themselves that the other person might not discover in another way Trust is the foundation of self-disclosure and essence of emotional safety Family Background Jewish families willingly engage in talk about feelings, whereas Irish families have more trouble discussing inner feelings (McGodrick, 2005) Partner Relationships Children become more anxious and worried when parents share too much about divorce (Koerner, Jacoabs, & Raymond, 2000) Sibling discourse increase with age and sense of relational connection (Howe, Aquan-Assee, Bukowski, Lehous, & Rinaldi, 2001)
Partner Communication Communication is crucial for the development of intimate sexuality (Troth & Peterson, 2000) Orientation toward sexuality is reflective of what people learn in their families-of-origin Sexual communication can evolve over the span of a relationship Parent-child communication Parent-child discussion of sexuality is important for family connectedness Maddock (1989) describes three orientations to sexual communication Sexually neglectful – sex is seldom discussed; talk occurs on abstract level Sexually abusive – incestuous relationships occur and co-op spousal roles; confusion between individuals and generations; sex is seldom discussed Sexually healthy – respect for both genders; boundaries appropriate and support gender identities; effective and flexible communication patterns; shared system of culturally relevant sexual meanings and values Other family forms Discussing parent’s homosexuality with a child can be complicated Homosexual couples with children (together longer) had higher relationship satisfaction (Koepke, Mare, & Moran, 1992)
Others Intimacy Factors Effort – auto pilot vs. taking time to focus on relationship Sacrifice – demonstrates strong commitment; higher satisfaction; longer relationships (Flanagan, Clements, Whitton, Portney, Randall, & Markman, 2002) Forgiveness – family members forgive for love, restoring the relationship, and for the well-being of the other (Kelley, 1998) Sanctification – spiritual beliefs can help sustain family during difficult times
Barriers to Intimacy Fears of intimacy – closeness is lowest for couples on stressful days (Lavee, 2005) Jealousy – parental favoritism can lead to increased sibling rivalry, lowered self-esteem, and perception of declining family support (Lucchetti & Roghaar, 2001) Deception – accidental discoveries can cause privacy dilemmas (Petronio, 2002)
It was interesting to find that LD daters idealize their partner’s self-disclosure and that leads to intimacy. I understand that they idealize their partner’s self-disclosure due to the limited interactions and more biased impressions of each other through CMC (p.562), but I wondered how it leads to intimacy. Do LD daters really become intimate or they just feel they are more intimate, or do they also idealize that they are intimate through idealization of partner’s self-disclosure?
Megan Getter COMM 640
“That Dear Octopus”:
A family-based model of