Friendships and Adaptation in the Life Course - Psychology ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

358 HARTUP AND STEVENS pending on whether one counts unreciprocated as well as recip- rocated choices (Hallinan, 1980). This figure remains relatively constant during adolescence and early adulthood (Cairns, Lueng, Buchanan, & Cairns, 1995), although to make comparisons across studies is difficult because of methodological varia- tions. Network size is greatest among newlyweds, who report an average of 7.6 friends; then declines to 4.7 again by middle age; and rises slightly (to 6.0) among persons about to retire (Lowenthal, Thurnher, & Chiriboga, 1975). Network size declines among older adults between Ages 55 and 90 (Dickens & Perlman, 1981; Dykstra, 1995b) due to mostly the loss of "ca- sual" friends. Close friends, however, are retained into old, old age, and older persons have about the same number of close friends as middle-aged adults (Field, 1995; Lang & Carstensen, 1994). Girls' networks are ordinarily smaller and more exclu- sive than boys' during early and middle childhood (Eder & Hallinan, 1978), but this situation reverses during adolescence (Cairns et al., 1995 ). Gender differences in network size among adults are not consistent across the relevant studies. Third, time spent with friends varies over the life course, although estimates are extremely difficult to compare from investigation to investigation; metrics and methods vary greatly. On the one hand, time spent with friends is greatest in middle childhood and adolescence, amounting to 29% of time awake among teenagers. On the other hand, middle-aged adults spend only 7% of their time interacting with friends, and those over Age 65 spend 9% of their time this way (Larson & Bradney, 1988; Larson, Zuzanek, & Mannell, 1985 ). Older women spend more time interacting with friends (and relatives) than men, and widowed men and women spend more time with friends than married individuals (Altergott, 1988). Fourth, children who have friends at one age are likely to have them at other ages (Elicker, Englund, & Sroufe, 1992), thus illustrating a continuity in social relations also suggested by retrospective interviews with older persons. Based on interviews with older participants, Matthews (1986) identified three "per- sonological" types as differentiated by friendship styles--inde- pendents enjoy friendly, satisfying social relationships throughout their lives but never have close or intimate friendS; discern- ing individuals report having a small number of very close friends throughout childhood, adolescence, and adulthood; and acquisitive individuals always have a relatively large number of friends and expect friends always to be available. Continuity is also suggested by the fact that close friends of many older persons are the same individuals who were their friends earlier in life (Field, 1995). Long-term friendships rest on shared his- tories, accumulated experiences, and simultaneously moving through major developmental transitions (Hess, 1972; Rawlins, 1992). Long-term continuities result from selection too: Old friends are consciously maintained in preference to the making of new ones into very old age (Lang & Carstensen, 1994). Behavior With Friends and Nonfriends Behaviors that differentiate friends from nonfriends have been examined in more than 80 studies with children and adolescents; the results generally verify the friendship deep and surface struc- tures described earlier. Reciprocity anchors these relationships generally through the first 2 decades; surface content changes with age. Several narrative reviews of these studies have been published (Hartup, 1989, 1996) as well as a meta-analysis (A. F. Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995 ). In these studies, researchers did not demonstrate the developmental significance of friendships directly but specified some of the social processes through which friendship experience and adaptation are linked. We summarize one representative investigation in this article • along with the meta-analytic results as a basis for the remainder of the review. In an empirical study, Hartup, Daiute, Zajac, and Sholl (1995) examined conversations between friends and nonfriends (10-year-olds) in an innercity magnet school while the children wrote stories collaboratively on a computer, Stories were about the tropical rain forest--a'subject matter that the children had studied during a 6-week science project. Children were assigned to three groups: (a) those who wrote stories individually on 4 different days; (b) those who wrote individually on Day 1, then the next 2 with a friend, and the final day alone; and (c) those who collaborated with a nonfriend rather than a friend. Results indicate that friends did not talk more during collaboration than nonfriends but, nevertheless, (a) engaged in more mutually oriented and fewer individualistic utter- ances; (b) agreed with one another more often (but did not disagree more readily); (c) repeated their own and friend's assertions more often; (d) posed alternatives and provided elaborations more frequently; (e) spent twice as much time as nonfriends talking about writing content, the vocabulary used, and writing mechanics; and (f) spent less time engaged in "off- task" talk. Principal component analyses confirm that friends' talk was assertively collaborative--a finding that is reminiscent of the dialogues between experts and novices reported in other social problem-solving studies (Rogoff, 1990). The stories also show that, overall, the ones written collaboratively by friends were better than those written by nonfriends--a difference that seems to rest on the better use of standard English by friends rather than the narrative elements included in the stories. The meta-analysis (A. E Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995) sum- marizes friend versus nonfriend differences among children and adolescents in terms of four broad band categories: positive engagement (i.e., more talk, smiling, and laughter generally occur among friends than nonfriends), conflict management (i.e., friends use disengagement and negotiation vs. power asser- tion proportionally more frequently than nonfriends), task activ- ity (i.e. task orientation as opposed to off-task orientation is greater among friends than nonfriends), and relationship proper- ties (i.e., equality in the exchange as well as mutuality and affirmation are greater among friends than nonfriends). The data within and across studies show that, behaviorally speaking, the relationship affordances of "being friends" differ from the affordances of "being acquaintances." Friends are socially ac- tive with one another, and their interaction is marked by mutuality, effective conflict management, and task orientation, thereby reflecting the deep structure revealed in the descriptions of friends (L. Weiss & Lowenthal, 1975). Certain changes in the interaction between friends can be observed with the onset of adolescence, although these exchanges remain anchored in reciprocation. First, although nega- tive gossip occurs more commonly in talk between friends than between nonfriends throughout childhood and adolescence, positive gossip differentiates friends and acquaintances only in adolescence. Second, self-disclosure newly differentiates among friends and acquaintances in adolescence and so does mindread-
ing, that is, attributions that people make to others' actions, motives, or personalities (Gottman & Mettetal, 1986). Conflicts with friends do not occur as frequently as commonly supposed (Laursen & Collins, 1994) and are reported about as frequently by adolescents as children. When choosing between competition or sharing with their friends, though, adolescents compete less and share more than children (Berndt, Hawkins, & Hoyle, 1986). Differences in the exchanges that occur between adult friends and nonfriends have been studied mainly because these establish the greater closeness of friends as compared with acquaintances. On that basis, more numerous exchanges occur between friends than acquaintances (Berg, 1984); self-disclosure occurs more frequently and is deeper (Altman & Taylor, 1973; Berg, 1984); friends are more directive and authoritative with one another than nonfriends. More diverse resources are exchanged by friends than nonfriends (Berg, 1983), although the specific resources exchanged differ: Affection, services, and status are exchanged more frequently by friends than nonfriends but not goods, money, and information (Tornblom & Fredholm, 1984). Friends are more likely to give benefits to one another on the basis of need or desire than nonfriends, whereas the latter are more likely to give benefits depending on whether they have received them previously themselves (Mills & Clark, 1982). Finally, friends think of themselves as a unit more frequently than acquaintances, their exchanges are more satisfying intrinsi- cally, and relationships are more lasting than between mere acquaintances (see also Berg & Clark, 1989). Results indicate that the reciprocities undergirding friendships among younger children and adolescents are amplified among adults by a complex set of attributions that concern closeness and the nature of relationships. The developmental origins of these attributions and their elaborations have not been studied. Companionship and talk (referred to earlier as positive engagement) continue to differentiate friends from nonfriends in middle and old age (Blieszner & Adams, 1992). Relationship talk is more topical and role related among young adult and middle-aged friends than among either adolescents or older adults. Sharing, resource exchanges, emotional support, and other indications of mutuality are salient in friendship interactions, especially those among adult friends that occur during crises such as divorce (Ginsberg, 1986). Problem solving among older persons is notably more symmetrical with friends than with relatives (Kaye & Monk, 1991 ). Although conflicts occur frequently between adult friends (as among children), they are less commonly acknowledged than conflicts in marital relationships. Conflicts among adult friends are concentrated in two areas (Argyle & Furnham, 1983): emotional disagreements (beliefs, values, and social partners) and criticisms (over life- style, habits, and personal issues). Among older persons, conflicts mainly concern normative expectations that apply to older persons and resource inequities affecting older persons (C. B. Fisher, Reid, & Melendez, 1989). To summarize, social interactions between friends, as compared with nonfriends, are more engaged, mutually oriented, and symmetrical across the life course. Social exchanges between friends, that is, their content, change over time but certain struc- tural dimensions--especially their mutuality and symmetrical reciprocity--characterize friendships at all ages. Observational studies have seldom been conducted with adults, except in a FRIENDSHIPS IN THE LIFE COURSE 359 few instances with college roommates (Ginsberg & Gottman, 1986) and older residents of an apartment complex (Hochschild, 1973). Consequently, age differences in behavior with friends cannot always be specified from direct observation. Observa- tional studies are badly needed, however, because of experimen- tal evidence showing that exchange equivalences and reciprocal self-disclosure are not always concomitants of social attraction (Clark & Mills, 1979; Ginsberg & Gottman, 1986). Developmental Significance Security and self-validation in social relations have long been regarded as necessary to the growth of social competence (Sroufe & Fleeson, 1986). To show that friends interact commu- nally with one another, however, does not demonstrate their developmental significance. Rather, two other kinds of studies are needed to do this: (a) comparisons between individuals who have friends with those who do not, especially with respect to self-esteem and social competence, and (b) demonstrations that having friends supports better coping with challenges or stress than not having friends and promotes good outcome over time. Having friends versus not having friends. Cross-sectional (concurrent) comparisons show that, first, children who have friends are more socially competent than those who do not; they are more sociable, cooperative, altruistic, self-confident, and less lonely (A. E Newcomb & BagweU, 1995). Second, children, adolescents, and adults seeking clinical referrals or other forms of assistance with psychosocial problems are more likely to be friendless than better adjusted individuals (Rutter & Garmezy, 1983). Third, individuals with friends enjoy greater psychological well-being throughout adulthood and old age than individuals who do not have friends (Brown, 1981; Gupta & Korte, 1994; Larson, 1978). Certain studies suggest, however, that the existence of supportive relationships may have less to do with well-being, especially in old age, than the absence of problematic ones. Indeed, the number of problematic relationships one has and the fre- quency with which one interacts with problematic persons are more closely related (negatively) to well-being than the number of supportive persons available and opportunities to interact with them (Pagel, Erdly, & Becker, 1987; Rook, 1984; Stephens, Kinney, Ritchie, & Norris, 1987). Still other studies suggest that friendship support may be more necessary for some individuals than others. Lang and Carstensen (1994) found, for exam- ple, that among older individuals who no longer have living relatives, number of close friends predicts feelings of social embeddedness, whereas this is not the case among individuals with families. Friends also provide emotional advantages for "spouseless" individuals, that is, persons who were never or were formerly married (Dykstra, 1995a; Gupta & Korte, 1994). Among older persons, widows and widowers spend more time with friends than married people (Gallagher & Gerstel, 1993; Wister, 1990) or those divorced (R. S. Weiss, 1975), with friends serving both confiding and companionship functions (Connidis & Davies, 1990). Comparisons between married and spouseless individuals are especially important because the results support two widely discussed but infrequently verified hypotheses: ( 1 ) Friendships may substitute for other (missing) relationships in social development and adaptation and (2) friendships are protective factors or "buffers" that mitigate
Page 1 and 2: Psychological Bunetin Copyright 199
Page 3: normative traditionalism is support
Page 7 and 8: having a best friend is often diffi
Page 9 and 10: conventional norms move further ove
Page 11 and 12: among adolescents (e.g., alcohol us
Page 13 and 14: Ainsworth, M.D.S., Blehar, M.C., Wa
Page 15 and 16: Ipsa, J. (1981). Peer support among

Friendships and Adaptation in the Life Course - Psychology ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?