Interpersonal Communication A Mindful Approach to Relationships Friendship Relationships

10 Friendship Relationships When you hear the ( friend or friendship , what comes to mind ?

In today society , the words friend and friendship can refer to a wide range of different relationships or . We can be a friend of a library , museum , opera , theatre , etc . We can be a friend ( someone in need . We can friend thousands of people on social media platforms like Facebook . We can develop friendships With people in ( ur lives at Work , in social groups , at school , at church , etc . Some people see their , spouses , and siblings as Many of us even have one or more best friends . So , When we look at all ( these different areas Where we use the word friend , do we mean the same thing ?

In this chapter , we re going ( delve into the World of interpersonal friendships , which at least takes a few items off of our list of friendships ( libraries , museums , operas ) but we re still 11 ' left With a term that is very difficult ( tion 326 was one of the first scholars to note the problem related to defining the term Everyone knows what friendship is until asked to define it . There are virtually as definitions of friendship as there are social scientists studying the Table presents some sample that exist in the literature for the terms friend or ) A relationship is a social relationship in which partners provide support according to their abilities in times of need , and in which this behavior is motivated in part by positive affect between Clinical Psychology who likes and wishes to do well for someone else and who believes that these feelings and good intentions are reciprocated by the other Dictionary The emotions or conduct of friends the state of being Friendship is a , positive relationship that involves Friendship as Love The etymology of word friend connects its meaning with love , freedom and choice , suggesting an ideal definition of friendship as a relationship that includes a mutual and equal emotional bond , mutual and equal care and , as well as Friendship is a word of broad and varied application . It is commonly used to describe the relationships which exist not only between those connected by ties of kinship or marriage , but as well between strangers in blood , and which vary in degree from the greatest intimacy to an acquaintance more or less Personality , mutual , flexible , and terminable relationships that emphasize equality and reciprocity , and require from each partner an affective involvement in the total personality of the other . Philosophy A distinctively personal relationship that is grounded in a concern on the part of each friend for the welfare of the other , for the other sake , and that involves some degree of Social Psychology or unrestrained interaction in which the participants respond to one another personally , that is , as unique individuals rather than as packages of discrete attributes or mere role Table Defining Friendship As you can see , there are several different ways that scholars can define the term So , must question whether defining the term friendship is the best way to start a discussion of this topic . 32 '

Friendship Relationships . Evaluate Rawlins friendship characteristics . Analyze the importance of communication in the formation of friendships . ma 32 LU ' Appraise Rawlins dialectical approach to friendships . In a 2017 book on the psychology of friendship , Michael asked the different chapter authors if they planned on defining the term friendship Within their various found that the majority of the authors planned on not defining the friendship , but instead planned on identifying characteristics of the We point this out because defining friend and friendship isn an easy thing to do . We all probably see our friendships as different or unique , Which is one of the reasons Why defining the is so hard . For our purposes in this chapter , we re going to go along with the of friendship scholars and not provide a strict definition for the . Friendship Characteristics William Rawlins , a communication scholar and one of the most figures in the study of friendship , argues that friendships have five essential characteristics that make unique from other forms of interpersonal relationships voluntary , personal , equality , involvement , and affect ( Figure ) All Friendships are Essentially Voluntary There an old saying that goes , You can choose your family , but you can choose your This saying affirms the basic idea that friendship relationships are voluntary . Friendships are based out of an individual free will to choose they want to initiate a friendship relationship With . We a I go through our lives constantly decisions to engage in a friendship With one person and not engage in a friendship with another person . Each and every one of us has our reasons for friendships . For , a one of our originally established a friendship with a peer during graduate school because they were the two youngest people in the program . In this case , It . the friendship Was initiated because of demographic I but continues almost 20 years later because they went on to establish a deeper , more meaningful relationship over . Take a second and think about Figure . Friendship 328

your friendships . Why did decide to engage in those friendships ?

Of course , the opposite is also true . We meet some people and never end up in friendship with them . Sometimes it because you re not interested or the other person isn interested ( voluntariness works both ways ) We also choose to end some friendships when they are unhealthy or no longer serve a specific purpose within our lives . Friendships are Personal Relationships that are Negotiated Between Two Individuals The second quality of friendships is that they are personal relationships negotiated between two individuals . In other words , we create our friendships With individuals and we negotiate what those relationships look like with that other individual . For example , let imagine you meet a new person named Kris . you enter into a relationship with Kris , you negotiate what that relationship will look like with Kris . If Kris happens to be someone who is transgendered , you are still entering into a relationship with Kris and not everyone who is transgendered . Kris is not the ambassador for all things transgendered for us , but rather a unique individual we decide we want to be friends with . Hence , these are not group relationships these are individualized , personal relationships that we establish with another person . Friendships Have a Spirit of Equality The next characteristic of friendships is a spirit of equality . Rawlins notes , Although friendship may develop between individuals of different status , ability , attractiveness , or age , some facet of the relationship functions as a leveler . Friends tend to emphasize the personal attributes and styles of interaction that make them appear more or less equal to each other . It important to note that we re not saying a split in everything is what makes a friendship equal . Friendships ebb and flow over time as friends desires , needs , and interests change . For example , it perfectly possible for two people from very different social classes to be friends . In this case , the different social classes may put people at an imbalance when it comes to financial means , but this doesn mean that the two can not still have a sense of equality within the relationship . Here are some ways to ensure that friendships maintain a spirit of equality Both friend needs and desires are important , not just one person . Both friends are curious about their friend personal life away from the friendship . Both friends show affection in their own ways . Both friends demonstrate effort and work in the relationship . Both friends encourage the other goals and dreams . Both friends are responsible for mutual happiness . Both friends decide what activities to pursue and how to have fun . Both friends are mutually engaged in conversations . Both friends carry the other burdens . 10 . Both friends desire for the relationship to continue and grow . Friendships Have Mutual Involvement The fourth characteristic of friendships is that they require mutual involvement . For friendships to work , both parties have to be mutually engaged in the relationship . This does not mean that friends have to 329

talk on a daily , weekly , or even monthly basis for them to be effective . Many people establish friendships with individuals they don get to see more than once a year or even once a decade . For example , my father has a group of friends from high school whom he meets up with once a year . His friends and their spouses pick a location , and they all meet up once a year for a week together . For the rest of the year , there are occasional emails and Facebook posts , but they don interact much outside of that . However , that once a year get together is enough to keep these ( years at this point ) friendships healthy and thriving . The concept of mutual involvement can differ from one friendship pair to another . Different friendship pairs collaborate to create their sense of what it means to be a friend , their shared social reality of friendship . Rawlins states , This interpersonal reality evolves out of and mutual acceptance and support , trust and confidence , and assistance , and discussion of thoughts and One of the reasons why defining the term friendship is so difficult is because there are as many friendship realities as there are pairs of friends . Although we see common characteristics among them , its important to understand that these characteristics have many Ways of being exhibited . Friendships Have Affective Aspects The final characteristic of friendships is the notion of affect . Affect refers to any experience of feeling or emotion , ranging from suffering to elation , from the simplest to the most complex sensations of feeling , and from the most normal to the most pathological emotional reactions . Often described in terms of positive affect or negative affect , both mood and emotion are considered affective Built into the voluntariness , personal , equal , and mutually involved nature of friendships is the inherent caring and concern that We establish within those friendships , the affective aspects . Some friends will go so far as to say that they love each other . Not in the eras or romantic sense of the term , but instead in the or affectionate sense of the term . People often use the term platonic love to describe the love that exists without physical attraction based on the Writings of Plato . However , Aristotle , Plato student , believed that was an even more profound form of dispassionate , virtuous love that existed in the loyalty of friends void of any sexual connotations . All friendships are going to have affective components , but not all friendships will exhibit or express affect in the same ways . Some friendships may exhibit no physical interaction at all , but this doesn mean they are not intimate emotionally , intellectually , or spiritually . Other friendships could be very affective , but have little depth to them in other wa Every pair of friends determines what the affect will be like within that friendship pairing . However , both parties within the relationship must have their affect needs met . Hence , people often need to have conversations with friends about their needs for affection . Communication and Friendship Formation Now that we ve explored the five basic characteristics of friendships , let switch gears and focus on communication and friendships . This entire chapter is about communication and friendships , but we re going to explore two communication variables that impact the formation of friendships . Communication Competence Previously in this book , we talked about the notion of communication competence . For our purposes , we used the definition from John , the ability of an to choose among available communicative behaviors in order that he may successfully accomplish his om 330

interpersonal goals , while maintaining the face and line of his fellow within the constraints of the Not surprisingly , an individual communication competence impacts their friendships . Kenneth Rubin and Linda took communication competence a step further and referred to social communicative , ability to achieve personal goals in social interaction while simultaneously maintaining positive The most common place where we exhibit social is within our friendships . Throughout our lifespans , we continue to develop our social communicative through our continued interactions with others . However , individuals with lower levels of competency will have problems in their communicative interactions . Arroyo and Chris tested this idea and found that individuals who reported having lower levels of communication competence were less in their ' Furthermore , individuals who rated a friend as having lower levels of communication competency reported lower levels of both friendship satisfaction and commitment . So right off the bat people with lower levels of communication competence are going to have problems in their communicative interactions with friends . Communication Apprehension Another variable of interest to communication scholars has been communication apprehension ( CA ) know that peers tend to undervalue their quieter peers , generally seeing them as less credible and socially In a study examining friendships among college students , participants indicated how many people they would classify as good Over of the people with high levels of CA reported having no good friends at all . No students with low or average levels of CA reported having no good friends . Over half of high CA individuals also reported family members as being their good friends ( siblings , cousins ) Less than of individuals with low average levels of CA mentioned relatives . Ultimately , we know it harder for people with higher levels of CA to establish relationships and keep those relationships glowing . Furthermore , individuals with higher levels of CA are less satisfied with their communicative interactions with As you can see , both communication competence and CA are important aspects of communication that impact the establishment of effective friendship relationships . Dialectical Approaches to Friendships Earlier in this book , we introduced you to the dialectical perspective for understanding interpersonal relationships . Rawlins proposed a dialectical approach to The dialectics can be broken down into two distinct categories contextual and interactional . Contextual Dialectics The first of dialectics is contextual dialectics , which are dialectics that stem out of the cultural order where the friendship exists . If the friends in question live in the United States , then the prevailing social order in the United States will impact . However , if the friends are in Malaysia , then the Malaysian culture will be the prevailing social order that impacts the friendship . There are two different dialectics that Rawlins labeled as contextual and real . The first friendship dialectic is the dialectic . Let start by examining the public side of ' I

friendships in the United States . Sadly , these relationships aren given much credence in the public space . For example , there are no laws protecting . Your friends can get health from . Religious bodies don recognize your friendships . As you can see , we re comparing friendships here to marriages , which do have religious and legal protections . In fact , in the legal system , the family often trumps friends unless there is a power of attorney or will . As a significant historical side note , one of the biggest problems many gay and lesbian couples faced before marriage legalization was that their intimate partners were perceived as friends in the legal system . Family members could swoop in when Partner A ( lied and evict and confiscate all of Partner A money and property unless there was an will leaving the money and property to Partner . From a legal perspective , marriage equality was very important in ensuring the rights of individuals and their spouses . On the opposite end of this dialectic , many friendship bonds are as strong if not stronger than familial or marital bonds . voluntarily enter into friendships and create our sense of purpose and behaviors outside of any religious or legal context . In essence , these friendships are autonomous and outside of social strictures that define the lines of marital bonds . Instead of having a religious organization dictate the morality of a relationship , friendships ultimately develop a sense of morality that is based within the relationship itself . From the moment we are born , we start being socialized into a wide range of . Friendship is one of those relationships . learn about friendships from our family , schools , media , peers , etc each of these different sources of information , we develop an ideal of what friendship should be . However , friendships are not ideals they are real , functioning relationships with and minuses . This dialectic also impacts how we communicate and interact within the friendship itself . If our culture tells us that people must be and respectful in private , then a simple act of laughing with another person could be an outward sign of friendship . Dialectics It important to understand that friendships change over time along with how we interact within those friendships . For communication scholars , Rawlins dialectics help us understand how communicative behavior happens within Rawlins noted four primary communicative dialectics for friendships , and . First and foremost , friendships are voluntary relationships that we choose . However , there is a constant pull between the desire to be an independent person and the willingness to depend on one friend . Let look at a quick example . A few weeks ago , you and one of your friends both mentioned that you wanted to see a new film getting released . A few weeks later , it a Friday afternoon and you re done With class or work . The movie was released that day , so you go and watch a matinee . You decided to engage in behavior without thought of your friend . You acted independently . It also possible that you know your friend hates going to the movies , so engaging independent movie watching behavior is very much in line with the norms you ve established within your friendship . 332

On the other side , we do depend on our friendships . You could have a friend that you do almost everything with , and it gets to the point that people see as a duo and are shocked when both of ar en together . In these dependent friendships , individual behavior is probably very infrequent and more likely to be resented . Now , if you Went to the movie alone in a highly dependent friendship , your friend may be upset or jealous because you didn Wait to see it with . You may have had the right to engage as an independent person , but a friend in a highly dependent friendship would see this as a violation . This story would cause even more friction within the friendship if you had promised your friend to see the movie with her . You would still be acting independently , but your friend would have a stronger foundation for being upset . Ultimately , all friendships have to negotiate independence and dependence . As with the establishment of any friendship norm , the pair involved in the relationship needs to decide when its appropriate to be independent and when it is appropriate to be dependent . Maybe you need to Via text 20 times a day ( pretty dependent ) or talk on the phone once a year in both cases , friendships are different and are in constant negotiation . Its also important to note that a friendship that was once highly dependent can become highly independent and vice versa . The second interactional dialectic examines the intersection of affection as a reason for friendship versus instrumentality ( the agency or means by which a person their goals or objectives ) As Rawlins noted , This principle formulates the nature of caring for a friend as an as a means to an 25 VVe already discussed the importance of affection in a friendship , but haven examined the issue of friendships and instrumentality . In friendships , the issue of instrumentality helps us understand the following question , How do we use friendships to benefit ourselves ?

Some people are uncomfortable With this question and find the idea of very . Have you ever had a really bad day and all you needed was a hug from your best friend ?

ell , was that hug a sign of affection ?

Or did you use that friendship to get something you needed ( instrumentality ) all do this to Varying degrees within friendships . Maybe you don have a washer and dryer in your apartment , so you go to your best place to do laundry . In that situation , you are using your friend and that relationship to achieve a need that you have ( wearing clean clothes ) The problem of arises when one feels that are being used and taken for granted within the friendship itself or if one friend stops seeing these acts as voluntary and starts seeing them as obligatory . First , there are times when there is an imbalance in friendships , and one friend feels that they are being taken advantage of . Maybe the friend with the washer and dryer starts realizing that the only time their friend really reaches out to see if they re available to hang out is when the friend needs to do laundry . Second , sometimes acts that were initially voluntary become seen as obligatory . In our example , maybe the friend who needs to wash their clothes starts to see What was once a nice , voluntary gesture as an obligation . If this happens , then the use of the washer and dryer becomes part of the rules of the friendship , which can change the dynamic of the relationship if the person with the washer and dryer isn happy about being used in this way . In our friendships , we expect that these relationships are going to enhance our and make us feel accepted , cared for , and wanted . On the other hand , interpersonal relationships of all kinds are marked by judgmental messages . Ronald Liang argued that all interpersonal messages are inherently ' I

So , do we navigate the need to be accepted and the reality of A lot of this is involved in the negotiation of the friendship itself . we may not appreciate criticism from others , Liang argues that criticism demonstrates to another person that we value them enough . 27 Now , can criticism become toxic ?

Yes . Maybe you ve experienced a friend who criticized everything about you . Perhaps it got to the point it felt that you needed to change pretty much everything about how you look , act , think , feel , and behave just to be good enough for your friend . If that the case , then that friend is clearly not criticizing you for your betterment but for their desires . final interactional dialectic is ) This dialectic questions the degree to which we want to express ourselves in our friendships while determining how much not to express to protect ourselves . As we discussed earlier in this book , social penetration theory starts with the basic idea that in our initial interactions with others we disclose a wide breadth about ourselves . Still , these are primarily surface level topics ( what your major , are your hobbies , where are you from ) As time goes on , the number of topics we express decreases , but they become more personal ( depth ) In a friendship relationship , we to navigate this breadth and depth in deciding we express and what we protect . Ultimately , this is an issue of vulnerability . When we open ourselves up to people and express those deeper parts of ourselves , there is an excellent likelihood that disclosure of these areas could cause greater harm to the individual if the information got out . For example , one of our had a friendship sour after our coauthor friend started talking to our coauthor parents about our coauthor sexual orientation . Our coauthor saw this as a massive violation of the confidentiality of what was in their friendship . This friend still speaks to our coauthor parents 20 years later , but our coauthor hasn spoken to this former friend since the trust was violated . All friendships are an exploration of what can be expressed and what needs to be protected . VVe all have some friends that we keep at arm length because we know we need to protect ourselves , since they tend towards being overly chatty or gossipy . At the same time , we other friends who get to see the real us as we protect less and less of ourselves in those friendships . No one will ever completely know what going on in our heads , but deep friendships probably come the closest and also make us the most ) MINDFULNESS ACTIVITY In a 2018 survey of readers , the magazine mindful explored the qualities of good friendships , 38 ) was a friends propensity for understanding . Next was 29 for trustworthiness , followed by 13 for compassion . Another 15 of the vote was divided between positivity , generosity , sense of humor , and sharing similar interests and passions . Finally , of respondents named other qualities , such as and For this activity , we want you to think about how you can become more mindful of your friendships . Here are three things you can do be present , try something new , and practice compassion and Think about your friendships and answer the following questions 334

. you re with your friends , are you truly present , or do you let distractions ( your cell phone , personal problems ) get in the way of your interactions ?

How often do you and your friends do new things , or are you stuck in a rut doing the same over and over again ?

you re with your friends , are you aware of your attention , intention , and attitude ?

If not , what can you do to refocus yourself to be more present ?

Keg Takeaways Rawlins proposed five specific characteristics of friendships ( friendships are based on an individual free will ) personal ( we create our friendships with individuals negotiating what those relationships look like with that other individual ) equality ( friendships have a sense of balance that makes them appear equal ) involvement ( both parties have to be mutually engaged in the relationship ) and affect ( friendships involve emotional characteristics different from other types of relationships ) Two important communication Variables impact friendship formation communication competence and CA . Individuals who have lower levels of communication competence have fewer opportunities to make friends and report lower overall satisfaction with their friendships . Individuals with CA are less likely to in interactions with others , so they have fewer opportunities to engage in friendships . Individuals with high levels of CA report having friendships and are more likely to list a family member as their best friend . Rawlins dialectical approach to communication breaks friendship down into two large categories of dialectical tensions contextual ( real ) and interactional ( acceptance , and ) These dialectical tensions provide friendship scholars a framework for understanding and discussing friendships . Think about one of your current or past friendships . Examine that friendship using Rawlins five characteristics of friendships voluntary , personal , equality , involvement , and affect . How has your communication competence or CA impacted your ability to develop friendships ?

Also , what would you give to someone who has low levels of communication competence or high levels of communication apprehension on how to form friendships ?

Think about one of your current or past friendships . Use Rawlins friendship dialectics to analyze this friendship ( both contextual and interactional ) After analyzing your friendship , what do these dialectical tensions tell you about the nature and quality of this friendship ?

I Stages and of Friendships . Differentiate among ' seven stages of friendships . Evaluate Matthews three basic types of friendships . ma 32 I LU ' Compare and contrast healthy and unhealthy friendships . In Stephen and George musical , Merrily Roll Along , the story follows the careers and friendships of three people trying to make it in New York City . One song in the show has always stuck out because of its insightful message about friendship , Hey Old In the musical , three friends Mary , Charlie , and Frank get together after not having seen each other for a while . The purpose of the song is to discuss how some friendships can persist even when we aren in each other lives daily . You can see a clip from the rehearsal at the New York Center Encore production starring Celia ( Mary ) Colin ( Frank ) and Miranda ( Charley ) In this short song , we learn a lot about the nature of this group friendship and their enduring desire to be ( se to one another through the ins and outs of life . This section of the chapter is going to examine the stages that friendships through , the types of friendships we have , and healthy unhealthy friendships . Stages of Friendships As we Ve already discussed , friendships are not static relationships we re born with . Instead , these relationships are dynamic , and we grow with them . To help us understand how we ultimately form friendships , William Rawlins broke this process into seven stages of friendships ( Figure ( 01 Role Interaction 02 Friendly Relations 03 Role Interaction , i . i i 04 Nascent Friendship 05 Stabilized Friendship we all exist in a Wide range of roles Within our lives shopper , salesperson , patient , driver , student , 06 Waning Friendship 07 Post Friendship guardian , spouse , etc . In each of these different roles , we end up interacting with a Wide range of different people . For example , imagine you re just sitting down in a new class in college , and you talk to the stranger sitting next to you named . In this case , you are both interacting Within your roles as students . Outside of those roles and that context , you may never meet and never have the opportunity even 10 ' to develop a social relationship with this other person . Stages of Friendship 336

This does not discount the possibility of random , chance encounters with other people . Still , most of our interpersonal relationships ( outside of our family ) stem from these roles and the communicative they present . Friendly Relations role interaction , we may decide to move to the second stag of friendship , friendly relations . These relations are generally positive interactions , but they still exist within those same roles . In our example , we start chatting with before the beginning of each class . At this point , though , most of our interactions are still going to be within those roles , so we end up talking about the class , fellow students , the teacher , etc . Notice that there is not a lot of actual happening within friendly relations . Some people can maintain friendly relations with others for years . For example , you may interact with coworkers , religious association members , and neighbors within this type of relationship without them ever progressing to the next stage of friendship . According to Rawlins , friendly relationships move towards friendships because they start to exhibit four specific communication behaviors moves away from what is required in the specific role relationship , fewer stereotyped lines of interaction , individual violations of public propriety , and greater First , we start interacting in a manner that doesn resemble the original roles we had . In our example , we start interacting in a that doesn resemble the roles of students when they first meet . Second , we move away from lines of communication that are stereotypes for our roles . For example , some possible stereotyped lines for two students could include , what did you think of the did you bring your book with you today see you next class etc . In each of these lines , we enact dialogue that is expected ( or stereotyped ) within the context of the class itself . Third , more of our normal selves will start to seep into our interactions , which are called violations of public propriety . Maybe one day turns to you before class , saying , That reading for homework was such a waste of In this case , is giving you a bit more insight into who she is as a person These violations of public propriety single an individual out as having an essential side which is not so easily circumscribed by the protocol of a 32 Lastly , we see increased spontaneity in our interactions with the other person . Over time , these interactions , although still interacting within their formal roles , take on more social and less formalized tones . Maybe one tells you a joke or shares a piece of gossip she heard . In this , is tarting to be more spontaneous and less structured in her interactions . At some point , people decide to interact with one another outside of the roles they originally embodied when they initially met . This change in roles is a chang . In our example , maybe one day A ( i a es you co ee a er ass an ( av you as re unc ) ore ass . Hi Although it possible that a single step outside of those roles could be enough that a friendly relation is moving towards a friendship , there is generally a sequence of these occurrences . In our example here , may have made the first move inviting us to coffee , but we then reciprocated later by asking her to lunch . In both of these cases , we are starting to step outside of the original friendly relation and changing ' I

the nature of our original interactions . Nascent Friendship hen one enters into the nascent stage of friendship , the friends are no longer interacting within their original roles , and their interactions do not follow the stereotypes associated with those roles . Eventually , we start to develop norms for how we communicate with this other person that are beyond those original roles and stereotypes . Ultimately , this stag is all about developing those norms . We develop norms for what we talk about , when we talk , and how we talk . Maybe makes it very clear that she doesn want to talk about politics or religion , and we re perfectly OK with that . Maybe we keep the bulk of our interaction before and after class , or we start having lunch together before class or coffee after class . The norms will differ from friendship to friendship , but these norms allow us to set parameters on the relationship in this early stage . These norms are also important because keeping them demonstrates that we can be trusted . And when we show we can be trusted over time , the level of intimacy we can develop within our relationship also increases . It also ( hiring this period that others start to see you more and more as a pair of friends , and external forces may begin to impact the development of your friendship as well . In our case , maybe has a sister who also goes to the school , so she starts hanging out with both of you from time to time . Maybe we have a significant other , and start hanging out as well . Even though we may have these distractions , we must keep faithful to the original friendship . For example , if we start spending more time with sister than , then we aren faithful to the original friendship . Eventually , the friendship , and others start to see the two friends as a pair . One of our had a friend in graduate school , and it was common for people to ask the friend when our coauthor couldn be found or ask the coauthor when the friend couldn be found . Friends in the nascent state are seen increasingly as a Stabilized Friendship Ultimately nascent friendships evolve into stabilized friendships through time and refinement . Its not like one day you wake up and go , My friendship has stabilized ! It much more gradual than that . VVe get to the point where our developed norms and interaction patterns for the friendship are functioning for both parties , and the friendship is working smoothly . In nascent friendships , the focus is on the duo and developing the friendship . In stabilization , we often bring in new friends . For example , if we had found out that had coffee with another person from our class during the nascent stage of friendship , we may have felt a bit hurt or jealous of this outsider intruding on our growing friendship . As stabilized friends , we realize that having coffee with someone else isn going to impact the strength of the relationship we already have . If anything , maybe will find other friends to grow the friendship circle . However , like any relationship , both parties still must make an effort to make the friendship work . need to reaffirm our friendships , spend time with our friends , and maintain that balance of equity we discussed earlier in this chapter . also notes that friendships in the stabilized stage can represent three different basic patterns active , dormant , and Active friendships are ones where there is a negotiated sense of mutual accessibility and availability for both parties in the friendship . Dormant friendships share either a valued history or a sufficient amount of sustained contact to anticipate or remain eligible for a resumption of the friendship at any These friends may not be ones we interact with every , but they are still very much alive and could take on new meaning and grow back into an active friendship

if the time arises . Commemorative friendships are ones that reflect a specific space and time in our lives , but current interaction is and primarily reflects a when the two friends were involved in each other lives . commemorative friendships , we still see ourselves as friends even though we don have the consistent interaction that active friendships have . In a study conducted by Sara and Scott Myers , the researchers set out to determine what types of relational maintenance strategies people use to keep their friendships going across the three different types of friendship patterns ( active , dormant , commemorative ) Using the seven relational maintenance behaviors noted by Laura ( positivity , understanding , relationship talks , assurances , tasks , networks ) the researchers recruited participants over the ag of 30 to examine the intersection of relational maintenance and friendship types . All three friendship types use positivity , relational talks , and networks related to relational maintenance to some degree . However , active friendships were likely than commemorative friendships to use understanding , assurances , and tasks to maintain their friendships . No differences were seen in relational maintenance strategies between active and dormant friendships nor dormant friendships and commemorative friendships . Waning Friendship , some friendships will not last . There are many reasons why friendships may start to wane or decrease in importance in our lives . There are three primary reasons Rawlins discusses as causes an overall decline in affect , an individual or mutual decision to let it wane based on identifiable dissatisfaction with the relationship , or a significant , negative , relational event which an abrupt termination of the First , some relationships wane because there is a decrease in emotional attachment . Some friends stop putting in the time and effort to keep the friendship going , so its not surprising that there is a decrease in emotional attachments . Second , both parties may become dissatisfied with the relationship and decide to take a hiatus or spend more time with other friends . some ) ying event could happen . For example , you out that had an affair with your romantic partner . broke a promise to you or told someone one of your secrets . started yelling at you for no reason and physically assaulted you . Each of these events would most likely destroy your friendship . A wide range of different events could end a friendship . In a study conducted by a team of researchers led by anan Johnson , the researchers interviewed college students about why their friendships had . The common reasons listed for why relationships fell apart were ) romantic partner of self or friend , increase in geographic distance , conflict , not many common interests , hanging out with different groups or different friends , and ) other . Interestingly , females and in the study did report differences in the likelihood that these five reasons led to deterioration . Females reported that conflict was a greater reason for friendship deterioration than males . And reported not having many common interests was a greater reason for friendship deterioration than females . Females and males did not differ in the other three categories . It important to note , that while this set of findings is interesting , it was conducted among college students , so it may not apply to older adults . The final stage of the friendship is what happens after the friendship is over . Even if a friendship ended on a horrible note , there are still parts of that friendship that will remain with us forever , impacting how ' I

we interact with friends and perceive friendships . You may even have symbolic links to ( ur friends the nightclubs ( went to , the courses you took together , the coffee shops you frequented , the movies you watched , etc . all are links back to that friendship . It also possible that the friendship ended on a positive note and you still periodically say hello on or during the holidays through card exchanges . Just as all friendships are unique , so are their experiences of ( reality . Friendship Styles Friendships , Beyond the stages ( friendship Change Because development , different people develop of Events different types of friendship throughout their lifetime . Sarah Matthews noted I that ultimately people have three basic types of friendships independent , discerning , and acquisitive ( as seen in I Figure ) Id en committed in her study , Matthews found that I independents often saw their friendships and based on circumstances in their lives and ( necessarily specific Figure Friendship Styles friends . When talking about friends , independents were more likely to about people they knew or people they had , not reflecting ( ii specific names . Independents were more likely to mention specific names when they talked about people they were interacting with currently . example , independents talked about friends during periods of their life ( school , junior ( high school , college ) and not about specific people they knew for long periods of life . Matthews argues that independents framed their concepts of friendships regarding major life events . They also never reported having a close , special , or best friend relationship , so during periods of major life events , they didn have specific commitments ( the people they called Independents were also more likely to talk about friends as a general concept instead of specific friends . Comparing independents ( the stages ( friendship discussed by , you can consider these ( be more along the lines of friendly Matthews chose the term independents because it reflects a more autonomous state , It was clear that most of them were ( isolated people , but instead considered 40 themselves to be sufficient unto Discerning The second type ( friendship discussed by Matthews was the discerning style , Which , unlike independents , is marked by a deep connection with a friend or group of friends regardless ( changing circumstances in their lives . These friendships are marked by deep commitment and longevity , which also means that when a discerning person loses a friend , they are the most likely to experience a deep sense of loss in their lives . were also ( re likely to draw clear lines between friendly relations and friendship . Overall , the discerning identified only a very few people throughout their lives whom 340

they considered friends . Although not all of informants had kept these friendships , those who , valued Acquisitive filial friendship discussed by Matthews is acquisitive style . are people who moved through their lives collecting a variety of friendships , circumstances to make possible the meeting of likely candidates , but then , committing themselves to the friendships once they were made , at the very least for the period of time ( hiring which they and their friends were geographically Unlike the independents , discussed having close connections With all of the friends they ve met , and unlike the discerning , were open to developing new friendships throughout their lives . In essence , these individuals develop a strong , core group of friends as they go throughout their lives while acquiring new ones depending on changes within their lives . Good and Bad Friendships Another system for understanding friendships is to think of them with regard to two basic psychological constructs health and enjoyment . First , is the relationship a healthy one for you to have ?

Although this is a concept that is more commonly discussed in romantic relationships , friendships can also be or unhealthy ( Table ) Healthy Unhealthy Equality Separate Identities Intertwined Identities Enhancing Destroying Fulfilling Depressing Acceptance Combative Loving Indifferent Comforting Stressful Benevolent ) Beneficial Damaging Healthful Toxic Table Healthy . Unhealthy Friendships In addition to the health of a friendship , you must also question if friendship is something that is ultimately enjoyable to you as a person . Does this friendship give you meaning of some kind ?

Ultimately , We can break this down into four distinct types of friendship experiences people may ( Figure ( 341 ' Ideal Friendship HEALTHY The first category we label as ideal friends because these ( are both healthy and enjoyable . In an ideal world , the majority of our relationships would fall into the category ( ideal friendships . Waning Friendship The second category we label as waning friendship because these friendships are still healthy but not enjoyable anymore . Chances are , this friendship was an ideal friendship at ( me point and has to become less enjoyable over time . There a Wide range of reasons why friendships may stop , have the time to invest in the friendship , so you find yourself regretting the am ( unt of time and energy that necessary to keep the friendship afloat . Problematic Friendship The third category of friendship , classified as ( friendships , is tricky because these are enjoyable but not healthy for us . Ultimately , the friend we have could be a ( of fun to hang outwith , but they also ( uld be more damaging to us as people . Instead ( supporting us , they make fun of us . Instead of treating us as equals , they hold all the power in the relationship . Instead of being honest , we always know they re lying to us . Ultimately , we must question why we decide to stay in these relationships . Deviant Friendship The category of friendships we may have is deviant friendships , re commonly referred to as toxic friendships . For ( ur purposes here , we use the term deviant because it refers to any behavior that violates behavioral norms . In this case , any friendship situation that is clearly outside the parameters of what is a healthy and enjoyable friendship is not the norm . Unfortunately , me people get so stuck in these friendships that they stop realizing that these friendships aren normal at all . Other people may think that their deviant friendships are the only kinds of friendships they can get ( deserve . It entirely possible that a deviant friendship started as perfectly healthy and , but often these were somewhat problematic in their early stages and eventually progressed into fully deviant friendships . Deviant Friends 342

' Use criticism and insults as weapons ' Use guilt to get you to to their desires and whims Immediately assume you re ( probably because they are ) Disclose personal secrets Are very gossipy about others , and are probably gossipy about you as well Only care about their own desires and needs ' Use your emotions as weapons to attack you psychologically Pass judgment on you and your ideas based on their own with little flexibility Are stuck up and only really turn to you when they need you Can be obsessively needy , but then are hard to please Are inconsistent , so predicting how they will think or behave can be very hard if not impossible Put you in competition with their other friends for affection and attention Conversations tend to be all about them and their desires and needs Make you feel that being your friend is a chore for them Make you feel as if you ve lost control over your own life and choices Cross major relationship boundaries and violate relationship norms without apology Express their jealousy of your other friendships and relationships Keg Takeaways Rawlins proposed that friendships go through seven distinct stages . The first stage , role interaction , is where we interact with a broad range of people within specific roles we play in life . The second stage , friendly relations , occurs when we have continuous positive interactions with someone , but the interactions still exist within those same roles . The third stage , occurs when people decide to interact with one another outside of the roles they originally embodied when they initially met . The fourth stage , nascent friendship , occurs when the friends are no longer interacting within their original roles , and their interactions do not follow the stereotypes associated with those roles . The fifth stage , stabilized friendship , reflects friendships that have developed norms and interaction patterns that are functioning for both parties , and the friendship is working smoothly . The sixth stage , waning friendship , occurs when a friendship decreases in importance in our lives . The final stage , occurs after a friendship has been terminated . Sarah Matthews proposed three basic types of friendships that people have independent , discerning , and acquisitive . Independents see friendships based on specific circumstances in their lives and not necessarily on specific friends . Discerning friendships are marked by a deep connection with a friend or group of friends regardless of changing circumstances in their lives . Lastly , acquisitive individuals develop a strong , core group of friends as they go throughout their lives while acquiring new ones depending on changes within their lives . To understand healthy versus unhealthy friendships , it also important to consider whether an individual finds that relationship enjoyable or unenjoyable . People who are in a healthy and enjoyable friendship are in an ideal friendship . Individuals who are in a healthy friendship that is unenjoyable are in a waning ' I

friendship . People are in unhealthy friendships are enjoyable are in a problematic friendship . Lastly , people who are in unhealthy friendships that are unenjoyable are in a deviant friendship . um Think back on a friendship that you no longer have . Take that friendship all seven of Rawlins friendship stages . How did you decide when the friendship entered into a new stage Think about your patterns of friendships in your life . Based on the information you learned from Matthews , what type of friendship style do you have ?

What made you decide that this friendship style most your approach to friendships Thinking about the intersection of healthy friendships and , think of one friendship from your own life ( past or present ) that into each category . After coming up with four friendships , differentiate among the four friendships and their outcomes . Friendships in Different . Differentiate between and opposite sex friendships . Evaluate Donald five distinct challenges that relationships have . Define and explain the term postmodern ma 32 LU ' Appraise the importance of friendships . Interpret the impact that mediated technologies have on friendships . So far in this chapter , we ve explored the foundational building blocks for understanding friendships . re now going to break friendships down by looking at them in several different gender and friendships , friendships , and mediated friendships . Gender and Friendships Based on a more traditional differentiation of both same and opposite sex friendships , early friendship research friendships into two categories communal and . Communal friendships were marked by intimacy , expressiveness , amount of , quality of disclosure , confiding , and emotional friendships , on the other hand , were . Figure illustrates three curves associated with these concepts . The first one shows women being communal and men being in their friendships , which was a common perspective on 344

the nature of gender differences and friendships . In reality , research demonstrated that both males and females can have communal relationships even though women report higher levels of in their friendships ( second set of curves ) As for agency , women and men were found to both have friendships , and there considerable overlap between the two groups here , with men being slightly more ( seen in the third set of ) A great deal of research in friendship has focused on sex differences between males and females with regard to friendship . In this section , we re going to start by looking at some of the research specifics to friendships and then opposite sex friendships . We end this section discussing a different way of thinking about these types of relationships . Communal Communal Friendships For a lot of research , we use the term to refer to two individuals of the same biological sex as friends . Gerald Phillips and Julia argue that there are four primary reasons females develop friendships with the , personal support , and Figure ?

For female friendships , the first reason is . These are friendships that tend to develop around a activity working out , church , social clubs , etc . For the most part , these friendships stay confined to the activity itself and provide a chance for conversation and associations . The second reason is personal support . It this second category that many highlight when discussing the differences between female and male friendships . Personal support involves friendships where an individual has a personal confidant with whom they can share their deepest , darkest secrets , concerns , needs , and desires . These friendships are often highly stable friendships and tend to last for a long time . By nature , these friendships tend to be highly communal , which is why we generally discuss them as a key reason for female friendships . Third , all of us have areas where we re skillful and lack skill . often develop friendships with people who have skills that are complementary to our own . or subconsciously , we develop friendships with others out of a need to in our daily lives . For example , an information technology specialist may become friends with an accountant . In their friendship , they provide complementary support computer help and financial advice . Finally , females tend to view their friendships as highly reciprocal . They expect to get out of a friendship what they put into a friendship it a mutual exchange . If a female feels her friend is not putting into a relationship the same amount of time and energy , she is less likely to keep sustaining that friendship . As for friendships , research shows us that they re not drastically different , though their friendships may be framed differently . They still create friendships because of recreation , personal '

support , and reciprocation . And these relationships can be just as intimate as their female , but the relationships may look a bit more distinct . First , many male friendships are based around activities church , work , hobbies , social clubs , etc . These friendships are less about having conversations and more about engaging in the activity at hand . These friendships are not going to be as communal as female friendships that develop around recreation . Often people mistake these male friendships as being less because they do not disclose a lot of information , and there isn necessarily a lot of talk involved , but males do find these relationships perfectly fulfilling . Phillips and noted that men often view friendships in terms of teams having allies and team members . In essence , they create their circles of in and members based on team status . Part of this team status involves favors for each other and siding with one another . It the whole I ve got your back mentality . VVe should also note that males are more likely to be friends with those who are the most like them similar majors , similar religion , similar rungs of the social hierarchy , similar socioeconomic status , similar attitudes , similar interests , etc . Research has even shown that males are more likely to have male friends who are equally physically attractive . One possible explanation for this phenomenon is that males are more likely to develop relationships based on social hierarchies . If attractive males are on a higher rung of a social hierarchy , then it not surprising that the matching effect occurs . Opposite Sex Friendships Friendship between a woman and a man ?

For many people , the idea is charming but Rawlins originally wrote this sentence in 1993 at the start of a chapter about the problems associated with opposite sex or friendships . VVhat do you think ?

Donald discusses five distinct challenges that relationships have emotional bond , sexuality , inequality and power , public relationships , and opportunity structure . Emotional Bond First and foremost , in society females and males are raised to see the opposite sex as potential romantic partners and not friends . One of the inherent problems with friendships is that one of the friends may misinterpret the friendship as romantic . From an emotional sense , the question that must be answered is how do friends develop a or even loving relationship with someone of the opposite sex . Unfortunately , females are more likely than males to think this is possible . Rawlins did attempt to differentiate between five distinct love styles that could help distinguish the types of emotional bonds possible friendship , Platonic love , friendship love , physical love , and romantic First , friendship is a , mutual , personal and affectionate relationship devoid of expressed Second , Platonic love is an even deeper sense of intimacy and emotional commitment without sexual . Third , friendship love is the interplay between friendships and sexual relationships . It often characterized by the use of the terms boyfriend and girlfriend as distinguishing characteristics to denote paired romantic attachments . Fourth , physical love tends to involve high levels of sexual intimacy with love levels of relationship commitment . And finally , there romantic love , or a relationship marked by exclusivity with regards to emotional attachment and sexual activity . correctly that the challenge for friendships is finding that shared sense of love ( one partner slipping into one of the other four categories of love because often the emotions associated with all five different types of love can be perceived . 346

obvious next step in progression of issues related to friendships is sexuality . Sexual attraction is inherent in friendship between heterosexual couples . Sexual attraction not be something initial in a relationship . Still , it could develop down the line and start to blur the lines between someone desire for friendship and a sexual relationship . In any friendship , there will always be a latent or manifested sexual attraction that is possible . Even if one of the parties involved in the friendship is completely unattracted to the other person , it doesn mean that the other friend isn sexually attracted . As , like it or not , there will always be the potential for the issue of sexuality in friendships once people hit puberty . Now it perfectly possible that parties within a friendship are mutually sexually attracted to each other and decide openly not to explore that path . You can find someone sexually attractive and not see them as a viable sexual or romantic partner . For example , maybe you both decide not to consider each other viable sexual or romantic partners because you re in healthy romantic relationships , or you may realize that your friendship is important . Inequality and Power live in a society men and women are not treated equally . As such , a fact of inequality and , created by our society , will always exist between people in friendships . As such , males are in a better position to be in an exchange relationship . argues that friendships should , therefore , strive to develop communal ones . However , there is also an imbalance that may exist when it comes to communal needs as well . Females are more likely to get their emotional needs through . However , males are more likely to get their emotional needs met through opposite sex friendships . This dependence on the opposite sex for emotional needs and support places females in a subordinate position of needing to fulfill those needs . Public Relationships next challenge for friendships involves the public side of friendships . The previous three challenges were all about the private inner workings of the friendship between a female and a male ( internal side ) This challenge is focused on public displays of friendships . First , it possible that others will an friendship as a romantic relationship . Although not a horrible thing , this could give others the impression that a pair of friends are not available for romantic relationships . If one of the friends is seen on a date , other could get the impression that the friend is clearly cheating on their significant other . Second , it possible that others won believe the couple as simply being This consistent of friendships and the favoring of romantic relationships in our society puts a lot of stress on . of friendships over romantic relationships can also be seen as a tool to . it possible that others may question the sexual orientation of the individuals involved in the friendship . If a male is in a friendship relationship with a female , he may be labeled as gay or bisexual for not turning that friendship into a romantic one . The opposite is also true . Lastly , public friendships can cause problems for romantic partners . Although not always the case , it may be very difficult for one member of a romantic relationship to conceive that their partner is in a close friendship relationship with the opposite sex that is not romantic or sexual . For individuals who never experienced these types of emotional connections , they may assume that it is impossible ' I

and that the friends are just kidding Another possible problem for romantic relationships is that the significant other of the friend because they believe that , as the significant other , they should be any role an opposit sex friend is . Scouts are Changing with the Tim Just as a quick caveat , as of the publication of this book , the Girl Scouts of America is open to transgendered children on a basis . However , Boy Scouts of America started accepting girls starting in 2017 and is now called Scouts to show this change to policy . Opportunity Structure The final challenge described by a was not part of the original four but was described in a subsequent This question is primarily focused on how individuals find opportunities to develop friendships . A lot of our social lives are divided into females and . Girls go to Girl Scouts and Boys to Boy Scouts . Girls play and softball while football and baseball . Now , that not to say that there ar en girls who play football or boys who play volleyball , but most of these sports are still highly . As such , when were growing up , we are more likely to spend social time with the . Ultimately , it not impossible for relationships to develop , but our society is not structured for these to happen naturally in many ways . Postmodern Friendships In the previous section , we looked at some of the basic issues of and friendships however , a great deal of this line of thinking has been biased by heteronormative patterns of . The noted absence of individuals from a lot of the friendship literature is nothing have needed newer theoretical lenses to help us break free of some of these historical understandings of friendship . Growing out of , feminism , and gay and lesbian studies , queer theory has been favored by those scholars for whom the heteronormative aspects of everyday life are troubling , in how they condition and govern the possibilities for individuals to build meaningful identities and By taking a purely heteronormative stance at understanding friendships , friendship scholars built a field around basic assumptions about gender and the nature of Friendship scholar Michael asked a group of friendship scholars about the definition of friendship and found there was little to no consensus . How then , argues , can researchers be clear in their attempts to define gender and sex when analyzing or opposite sex friendships As part of his discussion questioning the nature of gender and sex and they have been used by friendship scholars , provided the following questions for us to consider does it mean to state that two individuals are in a or opposite sex friendship that they are of the same or opposite sex one another ?

decision rules are invoked when deciding whether a particular friendship is one or the other ?

the friendship be one or the other ?

If friendship scholars and researchers believe that all friendships are either or 348 sex ( and it appears most do ) at a minimum should be agreement about what constitutes biological sex . biological traits make a person a female or a male ?

Are they absolute ?

Are they As part of this discussion , provides an extensive list of areas of related to the terms used for binary gentler . about individuals who are about individuals with chromosomal differences outside of traditional and XY ( Heck , there are even some and who develop because of chromosomal structural anomalies region on the chromosome ?

about bisexual , gay , and lesbian people ?

about people who are transgendered ?

about people who are asexual ?

Hopefully , you re beginning to see that the concept of labeling and opposite sex friendships based on heterosexual individuals who have ) pairs that are either or XY may not be the best or most complete way of understanding friendship . should also note that research in the field of communication noted that an individual biological sex contributes to maybe of the differences between females and ' So , would we use the words same and opposite to differentiate friendship lines when there is more similarity between groups than not ?

As such , we agree with the definition and conceptualization of the term created by Mike and William Rawlins postmodern A postmodern friendship is one where the participants the individual and dyadic realities within specific friendships . This involves negotiating and affirming ( or not ) identities and creating relational and personal realities through communication . 51 Ultimately , this perspective allows individuals to create their own friendship identities that may or may not be based on any sense of traditional gender identities . Friendships As we noted above , research found that one of the biggest factors in friendship creation is the groups one belongs too ( more so for males than females ) In this section , we re going to explore issues related to friendships . A friendship is a friendship that exists between two individuals who belong to two or more different cultural groups ( ethnicity , race , sexual orientation , socioeconomic status , nationality ) The phrase , Some of my best friends are is all too typically used by individuals wanting to demonstrate their liberal credentials . Some of my best friends are Some of my best friends are People say , Some of my best friends are and then fill in the blank with whatever marginalized group which they care to exonerate Often when we people make these Some of my best friends are statements , we view them as seriously suspect and question the validity of these relationships as actual friendships . However , many people develop successful friendships . It important to understand that our cultural identities can help us feel that we are part of the or part of the as well . Identity in our society is often highly intertwined with . As noted earlier , we also know that males are more likely to align themselves with others they perceive as similar . Females do this as well , but not to the same degree as males . In essence , most ' I

of us protect our group identities by associating with people we think are like us , so its not surprising that most of our friendships are with people are demographically and ideologically similar to us . To a certain extent , we judge members of different based on our perceptions of behavior . For example , some people ask questions like , does Black friend talk about race so Does friend have to act so when we re in public ?

or I like my friend , but does she always have to talk to me about her religion . In these three instances ( race , sexual orientation , and religion ) we see examples of judging someone communicative behavior based on their own communicative behavioral norms . Especially for people who are marginalized , being marginalized is a part of they are that can not be separated from how they think and behave . Maybe a friend talks about race because they are part of a marginalized racial group , so this is their experience in life . This is actually normal and understandable behavior on the part of these different groups . They are not the ones make it the focus of their lives . rest of race or orientation or gender an issue for issue that they can not ignore , even if they wanted to . They to face it every waking moment of their People who live their lives in marginalized groups see this as part of their daily life , and it intrinsically intertwined with their identity . Many of us will have the opportunity to develop friendships throughout our lives . As our society becomes more diverse , so does the likelihood of developing friendships . In a large research project examining the outcomes associated with friendships , the researchers found two factors were the most important it came to developing racism and exposure to friendships . First , individuals who are racist are less likely to engage in group Second , actual exposure to friendships can lead to more contact and more positive attitudes towards members in those groups . Ultimately , successful friendships succeed or fail based on two primary factors time and First , successful friendships take time to develop , so don expect them to happen overnight . Furthermore , these relationships will take more time to develop as you navigate your cultural differences in addition to the terms of the friendship itself . It important that when we use the word time here , we are not only discussing longitudinal time , but also the amount of time we spend with the other person . The more we interact with someone from another group , the stronger our will become . Second , successful friendships involve high amounts of . VVe must be open and honest with our thoughts and feelings . need to discuss not only the surface level issues in our lives , but also have deeper , more meaningful disclosures about who we are as individuals and who we are as individuals because of our cultural groups . One of our coauthor best friend is from a different racial background . Our grew up in the Southern part of the United States , and our coauthor friend grew up in the area in Los Angeles . they met , they had very different lived experiences related to both race and geographic differences . Their connection was almost instantaneous , but the friendship grew out of many long nights of conversations over many years . Mediated Friendships Probably nothing has more radically altered the meaning of the words friend and friendship than widespread use of social technology . Although the Internet has been around since 1969 and was consistently used for the exchange of messages through the , the public didn start to become more actively involved with the technology until it became cheap enough to use in one daily life . Before December 1996 , using the information superhighway was limited to tech professionals , colleges and 350

universities , the government , and hobbyists . The pricing for Internet use had been similar to that of a telephone subscription . You paid a base rate that allowed you so hours each month ( usually 10 ) of connected Internet time , and then you paid an additional rate for each subsequent hour . People who were highly active on the Internet racked up enormous bills for their use . Of course , this all changed in 1996 when America Online ( decided to offer unlimited internet access to the world for per month . This change in the pricing structure led to the first real wave of people jumping online because it was now economically feasible . The Internet that we all know and love today looks nothing like the of the late 20 Century . So has changed in the first 20 years of the new millennium in technology and how we use it to interact with your friends and family . For our purposes , were going to focus on the issue of mediated friendships in this section . VVe discuss ( communication , in general , in Chapter 12 . In the earliest of online friendships , technology was commonly used to interact with people at larger geographic distances . You met friends in or on bulletin boards ( precursors to modern social media ) and often , these people were not ones in your town , state , or even country . By ( 02 , 72 of college students were interacting with their friends This was the year was created , the year before MySpace into existence , and a solid two years before Facebook was created ( February , 2004 ) So , interaction in ( 02 was through email , instant messaging , and chat rooms . Today we talk less about using the Internet and about what types of applications people are using on their ( the first iPhone came out on June 29 , 20 ( For example , in 2018 , 68 of . adults used . By comparison , 81 of adults 18 to 29 use Facebook , while only of adults over the ag of 65 are using VVhat about other common apps ?

Statistics show that , among adults , 73 use YouTube , use Instagram , 29 use , 27 use Snapchat , 25 use , 24 use Twitter , and 22 use . All of these different technologies have enabled us to keep in touch with each other in ways that didn exist at the beginning of the 21 Century . As such , the nature of the terms friend and friendship have changed . For example , how does one differentiate between a friend someone has primarily online and a friend someone sees daily ?

Does the type of technology we use help us explain the nature of our Let explore both of these questions . What a Friend ?

As mentioned at the Very beginning of this chapter , one of the biggest changes to the story of friendships has been the dilution of the term In ways , this is a result of social networking sites like , Facebook , Snapchat , Instagram , etc . Today , we friend people on Facebook that we wouldn have had any contact with 20 years ago . have expanded the term friend to include everything from casual acquaintances to best friends . hen we compare William Rawlins six stages of friendships to how we use the term friend in the mediated context , we see that everything from friendly relations to stabilized friendships gets the generic term , One Australian writer , Ahmad realized that the term friend was being widely used and often didn fit the exact nature of the relationships she experienced . She created a six stage theory ( see sidebar ) to express how she Views the nature of friendships in the time of Facebook . She started by analyzing her 538 friends on . The overwhelming majority of these friends really were acquaintances . In fact , of the 538 friends Ahmad had , she claimed that only one of them was a true Now that you Ve had a to read through Ahmad six stage theory of friendships and I ' I

Six Stage Theory Dear person reading this , Find out where and I tell you we en friends don get . Now you . Love , This is not exclusive thing , where I people they unworthy . It telling it like it is . 10 of people I ) don know ' know other . Acquaintance Level To know of 20 of people I know ' know of other through ' briefly at a social ' You re a work colleague or business client ( who I haven spent ) run other now then ' Convenient Meeting up is planned , only because it is convenient ' Details about each other are . Acquaintance Level Liking Preliminary Care 30 of people I ' went to together , or have known you for a long period of ' usually meet groups , rarely ' If you needed , I would actively participate helping them to the best of my ability . I handle a chat with you , any I will get bored . Acquaintance Level Connection Care 25 of people I ' have a really good ' have some very meaningful ' care a lot about each ' don see each other all that , just now then when we plan to meet . AKA Potential Friend ) 14 of people I know ' Someone I were a friend ( as below and NOT as society currently it ) I want to spend more time with this person establish a proper friendship with them . Friend Mutual Feelings of Love of people I know ' I care immensely domain of their life ( academic , physical , mental wellbeing ) how their relationships with their loved ones are . I also care about their thoughts , ideas , I call easily give my honest opinion ' This person notices when I upset through subtle ' I see this person regularly feel totally comfortable to contact them for a deep meaningful ' Someone who takes initiative makes to work on this ' Mutual trust , respect , admiration , forgiveness care . Note If

it not mutual , then we re not friends . Further Notes . There is no shame in being an acquaintance . I think society has made the word derogatory and that is it seems offensive . It just about being honest . Friendship is not that complicated to Inc ( I know , the irony of making up a theory and calling it ( There may be a small few that can not be categorized because there is history and shades of grey but I look at relationship with most people as being Black or White , categorized , The theory is in the sense that people can go up or down the levels and understands that throughout a ( friendship , people become closer or further apart from each other . My theory originates from personal experiences . I realize that one of my biggest vulnerabilities is that I too sentimental this theory combats this problem quite efficiently . I understand that this theory can not be applied to everyone , but it significantly helps me . Reprinted with Permission of the Author , Ahmad . in acquaintances , how do you see this playing out in your own life How many people whom you label as friends really are acquaintances ?

Technologies and Friendships Today a lot of our interaction with friends is mediated in some fashion . it through phone calls and texts or social media , gaming platforms , Skype , and other interactive , we interact with our friends in new and unique ways . For example , in a study that came out in 2018 , found that 60 of today teenagers interact With their friends online daily only 24 see their friends Interacting online with people is fulfilling some of the basic functions that used to be filled through traditional friendships for today modern teenagers . Teens who spend time interacting with others in an online group or forum say that these interactions played a role in exposing them to new people ( 74 ) making them feel more accepted ( 68 ) figuring out important issues ( 65 ) and helping them through in life ( 55 ) But , are all technologies created equal when it comes to friendships ?

In a study by Dong Liu and Yang , the researchers set out to determine whether the way we perceive our friendships differs based on the communication technologies we use to The researchers examined data gathered from 22 different research samples collected by researchers around the world . Ultimately , they found that there is a difference in we use technologies to interact with friends . They labeled the two different categories ( calls , texts ) and ( instant messaging , social networking sites , gaming ) Of the different technologies examined , Mobile channels had stronger associations with friendship closeness , suggesting that phone calls and texting were predominantly used with closest As a side note , the researchers did not find sex differences with regard to communication technologies use and friendship intimacy . Research Spotlight In 2018 , Bree , Erin Sumner , Jennifer Eden , and Jennifer Fletcher set out to examine relational ' I

' maintenance strategies on Facebook among friends . Previous research ) foun ( that there were three different relational maintenance strategies used by members of I . Social Contact personalizing messages to specific frien ( via Facebook . Relational Assurances demonstrating one commitment to continuing a A relationship on Facebook . Response Seeking sending messages to a large number of people via Facebook in the hopes of getting input an of people . In this study , the researchers found that social contact , relational , and response seeking were all positively relate ( to liking , relational closeness , relationship satisfaction , an ( relationship commitment . Sumner , Eden , Fletcher , 2018 ) The effects of Facebook relational maintenance on friendship quality An investigation of the Facebook Relational Maintenance Measure . Communication Reports , 35 ( 8824 ( 17 . Keg Takeaways Although was a historical perception that friendships were different , research has there is more overlap between and friendships than there are actual differences . Donald proposed five distinct challenges that relationships emotional bond ( males and females are raised to see the opposite sex as potential romantic partners and not friends ) sexuality ( inherent in any sex friendship between heterosexual couples is sexual attraction ) inequality and power ( a fact of inequality and , created by our society , will always exist between people in ) public relationships ( sex friendships are often misunderstood and devalued in our society in favor of romantic relationships ) and opportunity structure ( our society often makes it difficult for friendships to develop ) friendships are an important part of our that been shown to be the most important when developing friendships are time and . First , friendships take more time to develop as individuals navigate cultural differences in addition to navigating the terms of the friendship itself . Second , effective friendships are often dependent on the adequacy of . Individuals in friendships need to discuss not only the surface level issues in our lives , but they need to deeper , more meaningful disclosures about who they are as individuals . The two factors In your view , what is a postmodern friendship , and why is it an important 354

perspective for communication scholar any of friendships fall within this framework ?

Think of a time when you ve had a friendship . What made it a friendship ?

How did friendship differ from your friendships ?

How was it similar to your friendships ?

If you were explaining the importance of friendships in your life to another , what would you tell them ?

Do you think the word friend has been devalued through the use of social media ?

you look at Ahmad six stage theory of friendships , do you agree with her perspective ?

Friendships are a very important part of our interpersonal relationships . As such , we should never take our friendships for granted . For this reason , it important to remember that friendships ( like all relationships ) take work . In this chapter , we started by exploring the nature and characteristics of friendships . We then examined the stages and types of friendships . VVe ended this chapter by exploring friendships in several different . End of Chapter RE GAS Friendships often blossom between people that surprise those around them . For example , two . Supreme Court Justices , an ( Ruth , were known for having a decade long friendship ( being on polar opposite ends of the political spectrum . They served on the Supreme Court for 22 years together until death in 2016 , ut their actual friendship ( late back to the when they served on the federal circuit court in , This unlikely friend pair was known to travel together with their spouses , an ( they shared an affinity for the opera . was favorite souvenir shopping buddy when the two went on trips . There even a famous picture of the two of them riding an elephant together during a trip to India . So , how did the two handle their friendship when they were at such opposite ends of the political spectrum ?

once noted that if someone can not agree to disagree with others and remain friends while on the bench , then they probably needed to get a different job . Do you think these types of friendships are possible , given the deep political divides that are plaguing the States ?

do you think and friendship withstood the test of time and politics . How can you analyze this friendship using what you ve learned in this chapter ?

I END OF TER . of Rawlins friendship characteristics is the one marked ) issues of connection ?

Affective . Equality Mutual Personal . stage of friendship development is marked by four communication behaviors ( moves away from what is required iii the role relationship , fewer stereotyped lines of interaction , individual violations of public propriety , and ( greater spontaneity ?

a . Friendly Relations Nascent Friendship Friendship . Joan is one of those people who has a lot of friendships . She has friendships ranging from when she was a young kid and friendships she developed this year . She just has a tendency of making new friends and adding them to the list of friends she has . of Sarah Matthews friendship styles oan reflect ?

a . Acquisitive Affective Communal Discerning Independent . friendships are marked activity . a . Acquisitive Affective Communal Discerning . A friendship is one where participants the individual and dyadic realities within friendships . Affective Independent Postmodern Relational 356

References , 1996 ) Friendship processes . Sage . I . 2010 ) Friendship Development , ecology , and evolution of a relationship . University of California Press . 1979 ) Anatomy . Friendship . 2018 ) English Oxford living dictionaries . Oxford University Press . Retrieved from friendship , Waves , 2017 , March ) The three basics of friendship Want to know who your real friends are ?

Look for these essential things . Psychology Today . Retrieved from , Cheney , 2012 ) The evolutionary origins of friendship . Annual Review of Psychology , 63 , Lynch , 2015 ) Friendship and happiness from a philosophical perspective . In ( Ed . Friendship and happiness Across the and cultures ( Springer . Clark Campbell , 82 281 ( 1926 ) Retrieved from Brown , 1981 ) A approach to friendship dimensions of an ageless relationship . Research in the Interweave of Social Roles , 25 . 10 , 2017 , August ) Friendship . Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Retrieved from 11 Wright , 1984 ) motivation and the intrinsic quality of friendship . of Social and Personal Relationships , 12 , 2017 ) The hackneyed notions of adult and friendships . In A ( The psychology ( Oxford . 13 Rawlins , 1992 ) Friendship matters Communication , dialectics , and the life course . Transaction . 14 Ibid . 15 Ibid . 12 . 16 Affect . 2018 ) APA dictionary of psychology . American Psychological Association . Retrieved from 17 , 1977 ) Explication and test of a model of communication competence . Human Communication Research , 195 . 18 Rubin , 1992 ) Interpersonal problem solving . In . Handbook development ( Plenum . 285 . 19 Arroyo , 2011 ) The relationship between and of communication competence and friendship quality . Communication Studies , 62 ( 20 , Richmond , 1976 ) The effects of communication apprehension on the perception . Western Speech Communication , 40 ( 21 , 1978 ) Communication apprehension , social preference , and social behavior in a college environment . Communication Quarterly , 26 ( 22 Rubin , Rubin , 1989 ) Communication apprehension and satisfaction in interpersonal relationships . Communication Research Reports , 23 Rawlins , 1989 ) Dialectical analysis of the tensions , functions and strategic challenges of communication in young adult friendships . Communication , 12 , 24 Ibid . 25 Ibid . 171 . 26 Laing , 1961 ) others . I

27 Ibid . 28 Mindful Staff . 2018 , August ) For the love of friends Answers from our reader survey on friendship . Mindful , 29 , 2017 , May ) simple ways to be more mindful in your friendships . 30 Rawlins , 1981 ) Friendship as a communicative achievement A theory and an interpretive analysis of verbal reports ( Unpublished doctoral dissertation ) Temple University , Philadelphia , 31 Ibid . 32 Ibid . 46 . 33 Rawlins , 1994 ) Being there and growing apart Sustaining friendships during adulthood . In Canary ( Communication and relational maintenance ( Emerald . 34 , Myers , A . 2016 ) The use of relational maintenance behaviors in sustained adult friendships . Communication Research Reports , 33 ( 35 Ibid . 36 , 2011 ) Measuring relationship maintenance behaviors Critique and development of the Revised Relationship Maintenance Behavior Scale . of Social and Personal Relationships , 28 ( 37 Rawlins , 1981 ) Friendship as a communicative achievement A theory and an interpretive analysis of verbal reports ( Unpublished doctoral dissertation ) Temple University , Philadelphia , PA . 38 , Becker , Brown , Craig , 2004 ) The process of relationship development and deterioration Turning points in friendships that have terminated . Communication Quarterly , 52 ( 39 Matthews , 1986 ) Friendships through the life course Oral biographies in old age . Sage . 40 Ibid . 34 . 41 Ibid . 52 . 42 Ibid . 53 . 43 Wright , 2006 ) Toward an expanded orientation to the comparative study of women and men friendships . In Canary ( Sex differences and similarities in communication ( 44 Phillips , Wood , 1983 ) Communication and human relationships The study communication . Macmillan . 45 , A . 1988 ) Matching for attractiveness in romantic partners and friends A analysis and theoretical critique . Psychological Bulletin , 104 ( 46 , 1977 ) Sex differences . In ( Ed . Personality variables in social behavior ( 47 Rawlins , 1993 ) Communication in friendships . In Arliss ( Women and men communicating Challenges and changes ( Brace . 51 . 48 , 1989 ) friendship four basic challenges of an ignored relationship . Sex Roles , 21 ( 49 , 1994 ) friendship opportunity challenge Uncharted terrain for exploration . Personal Relationship Issues , 50 Rawlins , 1982 ) friendship and the communicative management of expectations . Communication Quarterly , 30 ( 51 Ibid . 344 . 52 , 1994 ) friendship opportunity challenge Uncharted terrain for exploration . Personal Relationship Issues , 53 Rawlins , 2009 ) The compass Narratives , identities , and dialogues . Sage . 54 ( friendship research as ideological practice . In Duck ( Handbook of ) son ,

Personal Relationships ( Wiley Sons . 55 , 2012 ) friendships An analysis of gay and bisexual men workplace friendships with heterosexual women . Human Relations , 65 ( 960 . 56 , Rawlins , 2014 ) Transitional identities and postmodern friendships An exploratory investigation . Women eh Language , 37 ( 57 , 2017 ) The hackneyed notions of adult and friendships . In ( The psychology ( 5974 ) Oxford . 58 Ibid . 63 . 59 Canary , Hause , 1993 ) Is there any reason to research sex differences in communication ?

Communication Quarterly , 41 ( 60 , Rawlins , 2014 ) Transitional identities and postmodern friendships An exploratory investigation . Women eh Language , 37 ( 61 Ibid . 13 . 62 , I . A . 2011 ) Unlikely friends Bridging ties and diverse friendship . Lexington , 63 Ibid . 64 Binder , Brown , Kessler , 2009 ) Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact ?

A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three european countries . of Personality and Social Psychology , 96 ( 65 Davies , Aron , Pettigrew , Wright , 2011 ) friendships and attitudes A review . Personality and Social Psychology Review , 15 ( 66 Pew Internet American Life Project . 2002 ) The Internet goes to college How students are living in the future with today technology . Retrieved from 67 , I . 2018 , October 24 ) facts about Americans and Facebook . Pew Research Center . Retrieved from 68 Ibid . 69 Rawlins , 1981 ) Friendship as a communicative achievement A theory and an interpretive analysis of verbal reports ( Unpublished doctoral dissertation ) Temple University , Philadelphia , 70 Low , 2015 , October 28 ) Are your friends really your friends ?

Woman creates test to establish who your real mates are and you may be lonelier than you think ! Daily . Retrieved from 71 Anderson , 2018 , November 28 ) Teens social media habits and experiences Teens , friendships and online groups . Pew Research Center . Retrieved from 72 Liu , Yang , 2016 ) Media niche of electronic communication channels in friendship A analysis . Communication , 21 ( 12175 73 Ibid . 459 . 74 , 2013 ) Sharing , caring , and surveilling An interdependence model investigation of Facebook relational maintenance . Behavior , and Social Networking , 16 ( 12 ) END OF CHAPTER ANSWER KEY ) A ) A ) A ) I