The Sociocultural influence on relationships

1. The Sociocultural influence on relationships • Relationships are socially and culturally constructed. • A range of sociocultural factors — including community expectations and rules, laws and policies, economic and physical resources, technological and ethical factors — can influence an individual’s attitudes towards, behaviors in and expectations about relationships

2. The Sociocultural influence on relationships • The media and popular culture often present unrealistic images of relationships and play a critical role in persuading people to attempt to conform to these.

3. Social learning and relationships • Have you ever thought about the extent to which your parents influence your romantic relationship? • The early study of Bates (1942) suggested that parents can play an important role in their children’s selection of romantic partners and dating practices.

4. Sociocultural factors and relationships • Have you ever thought about the extent to which your parents influence your romantic relationship? • The early study of Bates (1942) suggested that parents can play an important role in their children’s selection of romantic partners and dating practices.

5. Sociocultural factors and relationships • In one recent study, Kim (2005) found that parents can exert control over their children’s romantic relationship and convey their cultural norms and expectations by setting up rules and restrictions that limit their children’s ability to go out on dates.

6. Sociocultural factors and relationships • Other lines of studies also revealed that perceived parental attitudes (Edmond, 2006) and perceived parental influence (Mok, 1999) can affect children’s attitude toward dating as well as their involvement in romantic relationships. • The association between parental influence and children’s romantic relationship is especially salient when it comes to partner choice.

7. Sociocultural factors and relationships • Cultural differences exist in the “norms for dating”. Chinese parents, for example, are thought to hold a more conservative attitude toward romantic relationship. • They think that their children should start dating at a relatively late age and should have consistent dating partner who is of the same ethnicity (Kim, 2005).

8. Sociocultural factors and relationships. • Cultural differences exist in the “norms for dating”. Chinese parents, for example, are thought to hold a more conservative attitude toward romantic relationship. • They think that their children should start dating at a relatively late age and should have consistent dating partner who is of the same ethnicity (Kim, 2005).

9. Understanding prosocial behavior. • Prosocial behavior refers to "voluntary actions that are intended to help or benefit another individual or group of individuals" (Eisenberg and Mussen1989). • This definition refers to consequences of a doer's actions rather than the motivations behind those actions.

10. Understanding prosocial behavior. • These behaviors include a broad range of activities: sharing, comforting, rescuing, and helping. • Though prosocial behavior can be confused with altruism, they are, in fact, two distinct concepts. Prosocial behavior refers to a pattern of activity, whereas, altruism is the motivation to help others out of pure regard for their needs rather than how the action will benefit oneself.

11. Understanding prosocial behavior. • A familiar example of altruism is when an individual makes an anonymous donation to a person, group or institution without any resulting recognition, political or economic gain; here, the donation is the prosocial action and the altruism is what motivates the doer to action (we will revisit this concept later).

12. Understanding prosocial behavior. • It is argued that prosocial behavior is dependent upon social and cultural factors. This has been explained and supported by many psychological studies. • In many cultures, prosocial conduct predominates, whereas in others, egoistic and selfish qualities are the norm. • Cultural dimensions can play an intricate role in prosocial behavior.

13. Culture & Prosocial Behaviour Are there differences in prosocial/helping behavior • Withina culture e.g. urban versus rural areas • Betweencultures e.g. individualist versus collectivist cultures

14. Social identity theory and Pro-social behavior Cultural Differences in Prosocial Behavior • People across cultures are more likely to help members of their in-group, the group with which an individual identifies as a member, than members of the out-group, a group with which an individual does not identity.

15. Social identity theory and Pro-social behavior Cultural Differences in Prosocial Behavior • People from collectivist cultures are more prone to help in-group members and less likely to help out-group members than are people from individualist cultures.

16. Situational factors and prosocial behavior An alternative hypothesis, by Milgram (1970), is the urban overload hypothesis, the idea that people living in cities are likely to keep to themselves in order to avoid being overloaded by all the stimulation they receive.

17. Situational factors and prosocial behavior Urban Overload Hypothesis (Milgram, 1970) The hypothesis suggests that impoverished social interaction in the city is an adaptation to overload of interpersonal contacts. • People who live in cities are exposed to high levels of environmental stimulation • They develop strategies to cut out excessive stimulation • One such strategy is to avoid interactions with strangers – this leads to a reduction in helping behavior in some situations

18. Situational factors and prosocial behavior Milgram argued in his 1970 paper that situational factors can influence the extent to which we see altruistic behavior. Can your situation lead you to become more or less altruistic? Give an example.

19. Milgram and situational prosocial behavior Urban Overload Hypothesis (Milgram, 1970) The hypothesis suggests that impoverished social interaction in the city is an adaptation to overload of interpersonal contacts. • People who live in cities are exposed to high levels of environmental stimulation • They develop strategies to cut out excessive stimulation • One such strategy is to avoid interactions with strangers – this leads to a reduction in helping behavior in some situations

20. Situational factors and prosocial behavior Milgram stated: "When I first came to New York it seemed like a nightmare. As soon as I got off the train at Grand Central I was caught up in pushing, shoving crowds on 42nd Street. Sometimes people bumped into me without apology; what really frightened me was to see two people literally engaged in combat for possession of a cab. Why were they so rushed? Even drunks on the street were bypassed without a glance. People didn't seem to care about each other at all." He suggests that the context of their environment have caused them to lack prosocial behavior. Read more: http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/social/city_living.pdf

21. Culture and prosocial behavior • In general, prosocial (helping, sharing, caring, politeness) behaviors increase during the course of childhood, although the development and prevalence of prosocial behaviors varies across cultures. • For example, researchers find that prosocial behavior, as observed among peers and in parent-child interaction is more prevalent among young East Asian children than among Western children. Why is that?

22. Culture and prosocial behavior • Researchers suggest that this difference results from the collectivist ideologies prevalent in East Asian cultures. • In support of this contention, researchers have reported that Chinese mothers of preschoolers are more likely than European American mothers to believe that their preschool children should share and help other children for social conventional reasons (e.g., to fit in with the group and function well in Chinese society). • This would suggest that certain cultures normalize prosocial behavior more than others.

23. Types of Culture • Individualistic • Based on values of independence, competition, achievement and self-interest • Prosocial concerns likely to be limited to immediate family/close relationships • Collectivistic • Based on values of mutual interdependence, loyalty and group membership • Prosocial concerns likely to be extended beyond family, at least to members of same social group

24. Research • Comparative studies of helping in children • Those from collectivist cultures (e.g. Kenyan, Mexican, Hopi Indian) generally more helpful, co-operative than individualist (US, UK) • US/UK children tend to compete even when working towards common goals. • Likely that individualist cultures raise less helpful, cooperative kids due to need to compete in later life (capitalism)

25. Research Prosociality does seems to depend on child rearing to some extent • Collectivist cultures tend to have extended family structures in which children take responsibility for younger siblings from an early age (Whiting & Whiting, 1988) • A look at cross-cultural research on prosocial behavior: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1063&context=famconfacpub

26. Research • Likely that individualist and collectivist cultures help others for different reasons • Individualist – helping motivated by personal rewards e.g. feeling good about yourself • Collectivist – helping motivated by continued survival of group, possible future reciprocation

27. Problems • ‘Individualist’ and ‘collectivist’ invite us to see all cultures as falling neatly into two camps. They don’t. • Research studies have used limited samples and generally involve a single favour, so not long term. • Usual problems of conducting cross-cultural research (e.g. trust, language) also apply.