He has been teaching a course in Close Relationships for over 25 years, and he won the Teaching Award from the International Association for Relationship Research primarily as a result of this book. By prompting students to engage with key concepts, while continually adapting to their individual needs, Connect activates learning and empowers students to take control resulting in better grades and increased retention rates.
Proven online content integrates seamlessly with our adaptive technology, and helps build student confidence outside of the classroom. Available within Connect, SmartBook 2. SmartBook 2. With the ReadAnywhere mobile app, students can now read and complete SmartBook 2. For instructors, SmartBook 2. Creating accessible products is a priority for McGraw Hill. We have put in place processes to make accessibility and meeting the WCAG AA guidelines part of our day-to-day development efforts and product roadmaps.
Please review our accessibility information for this specific product. McGraw Hill sites may contain links to websites owned and operated by third parties. McGraw Hill has no control over and is not responsible for the content or accessibility of any linked website.
After completing your transaction, you can access your course using the section url supplied by your instructor. Skip to main content x Sign In. The ninth edition has unmatched currency and breadth. Contact your Rep s. With the McGraw Hill eBook, students can access their digital textbook on the web or go offline via the ReadAnywhere app for phones or tablets.
See tabs below to explore options and pricing. Don't forget, we accept financial aid and scholarship funds in the form of credit or debit cards.
Product Description. Rent Monthly. Rent Day. What are my shipping options? The estimated amount of time this product will be on the market is based on a number of factors, including faculty input to instructional design and the prior revision cycle and updates to academic research-which typically results in a revision cycle ranging from every two to four years for this product.
Pricing subject to change at any time. Rowland S. He has been teaching a course in Close Relationships for over 25 years, and he won the Teaching Award from the International Association for Relationship Research primarily as a result of this book. Reduce course material costs for your students while still providing full access to everything they need to be successful.
It isn't too good to be true - it's Inclusive Access. Learn more about Inclusive Access here. When your students still want a book but don't want to keep it, McGraw-Hill's Textbook Rental program provides students with our latest editions at our most affordable hardcover prices.
Learn more about our Textbook Rental program. After completing your transaction, you can access your course using the section url supplied by your instructor. Skip to main content x Sign In. Instructors: choose ebook for fast access or receive a print copy. Dan Perlman [email protected] maintains a course website and does item analyses of questions from our test bank. He is happy to share these with you. A Partnership This book is about relationships, and, as far as we're concerned, one very important partnership is the one that exists between us, its authors, and you, our reader.
We've endeavored to make this edition the best we pOSSibly can. But we realize that in reading it, you may want to throw bricks, send bouquets, or just tell us how you think we could do even better next time.
Whichever your preference, we invite your feedback. Write either Rody Miller, [email protected] , or Dan Perlman, [email protected] Please let us know what works and what needs improvement. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, 'liTis the good reader that makes the good book. And feel free to share your experience with a friend or loved one. We hope the book will benefit you and your relationships, and to both you and your intimate partners, we wish a ''bon voyage" in reading and, more importantly, in relating.
Listen to a song. Watch a movie. At some point, the conversation, the lyrics, or the plot will probably touch on the topic of relationships.
We think about relationships so much because they are a central aspect of our lives: a source of great joy when things go well, but a cause of great sorrow when they go poorly. We're curious. Most of us want to understand how our relationships get started, how they grow, and how, sometimes, they end in a haze of anger and pain.
When it comes to relationships, we are all on a lifelong voyage of discovery. This book will promote your own process of discovery. Drawing on psychology, sociology, communication studies, and family studies, it describes what social scientists have learned about relationships through careful research. This is a different, more scientific view of relationships than you'll find in song lyrics or the movies; it's more reasoned, more cautious, and often less romantic.
You'll also find that this book is not a how-to manual. Intimacy takes many forms, and there is no magic formula for a satisfying relationship.
Instead, each of us must bring his or her beliefs, values, and personal experiences to bear on the information presented here. The purposes of this book are to guide you through the diverse foci of relationship science and to help you arrive at your own conclusions about relationships.
To set the stage for the discoveries to come, we'll first define our subject matter. What are intimate relationships?
Why do they matter so much? Then, we'll consider the fundamental building blocks of close relationships: the cultures we inhabit, the experiences we encounter, the personalities we possess, 3 4 PART ONE: Introduction to the Study of Intimate Relationships the human origins we all share, and the interactions we conduct.
In order to understand relationships, we must first comprehend who we are, where we are, and how we got there. They have parents and may have children; they have colleagues at work or school; they encounter grocery clerks, physicians, and office receptionists; they have friends; and they have lovers.
This book concentrates on just the last two types of partnerships, which exemplify intimate relationships. Our primary focus is on intimate relationships between adults although we do discuss childhood friendships in chapter 7.
The Nature of Intimacy What, then, is intimacy? First, intimate partners have extensive personal, often confidential, knowledge about each other.
They share information about their histories, preferences, feelings, and desires that they do not reveal to most of the other people they know. Intimate partners also care about each other, feeling more affection for one another than they do for most others. Their lives are also intertwined: What each partner does affects what the other partner wants to do and can do. Interdependence between intimates-the extent to which they need and influence each other-is frequent they often affect each other , strong they have a meaningful impact on each other , diverse they influence each other in many different ways , and enduring they influence each other over long periods of time.
When relationships are interdependent, one's behavior affects one's partner as well as oneself. As a result of these close ties, people who are intimate also consider themselves to be a couple instead of two entirely separate individuals. A quality that makes these close ties tolerable is trust, the expectation that an intimate partner will treat one fairly and honorably Holmes, Finally, intimate partners are ordinarily committed to their relationships.
That is, they expect their partnerships to continue indefinitely, and they invest the time, effort, and resources that are needed to realize that goal.
Without such commitment, people who were once very close may find themselves less and less interdependent and knowledgeable about each other as time goes by and they slowly drift apart. None of these components is absolutely required for intimacy to occur, and each may exist when the others are absent.
For instance, spouses in a stale, unhappy marriage may be very interdependent, closely coordinating the practical details of their daily lives, but still live in a psychological vacuum devoid of much affection, openness, or trust. Such partners would certainly be more intimate than mere acquaintances are, but they would undoubtedly feel less close to one another than they used to for instance, when they decided to marry , when more of the components were present.
Still, intimacy can exist to a lesser degree when only some of them are in place. And as unhappy marriages demonstrate, intimacy can also vary enormously over the entire course of a relationship. Indeed, perhaps the most fundamental lesson about relationships is a very simple one: They come in all shapes and sizes. This variety is a source of great complexity, but it can also be a source of endless fascination. And that's why we wrote this book!
For instance, we will not examine the relationships you have with most of your classmates. Should we be so particular? Is such a focus justified? The answers, of course, are yes. Although our casual interactions with strangers, acquaintances, and others can be very influential Miller, , there's something special about intimate relationships.
In fact, a powerful and pervasive drive to establish intimacy with others may be a basic part of our human nature. According to theorists Roy Baumeister and Mark Leary , we need frequent, pleasant interactions with intimate partners in lasting, caring relationships if we're to function normally. There is a human need to belong in close relationships, and if the need is not met, a variety of problems follow.
In order to fulfill the need, we need no pun intended to establish and maintain close relationships with other people; only interaction and communion with those who know and care for us will do.
We don't need many close relationships, just a few; when the need to belong is satiated, our drive to form additional relationships is 6 PART ONE: Introduction to the Study of Intimate Relationships reduced. Thus, when it comes to relationships, quality is more important than quantity. It also doesn't matter much who our partners are; as long as they provide us stable affection and acceptance, our need can be satisfied. Thus, if their spouses die after a long marriage, people are often able to find replacement partners who-though they may be quite different from their previous partners-are nonetheless able to satisfy the widow's or widower's need to belong.
Some of the support for this theory comes from the ease with which we form relationships with others and from the tenacity with which we then resist the dissolution of our existing social ties. Indeed, when a valued relationship is in peril, we may find it hard to think about anything else-and the resulting preoccupation and strong emotion show how much our partnerships mean to us.
Consider, too, that we use solitary confinement, the deprivation of social interaction, as punishment for those who misbehave. For most people, being entirely alone for a long period of time is a surprisingly stressful experience Schachter, Such losses impair one's health Levin, Spouses whose marriages have turned angry and antagonistic Kiecolt-Glaser et al.
And if such people continue to leave their social needs unfulfilled, they're likely to die younger than those who are happily attached to others. People with satisfying marriages, for instance, are generally happier a year later than are those whose marriages are less pleasant Ruvolo, And a variety of problems such as depression, alcoholism, eating disorders, and schizophrenia are more likely to afflict those whose social needs are unfulfilled than those who have adequate ties to others Segrin, On the surface as we explain in detail in chapter 2 , such patterns do not necessarily mean that bad relationships cause such problems; after all, people who are prone to schizophrenia may find it difficult to form loving relationships in the first place.
In general, our well-being seems to depend on how well we satisfy the need to belong. Why should we need intimacy so much? Why are we such a social species? That argument goes this way: Because early humans lived in small tribal groups surrounded by a difficult environment full of saber-toothed tigers, people who were loners were less likely than gregarious humans to have children who would grow to maturity and reproduce.
In such a setting, a tendency to form stable, affectionate connections to others would have been evolutionarily adap- CHAPTER 1: The Building Blocks of Relationships 7 tive, giving those who possessed it a reproductive advantage.
As a result, our species slowly came to be characterized by people who cared deeply about what others thought of them and who sought acceptance and closeness from others.
Admittedly, this view-which represents a provocative way of thinking about our modem behavior and about which we'll have more to say later in this chapter -is speculative.
Nevertheless, whether or not this evolutionary account is entirely correct, there is little doubt that now, in the twenty-first century, almost all of us care deeply about the quality of our attachments to others. We are also at a loss, prone to illness and maladjustment, when we have insufficient intimacy in our lives.
We know that food, water, and shelter are essential for life, but the need to belong suggests that intimacy with others is essential for a good, long life as well.
Now, let's examine the major influences that will determine what sort of relationships we construct when we seek to satisfy the need to belong. We'll start with a counterpoint to our innate need for intimacy: the changing cultures that provide the norms that govern our intimate relationships.
If they were a typical couple, they would have married in their early twenties, before she was 21 and before he was And it's also unlikely that they would have had a baby without being married; 95 percent of the children born in the United States in had parents who were married to each other.
Once they settled in, your grandmother probably did not work outside the home-most women didn't-and when her kids were preschoolers, it's quite likely that she stayed home with them all day; most women did. It's also likely that their children-in particular, your mom or dad-grew up in a household in which both of their parents were present at the end of the day.
Now, however, things are different. The last several decades have seen dramatic changes in the cultural context in which we conduct our close relationships. Almost everyone 94 percent married at some point in their lives in , but more people remain unmarried today. Demographers now predict that only 85 percent of young adults will ever marry Fletcher, Census Bureau at www.
National Center for Health Statistics at www. A woman is now 25 years old, on average, when she marries for the first time, and a man is 27 Schmid, That's much older than your grandparents probably were when they got married see Figure 1.
More than a third of all Americans now remain unmarried into their middle thirties, and most African-Americans 53 percent have never married when they reach age 34 U. Census Bureau, Cohabitation was very rare in only 5 percent of all adults ever did it-but it is now ordinary. Half of your classmates will at some time live with a lover without being married. In fact, almost one-third of American households 32 percent are made up of an unmarried man and woman living together "Data reveal," This was an uncommon event in ; only 5 percent of the babies born in the United States that year had unmarried mothers.
Some children were conceived out of wedlock, but their parents usually got married before they were born. Not so now. In , one-third 33 percent of the babies born in the U. The likelihood that a married couple would someday divorce skyrocketed from to see Figure 1. The divorce rate peaked in the early s and has since dropped ,. Average age of first marriage in the U. American men and women are waiting longer to get married than ever before.
Divorce rates in the U. After an extraordinary increase from the mids to , the American divorce rate has leveled off and even declined slightly in recent years. The figure illustrates the divorce rate per 1, married women age 15 and older in the United States.
As a result of the higher divorce and unmarried-birth rates, it's now unlikely that an American child will live with both parents throughout his or her entire youth. Indeed, at anyone time, more than a quarter 28 percent of the children in the u. Even if a child lives with both parents, neither of them is likely to be a full-time caregiver at home all day. I :' These remarkable changes suggest that some of our shared assumptions about the role that marriage and parenthood will play in our lives have changed substantially in recent years.
Once upon a time, everybody got married, usually soon after they left college, and happy or sad, they were likely to stay with those partners. Pregnant people felt they had to get married, and cohabitation was known as "living in sin. Marriage is now a choice, even if a baby is on the way, and increasing numbers of us are putting it off or not getting married at all. If we do marry, we're less likely to consider it a solemn, life-long commitment Myers, Do these changes matter?
Almost certainly they do. Cultural standards provide a foundation for our relationships Huston, ; they shape our expectations and define what patterns are thought to be normal. Consequently, fewer people get married and fewer marriages last. Sources of Change Thus, the patterns of your intimate relationships in the twenty-first century may differ from those experienced by prior generations, and there are undoubtedly several reasons why.
One likely influence is our culture's increasing level of socioeconomic development. There is a general trend for a society to harbor more single people, tolerate more divorces, and support a later age of marriage the more industrialized and affluent it becomes South, Education and financial resources allow people to travel more widely and be more independent. With more options, fewer of us may be motivated to tie ourselves to just one partner for our entire lives.
I CHAPTER 1: The Building Blocks of Relationships 11 Western cultures also emphasize individual liberty, encouraging people to pursue personal fulfillment, and if anything, this individualism has become more pronounced in recent years Myers, New technology matters, too. Modern reproductive technologies allow single women to bear children fathered by men picked from a catalog at a sperm bank whom the women have never met!
In addition, more and more of our leisure time is absorbed by private, often solitary entertainments such as watching television or surfing the Web instead of socializing with friends or neighbors Putnam, People who would have hosted parties in are now often sitting home alone watching video and computer screens.
However, an even more important-but more subtle-influence on the norms that govern relationships may be the relative numbers of young men and women in a given culture. Societies in which men are more numerous than women tend to have very different standards than those in which women outnumber men.
We're describing a culture's sex ratio, a simple count of the number of men for every women in a specific population. When the sex ratio is high, there are more men than women; when the sex ratio is low, there are fewer men than women. A sex ratio of means that there are equal numbers of women and men. In the United States, women are usually in their twenties, marrying a man two years older on average , when they marry for the first time; thus, relationship researchers usually compute sex ratios that compare the number of women to the number of men who are slightly older.
The baby boom that followed World War II caused the American sex ratio, which was very high in , to plummet to low levels at the end of that decade. For a time after the war, more babies were born each year than in the preceding year; this meant that when the "boomers" entered adulthood, there were fewer older men than younger women, and the sex ratio dropped.
However, when birthrates began to slow and fewer children entered the demographic pipeline, each new flock of women was smaller than the preceding flock of men, and the American sex ratio crept higher in the s see Figure 1. Since then, fairly stable birthrates among "boomer" parents have resulted in equal numbers of marriageable men and women today.
These changes may have been more important than most people realize. Cultures with high sex ratios in which there aren't enough women tend to support traditional, old-fashioned roles for men and women Pedersen, ; Secord, The women stay home raising children while the men work outside the home.
Such cultures also tend to be sexually conservative. The ideal newlywed is a virgin bride, unwed pregnancy is shameful, and open cohabitation is rare. Divorce is discouraged. In contrast, cultures with low sex ratios in which there are too few men tend to be less traditional and more permissive.
Women are encouraged to work and support themselves, and they are allowed if not encouraged to have sexual relationships outside of marriage. If a pregnancy occurs, unmarried motherhood is an option. Sex ratios in the U. American sex ratios were very low during the "sexual revolution" of the late s, but there were equal numbers of young men and women in the population as we entered the twenty-first century.
Women even wear shorter skirts Barber, Ancient Rome, which was renowned for its sybaritic behavior? A low sex ratio. Victorian England, famous for its prim and proper ways?
A high sex ratio. The Roaring Twenties, a footloose and playful decade? And in more recent memory, the "sexual revolution" and the advent of "women's liberation" in the late s? Take another look at Figure 1. Theorists Marcia Guttentag and Paul Secord argued that such cultural changes are not accidental. In their view, a society's norms evolve to promote the interests of its most powerful members, those who hold economic, political, and legal power.
In the cultures we just mentioned, those people have been men. As a result, the norms governing relationships usually change to favor the interests of men as the numbers of available men and women change. This is a daring assertion. After all, recent decades have seen enormous improvement in the status of American women, and few of us would want to ex ratios are' , there aren't change that. But let's think it through.
If a man is lucky eno want to keep her. And a encouraging women to be housewives who are financially dependent on their husbands, and b discouraging divorce, are ways to do just that and that's the way things were in Thus, women work and delay marriage, and couples divorce more readily if dissatisfaction sets in.
Thus, the remarkable changes in the norms for American relationships since may be due, in part, to dramatic fluctuations in American sex ratios. Indeed, we may already be seeing the effects of the higher sex ratios of the late s. The U. Politicians now care about "family values. With roughly equal numbers of men and women now approaching marriageable age, it's likely that the cultural pendulum will swing back to sexual norms that are less permissive than those of the s, but not as restrained as those of We should note that Guttentag and Secord's explanation of the operation of sex ratios-that things work to the advantage of men-is speculative.
However, there is a rough but real link between a culture's proportions of men and women and its relational norms, and it serves as a compelling example of the manner in which culture can affect our relationships. To a substantial degree, what we expect and what we accept in our dealings with others can spring from the standards of the time and place in which we live. J Our relationships are also affected by the histories and experiences we bring to them, and there may be no better example of this than the global orientations toward relationships known as attachment styles.
Years ago, developmental researchers e. The prevailing assumption was that whenever they were hungry, wet, or scared, some children found responsive care and protection to be reliably available. A loving and nurturing caregiver always came when they called. Such youngsters came to rely on others comfortably, learning that other people were trustworthy sources of security and kindness. As a result, such children developed a secure style of attachment: They happily bonded with others, and they readily developed relationships characterized by relaxed trust.
Other children encountered different situations. For some, attentive care was unpredictable and inconsistent. These children thus developed fretful, mixed feelings about others known as anxiousambivalent attachments. Being uncertain of when or if a departing caregiver would return, such children became nervous and clingy, displaying excessive neediness in their relationships with others.
Such children learned that little good came from depending on others, leading them to withdraw from others with an avoidant style of attachment. Avoidant children were often suspicious of and angry at others, and did not easily form trusting, close relationships. Thus, early interpersonal experiences were presumed to shape the course of one's subsequent relationships. Indeed, attachment processes became a popular topic of research because the different styles were so obvious in many children.
Anxious-ambivalent children cried and clung to their mothers, ignoring the parents' reassurances that all was well. And avoidant children actually shunned their mothers, keeping their distance and evading close contact even when they were scared. Still, attachment styles took on new relevance for relationship researchers when Cindy Hazan and Phillip Shaver demonstrated that similar orientations toward close relationships could also be observed among adults. In one of their studies, Hazan and Shaver invited readers of the Rocky Mountain News to participate in a "love quiz" by selecting the paragraph in Table 1.
Most people reported a secure style, but a substantial minority about 40 percent said they were insecure by picking either the avoidant or anxiousambivalent self-description. In addition, the three groups of people reported childhood memories and current attitudes toward love and romance that fit their styles. Secure people generally held positive images of themselves and others and remembered their parents as loving and supportive. In contrast, insecure people viewed others with uncertainty or distrust and remembered their parents as inconsistent or cold.
And importantly, attachment tendencies seem to broadly influence our thoughts, feelings, and behavior in our relationships. Cormen, Charles E. Leiserson, Ronald L. Rivest, Clifford Stein Free Download. Holcomb Free Download. Leary Free Download. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, Robert I. Hubbard Jr. Free Download. Introduction to Biotechnology 3rd Edition by William J. Thieman, Michael A. Palladino Free Download. Beatty, Susan S. Samuelson Free Download. Solen, John Harb Free Download.
Owens Jr. Joseph Free Download. Essa Free Download. Coppola Free Download. Hagen Free Download. Pond, Jeffrey L. Rankinen Free Download. Masters, Wendell P. Ela Free Download.
Introduction to Fire Protection by Robert W. Klinoff Free Download. Lasser Institute Free Download.
0コメント