|
Description
The purpose of this study is to compare the contributing role of two aspects of social interaction to the quality of marital relationships: the frequency of casual interaction between marital partners versus the quality of social interaction as exhibited by partners' reliance on universal rules of social interaction. Specifically we examine the relative contribution of frequency of casual interaction and reliance on interaction rules to assessments of marital quality. Findings indicate that although each of these features is associated with trust, liking, satisfaction, and commitment, reliance on basic interaction rules plays the more important role, explaining 51% of the variance in the composite marital quality index.
**********
Over the last few years, Stafford, Canary and their colleagues have identified a number of specific relational maintenance behaviors that predict various relationship qualities (e.g., Canary & Stafford, 1992; Canary, Stafford, & Semic, 2002; Stafford & Canary, 1991; Stafford, Dainton, & Haas, 2000). Shared tasks and openness, for instance, are identified as specific maintenance behaviors that predict levels of trust, commitment, love, and satisfaction in marriage. Maintenance behaviors ostensibly help preserve these features of relationship quality (Stafford, 2002). Yet the enactment of relationship maintenance behaviors is dependent upon the ongoing negotiation and co-construction of communicative understandings and activity that exist between married partners. Less work has been conducted to differentiate basic features of social interaction that enable marital relationships to function effectively.
The purpose of this study is to compare the role of two aspects of social interaction to the quality of marital relationships: the frequency of casual interaction between marital partners versus the quality of social interaction as exhibited by partners' reliance on universal rules of social interaction (Argyle, Furnham, & Graham, 1981; Argyle & Henderson, 1985a, 1985b). While these two features of social interaction are generally considered to be important to the quality of interpersonal relationships, they are still relatively understudied areas in intimate relationships, particularly in relation to assessments of relationship quality (Metts, 1997). Both the frequency with which people interact and the way people behave as they interact are offered in different types of theories (developmental theory and functional rules theory) as general mechanisms for understanding how social systems such as relationships develop to function effectively (e.g., Argyle et al.; Werner, 1957). Yet neither of these mechanisms has had lengthy, focused, or comparative treatment by marital relationship researchers. In particular, we know less what matters most, the frequency with which married partners interact or the extent to which partners conform to basic interaction rules, or universal expectations about how to communicate with one another.
Frequency of Casual Interaction
The first interaction feature that deserves further study is simply the frequency of casual interaction couples engage in with each other, and its association with perceptions of relationship quality. Sheer frequency of interaction has had a long history as an important aspect of intimate relationships, and has been considered by developmental theorists to be a critical mechanism of developmental change (e.g., Altman & Taylor, 1973; Delia & O'Keefe, 1979; Little, 1972; Werner, 1957). Duck and his colleagues (Duck, 1992; Duck, Rut*, Hurst, & Strejc, 1991), for instance, have argued that everyday casual interaction plays a powerful and significant, and yet largely ignored, role in the development of relationships. However, Duck et al. found that relational participants viewed talk within their relationship as indicative of the healthy continuation of their relationship. Similarly Kirchler (1988) found marital happiness to be positively associated with frequency of interaction, except when the interaction was conflict ridden. In addition, Barnes and Duck (1994) have found that routine casual interaction provides an opportunity to vent grumbles, escape everyday stresses and be comforted. Everyday casual interaction can provide a safe context within which more specific discussions can occur and partners can learn about one another (Duck, 1990). Routine casual conversation can allow partners to gauge each other's mood and behavior and regulate or diffuse problems before they occur (Met*s, 1997). Dainton and Stafford's (1993) efforts to explore maintenance behaviors beyond the initial maintenance strategies of Stafford and Canary (1991) indeed found that couples reported using casual interaction to maintain their relationships.
In their review of the literature on marriage Reissman, Aron, and Bergen (1993) concluded that the time couples spent engaging in leisure activities, such as talking or sharing tasks, was related to their relational satisfaction. Similarly, Vangelisti and Banski (1993) found that couples who talked at the end of the workday had higher levels of satisfaction than those who did not spend nightly time interacting with one another. Finally, Richmond (1995) found that satisfied couples engaged in more conversation across a variety of topics overall than did dissatisfied couples.
Some time ago, Crockett (1965), utilizing a domain specific model of development, argued that differences in social systems could partially be explained by a frequency of interaction effect. The frequency of interaction hypothesis argues that the duration of a person's experience in a particular domain of activity is a mechanism for developing that person's cognitive and social systems in that domain (Little, 1972). Applied to marital relationships, the frequency of interaction hypothesis implies that married individuals who interact more with their partner will develop relatively more sophisticated behaviors and perceptions than those with comparatively little experience in that domain. The experience gained from informal casual interaction may likely be the basis for overall impressions and perceptions of the relationship, which becomes translated into perceptions of marital quality. In a similar vein, Berger and Kellner (1964) have argued that marital reality is constructed through everyday conversation. Given that the benefits of marital relationships may be carried in and through interaction practices, our first hypothesis is that the frequency with which married individuals engage in casual interaction is related to their perceptions of the quality of their relationships.
Universal Rules of Social Interaction
A second feature of social interaction that has been identified as pervasive but has received scant research attention in reference to intimate relationships is the reliance upon general rules of social interaction (Argyle et al., 1981; Argyle & Henderson, 1985a, 1985b). Following Harre and Secord (1972), Argyle and his colleagues have advanced a functional theory of rules to explain patterns of behavior in social situations. Specifically, they argue that human interactive behavior is rule-governed; rules specify behaviors most people "think or believe should be performed or should not be performed"... |
More articles from Communication Reports
"Is there something I should know?": Topic avoidant responses in paren..., January 01, 2004
Keeping the score: the hegemonic everyday practices in golf., January 01, 2004
Anxiety patterns in employment interviews., January 01, 2004
Looking for additional articles?
Click here
to search our database of over 3 million articles.
|
