Studying this lecture summary will guarantee you good chances to pass the exam, probably even with a good grade (the book and the articles were not that important for this course). The summary is supplemented with all necessary images from the slides.
Contacted men in hospital after heart failure
Fill in questions about relationship status (yes/ no) and about satisfaction
Then follow for 4 years: are they still alive?
High Marital satisfaction (above curve) = higher proportion alive
Contacted 1000s of people (of all ages) & followed over course of 9 years
Measured at beginning: level of social integration (“are you married”, “how many
friends”, etc.)
1
, Higher chance of dying when not integrated
This effect stronger for men
Infected students in lab with rhino virus
Measured level of social integration
Follow them over weeks: Did they become ill? (objective & self-reported measure)
Higher chance of infection if not integrated (both measures
Social Relationships almost as predictive as smoking
Why is social integration associated with both physical and psychological well-being?
Because of Social support; a basic psychological mechanism, you need to be taken
care of.
Emotional support
Vs. Instrumental support: e.g. doing shopping for you when you’re ill; The two are
often highly correlated and even confounding. E.g. in the example above you also
experience it as emotional support
Visible support: you experience it as support. Negative side effects: loss of autonomy,
dependency on supporter, victimization
2
, Vs. invisible support: you don’t experience it as support. This sometimes works better
(because not te negative side effects of visible support
These, however, aren’t explanations of how emotional support affects well being. There are
2 effects of how it does (Cohen & Wils, 1985):
1. Direct effect-hypothesis (Main effect hypothesis):
Social support makes people take better care of themselves (less smoking,
more exercise, healthier diet, etc.)
Experience more positive affect
2. Stress-buffering hypothesis:
Social support reduces stress under potentially stressful circumstances
Stress (e.g. cortisol) directly related to health via cardio-vascular and immune
system
Evidence for this hypothesis: Lending a hand… (Coan et al., 2006)
o Fmri: pain, by electric shock
o Red X’s (then 20% of receiving another shock) vs. blue O’s on screen
o 3 different conditions:
romantic partner holding hand
Stranger holding hand
No hand
Less stress related activity when hand is held, especially by partner
This effect stronger for women satisfied with the relationship
Slatcher (2010, 2016): Strength and Strain model of marriage & health
Role of relationships (“Marital strength”) on health & well-being often
underestimated even by many psychologists
Conclusion so far:
3
, Having an extensive social network is stronglu associated with people’s psychological
and physical wellbeing
Social support is the key; has a direct and indirect (stress-buffering) effect
Role of relationships on health and well being underestimated by laypeople and
psychologists
The need to belong (Baumeister & Weary, 1995):
Evolved need to initiate and maintain relationships; critical for survival; more than a
motivation
Support for this hypothesis:
1. Changes in ‘belongingness’ evoke strong effects
Inclusion/ social integration = healthy and happy; Exclusion/ loneliness =
unhealthy and unhappy
o Social rejection: Frisbee paradigm, first include person and then
suddenly not throw Frisbee at him anymore; good paradigm, since
everyone would feel rejected after this (= ostracism)
o Immediate reactions to ostracism:
Lower sense of belonging
Loss of control
Lower sense of meaningfulness
Lower self esteem (sociometer theory)
o These reactions take place no matter what, for example even when
you get rejected by a member of the KKK
2. Initiating social interactions seems innate + humans form social relationships really
easy
Universal
Minimal group research
Mere proximity leads to relationships
Attachment literature
Innate focus on others (face perceptual systems eg babys gazing longer at
faces than other equally complex stimuli & seeing faces in objects)
Pain-overlap theory:
Similar neural systems involved in both social and physical pain
Sensitivity to both social and physical pain is linked to a common gene (OPRM-I)
Similar psychological responses: both lead to loss of control, lowered self-esteem,
aggression etc.
Eisenberger et al (2003):
o Ball tossing computer game (cyber ball game, similar to Frisbee)
o Leading to ostracism, with the same immediate responses as describes above
4
Alle Vorteile der Zusammenfassungen von Stuvia auf einen Blick:
Garantiert gute Qualität durch Reviews
Stuvia Verkäufer haben mehr als 700.000 Zusammenfassungen beurteilt. Deshalb weißt du dass du das beste Dokument kaufst.
Schnell und einfach kaufen
Man bezahlt schnell und einfach mit iDeal, Kreditkarte oder Stuvia-Kredit für die Zusammenfassungen. Man braucht keine Mitgliedschaft.
Konzentration auf den Kern der Sache
Deine Mitstudenten schreiben die Zusammenfassungen. Deshalb enthalten die Zusammenfassungen immer aktuelle, zuverlässige und up-to-date Informationen. Damit kommst du schnell zum Kern der Sache.
Häufig gestellte Fragen
Was bekomme ich, wenn ich dieses Dokument kaufe?
Du erhältst eine PDF-Datei, die sofort nach dem Kauf verfügbar ist. Das gekaufte Dokument ist jederzeit, überall und unbegrenzt über dein Profil zugänglich.
Zufriedenheitsgarantie: Wie funktioniert das?
Unsere Zufriedenheitsgarantie sorgt dafür, dass du immer eine Lernunterlage findest, die zu dir passt. Du füllst ein Formular aus und unser Kundendienstteam kümmert sich um den Rest.
Wem kaufe ich diese Zusammenfassung ab?
Stuvia ist ein Marktplatz, du kaufst dieses Dokument also nicht von uns, sondern vom Verkäufer Koechzn. Stuvia erleichtert die Zahlung an den Verkäufer.
Werde ich an ein Abonnement gebunden sein?
Nein, du kaufst diese Zusammenfassung nur für 6,49 €. Du bist nach deinem Kauf an nichts gebunden.
