Relational mobility

Last updated

Relational mobility is a sociological variable that represents how much freedom individuals have to choose which persons to have relationships with, including friendships, working relationships, and romantic partnerships in a given society. Societies with low relational mobility have less flexible interpersonal networks. People form relationships based on circumstance rather than active choice. In these societies, relationships are more stable and guaranteed, while there are fewer opportunities to leave unsatisfying relationships and find new ones. Group memberships tend to be fixed, and individuals have less freedom to select or change these relationships even if they wished to.

Contents

In contrast, societies with high relational mobility give people choice and freedom to select or leave interpersonal relationships based on their personal preferences. Such relationships are based on mutual agreement and are not guaranteed to last. Individuals have many opportunities to meet new people and to choose whom they interact with or which groups they belong to in such societies. [1] [2]

Relational mobility is conceived as a socioecological factor, which means that it depends on the social and natural environment. The theory of relational mobility has attracted increased interest since the early 2000's because it has been found to explain important cross-cultural differences in people's behavior and way of thinking. [3]

The relational mobility scale

The relational mobility scale is a sociometric scale used for measuring relational mobility in population surveys. This scale is based on a series of questions asking people not about their own situation, but the situation of people around them such as friendship groups, hobby groups, sports teams, and companies. The questions are probing to what degree these people are able to choose the people whom they interact with in their daily life, according to their own preferences. [1]

Geographic differences

Relational mobility is low in cultures with subsistence styles that put people in tight relationships with reciprocal duties such as farming that requires coordination of labor. The growing of paddy rice, in particular, requires tight coordination of labor and irrigation. The lowest level of relational mobility is found in East Asian countries where rice farming is a prevailing means of subsistence. A comparative study has found significant differences in ways of thinking between areas in China dominated by rice farming and areas dominated by wheat farming. This difference could not be explained well by other theories. [4]

On the opposite side of the spectrum is nomadic herding. Herders move frequently, meaning that they have fewer stable, long-term relationships and more opportunities to form and break relationships. Studies have shown that herding cultures emphasize more individual decision making while nearby farming and fishing cultures emphasize harmonious social interdependence and holistic thinking. [5]

A large cross-cultural study has found that relational mobility is lowest in East Asian countries where rice farming is common. The relational mobility is higher in industrialized European countries and English-speaking countries, while it is highest in South American countries. This study found a strong correlation between relational mobility and subsistence style, and a somewhat weaker correlation with environmental threats that require group cohesion and cooperation. [1]

Consequences for people's behavior and way of thinking

People in cultures with low relational mobility are careful to avoid conflicts and disagreements in order to maintain harmony in the social groups that they cannot escape. They are careful not to offend others in order to avoid a bad reputation. Thus, the cultural preference for conformity, which is common in East Asian cultures, is actually a strategy to avoid bad reputation and social exclusion. [6] People in these cultures are more sensitive to social rejection [7] and more likely to feel ashamed towards their friends (but not towards strangers) in order to mitigate information that may damage their reputation. [8]

The degree of relational mobility is influencing people's way of thinking. A low relational mobility is leading to cognitive tendencies that theorists call holistic thinking, while high relational mobility is associated with analytic thinking. This difference in social cognition is defined as a difference in how people attribute their own and others’ behavior to either internal causes (the actors’ dispositions) or external causes (situational factors). Individuals’ need to coordinate their actions and avoid conflict makes salient the influence of external forces, including powerful others in the environment, on their own situation. An external locus of control is typical of cultures with low relational mobility. People pay more attention to situational factors and to chance, fate, and luck than to individual dispositions in these cultures. In contrast, high relational mobility is associated with an internal locus of control with more focus on the individual and less focus on the social environment. [9]

Social relationships and group memberships are more easily formed and terminated in cultures with high relational mobility. Interpersonal connections are here based on mutual convenience and thus less stable and reliable. [9] Less importance is placed on job security, while also divorce is more common and more accepted. [1] People invest more effort in attracting, forming, and maintaining social bonds where relationships cannot be taken for granted. People exhibit more self-enhancement behavior and higher self-esteem here in order to advertise their value as companions and to facilitate the forming of social bonds. [10] People are more prone to develop personal uniqueness in high relational mobility societies in order to increase their value in the market-like competition for social relationships. Idiosyncratic behavior is less common in low relational mobility societies where it may lead to ostracism. [11]

People tend to invest more in maintaining friendships as well as romantic partnerships where relational mobility is high, because the stability of the bond cannot be taken for granted. This bonding behavior includes helping, intimacy, passion, and gift-giving. [12] [13] [14] People even disclose personal information to friends in order to show their commitment to the relationship. [15]

There are different ways of dealing with uncertainty about the quality of a potential partner or collaborator. In low relational mobility societies such as Japan, firms often maintain long-term relations with loyal partners even if better deals with new partners could be obtained. Business strategies tend to be different in societies with higher relational mobility, such as North America, where new relationships are formed based on trust. There is higher risk in new business relationships, but also more to gain by finding a potentially better business partner than one already has. [16] In general, the level of interpersonal trust has been found to be higher in societies with high relational mobility, not only in business relations, but also in general interpersonal relations and on social media. [1] [17]

Consequences for societies

Researchers have found evidence that cultures with higher relational mobility had higher rates of COVID-19 infections and death per capita. [18] [19] The theory is that cultures with higher relational mobility have more interactions in broad social networks and with new people, and these interactions give the virus more opportunities to spread. Cultural differences in relational mobility predicted more infections and death, even controlling for differences in economic development, international trade, population density, the prevalence of COVID-19 testing, and other variables. [18] There is some evidence that relational mobility was particularly important in the first few months of the pandemic, but it became less important over time, perhaps because cultures shut down public venues, and people changed their socialization patterns. [20]

However, there seem to be exceptions to this pattern. For example, cultures with low relational mobility may have stronger expectations of seeing family and friends for important holidays. This could explain why a study in China found that rice-farming areas had rates of COVID-19 infections that were three times higher than wheat-farming areas at the beginning of the outbreak in 2020, which coincided with Chinese New Year. [21] People in rice-farming areas of China reported visiting more family and friends than people in wheat-farming areas of China for Chinese New Year. In contrast, people in cultures of high relational mobility may give people more flexibility to choose whether or not to see people for holidays.

Animal analogies

The theory of relational mobility has analogies in the mating behavior, cooperation behavior, and inter-species symbiosis among animals. It has been observed that such behavior is adjusted to the stability of the relationships, the degree of competition on the relationship "market", and the possibilities for cheating among a variety of species, including birds and insects. [1] [22]

See also

Related Research Articles

Deception is the act of convincing one or many recipients of untrue information. The person creating the deception knows it to be false while the receiver of the message has a tendency to believe it. It is often done for personal gain or advantage. Deception can involve dissimulation, propaganda and sleight of hand as well as distraction, camouflage or concealment. There is also self-deception. It can also be called, with varying subjective implications, beguilement, deceit, bluff, mystification, ruse, or subterfuge.

In social psychology, an interpersonal relation describes a social association, connection, or affiliation between two or more persons. It overlaps significantly with the concept of social relations, which are the fundamental unit of analysis within the social sciences. Relations vary in degrees of intimacy, self-disclosure, duration, reciprocity, and power distribution. The main themes or trends of the interpersonal relations are: family, kinship, friendship, love, marriage, business, employment, clubs, neighborhoods, ethical values, support and solidarity. Interpersonal relations may be regulated by law, custom, or mutual agreement, and form the basis of social groups and societies. They appear when people communicate or act with each other within specific social contexts, and they thrive on equitable and reciprocal compromises.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fundamental attribution error</span> Psychological phenomenon

In social psychology, the fundamental attribution error is a cognitive attribution bias in which observers underemphasize situational and environmental factors for the behavior of an actor while overemphasizing dispositional or personality factors. In other words, observers tend to overattribute the behaviors of others to their personality and underattribute them to the situation or context. Although personality traits and predispositions are considered to be observable facts in psychology, the fundamental attribution error is an error because it misinterprets their effects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Infidelity</span> Cheating, adultery, or having an affair

Infidelity is a violation of a couple's emotional or sexual exclusivity that commonly results in feelings of anger, sexual jealousy, and rivalry.

Social cognition is a topic within psychology that focuses on how people process, store, and apply information about other people and social situations. It focuses on the role that cognitive processes play in social interactions.

A self-serving bias is any cognitive or perceptual process that is distorted by the need to maintain and enhance self-esteem, or the tendency to perceive oneself in an overly favorable manner. It is the belief that individuals tend to ascribe success to their own abilities and efforts, but ascribe failure to external factors. When individuals reject the validity of negative feedback, focus on their strengths and achievements but overlook their faults and failures, or take more credit for their group's work than they give to other members, they are protecting their self-esteem from threat and injury. These cognitive and perceptual tendencies perpetuate illusions and error, but they also serve the self's need for esteem. For example, a student who attributes earning a good grade on an exam to their own intelligence and preparation but attributes earning a poor grade to the teacher's poor teaching ability or unfair test questions might be exhibiting a self-serving bias. Studies have shown that similar attributions are made in various situations, such as the workplace, interpersonal relationships, sports, and consumer decisions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Locus of control</span> Concept in psychology

Locus of control is the degree to which people believe that they, as opposed to external forces, have control over the outcome of events in their lives. The concept was developed by Julian B. Rotter in 1954, and has since become an aspect of personality psychology. A person's "locus" is conceptualized as internal or external.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Perfectionism (psychology)</span> Personality trait

Perfectionism, in psychology, is a broad personality trait characterized by a person's concern with striving for flawlessness and perfection and is accompanied by critical self-evaluations and concerns regarding others' evaluations. It is best conceptualized as a multidimensional and multilayered personality characteristic, and initially some psychologists thought that there were many positive and negative aspects.

Interpersonal attraction, as a part of social psychology, is the study of the attraction between people which leads to the development of platonic or romantic relationships. It is distinct from perceptions such as physical attractiveness, and involves views of what is and what is not considered beautiful or attractive.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intimate relationship</span> Physical or emotional intimacy

An intimate relationship is an interpersonal relationship that involves emotional or physical closeness between people and may include sexual intimacy and feelings of romance or love. Intimate relationships are interdependent, and the members of the relationship mutually influence each other. The quality and nature of the relationship depends on the interactions between individuals, and is derived from the unique context and history that builds between people over time. Social and legal institutions such as marriage acknowledge and uphold intimate relationships between people. However, intimate relationships are not necessarily monogamous or sexual, and there is wide social and cultural variability in the norms and practices of intimacy between people.

Relational aggression, alternative aggression, or relational bullying is a type of aggression in which harm is caused by damaging someone's relationships or social status.

Cultural psychology is the study of how cultures reflect and shape their members' psychological processes.

In psychology, the theory of attachment can be applied to adult relationships including friendships, emotional affairs, adult romantic and carnal relationships and, in some cases, relationships with inanimate objects. Attachment theory, initially studied in the 1960s and 1970s primarily in the context of children and parents, was extended to adult relationships in the late 1980s. The working models of children found in Bowlby's attachment theory form a pattern of interaction that is likely to continue influencing adult relationships.

Emotions are biocultural phenomena, meaning they are shaped by both evolution and culture. They are "internal phenomena that can, but do not always, make themselves observable through expression and behavior". While emotions themselves are universal, they are always influenced by culture. How they are experienced, expressed, perceived, and regulated varies according to cultural norms and values. Culture is a necessary framework to understand global variation in emotion.

Cultural neuroscience is a field of research that focuses on the interrelation between a human's cultural environment and neurobiological systems. The field particularly incorporates ideas and perspectives from related domains like anthropology, psychology, and cognitive neuroscience to study sociocultural influences on human behaviors. Such impacts on behavior are often measured using various neuroimaging methods, through which cross-cultural variability in neural activity can be examined.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interpersonal communication</span> Exchange of information among people

Interpersonal communication is an exchange of information between two or more people. It is also an area of research that seeks to understand how humans use verbal and nonverbal cues to accomplish several personal and relational goals. Communication includes utilizing communication skills within one's surroundings, including physical and psychological spaces. It is essential to see the visual/nonverbal and verbal cues regarding the physical spaces. In the psychological spaces, self-awareness and awareness of the emotions, cultures, and things that are not seen are also significant when communicating.

Emotional intelligence (EI) involves using cognitive and emotional abilities to function in interpersonal relationships, social groups as well as manage one's emotional states. It consists of abilities such as social cognition, empathy and also reasoning about the emotions of others.

Relational models theory (RMT) is a theory of interpersonal relationships, authored by anthropologist Alan Fiske and initially developed from his fieldwork in Burkina Faso. RMT proposes that all human interactions can be described in terms of just four "relational models", or elementary forms of human relations: communal sharing, authority ranking, equality matching and market pricing.

In psychology, interpersonal accuracy (IPA) refers to an individual's ability to make correct inferences about others' internal states, traits, or other personal attributes. For example, a person who is able to correctly recognize emotions, motivation, or thoughts in others demonstrates interpersonal accuracy. IPA is an important skill in everyday life and is related to many positive social interaction outcomes.

Relationship science is an interdisciplinary field dedicated to the scientific study of interpersonal relationship processes. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, relationship science is made up of researchers of various professional backgrounds within psychology and outside of psychology, but most researchers who identify with the field are psychologists by training. Additionally, the field's emphasis has historically been close and intimate relationships, which includes predominantly dating and married couples, parent-child relationships, and friendships and social networks, but some also study less salient social relationships such as colleagues and acquaintances.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Thomson, Robert; et al. (2018). "Relational mobility predicts social behaviors in 39 countries and is tied to historical farming and threat". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 115 (29): 7521–7526. Bibcode:2018PNAS..115.7521T. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1713191115 . PMC   6055178 . PMID   29959208.
  2. ↑ Yuki, Masaki; Schug, Joanna (2012). "Relational mobility: A socioecological approach to personal relationships". In Gillath, O.; Adams, G.; Kunkel, A. (eds.). Relationship Science: Integrating Evolutionary, Neuroscience, and Sociocultural Approaches. American Psychological Association. pp. 137–151. doi:10.1037/13489-007. hdl:2115/52726. ISBN   978-1-4338-1123-4. S2CID   53496958.
  3. ↑ "Relational Mobility". Relational Mobility Website. Retrieved 9 November 2021.
  4. ↑ Talhelm, Thomas; et al. (2014). "Large-scale psychological differences within China explained by rice versus wheat agriculture". Science. 344 (6184): 603–608. Bibcode:2014Sci...344..603T. doi:10.1126/science.1246850. PMID   24812395. S2CID   206552838.
  5. ↑ Uskul, Ayse K.; Kitayama, Shinobu; Nisbett, Richard E. (2008). "Ecocultural basis of cognition: Farmers and fishermen are more holistic than herders". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105 (25): 8552–8556. Bibcode:2008PNAS..105.8552U. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0803874105 . PMC   2438425 . PMID   18552175.
  6. ↑ Yamagishi, Toshio; Hashimoto, Hirofumi; Schug, Joanna (2008). "Preferences versus strategies as explanations for culture-specific behavior". Psychological Science. 19 (6): 579–584. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02126.x. PMID   18578848. S2CID   3273290.
  7. ↑ Sato, Kosuke; Yuki, Masaki; Norasakkunkit, Vinai (2014). "A socio-ecological approach to cross-cultural differences in the sensitivity to social rejection: The partially mediating role of relational mobility". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 45 (10): 1549–1560. doi:10.1177/0022022114544320. S2CID   145394000.
  8. ↑ Sznycer, Daniel; et al. (2012). "Cross-Cultural Differences and Similarities in Proneness to Shame: An Adaptationist and Ecological Approach". Evolutionary Psychology. 10 (2): 352–370. doi:10.1177/147470491201000213. PMC   3604996 . PMID   22947644.
  9. 1 2 San Martin, Alvaro; Schug, Joanna; Maddux, William W. (2019). "Relational mobility and cultural differences in analytic and holistic thinking". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 116 (4): 495–518. doi:10.1037/pspa0000142. PMID   30614727. S2CID   58601844.
  10. ↑ Falk, Carl F.; Heine, Steven J.; Yuki, Masaki; Takemura, Kosuke (2009). "Why do Westerners self-enhance more than East Asians?". European Journal of Personality. 23 (3): 183–203. doi:10.1002/per.715. S2CID   30477227.
  11. ↑ Takemura, Kosuke (2014). "Being different leads to being connected: On the adaptive function of uniqueness in "open" societies". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 45 (10): 1579–1593. doi:10.1177/0022022114548684. S2CID   53985677.
  12. ↑ Yamada, Junko; Kito, Mie; Yuki, Masaki (2015). "Relational mobility and intimacy in friendships and romantic relationships: A cross-societal study between Canada and Japan". Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 55 (1): 18–27. doi: 10.2130/jjesp.1409 .
  13. ↑ Yamada, Junko; Kito, Mie; Yuki, Masaki (2017). "Passion, relational mobility, and proof of commitment: A comparative socio–ecological analysis of an adaptive emotion in a sexual market". Evolutionary Psychology. 15 (4). doi: 10.1177/1474704917746056 . PMC   10480844 . PMID   29237298. S2CID   9220858.
  14. ↑ Komiya, Asuka; Ohtsubo, Yohsuke; Nakanishi, Daisuke; Oishi, Shigehiro (2019). "Gift-giving in romantic couples serves as a commitment signal: Relational mobility is associated with more frequent gift-giving". Evolution and Human Behavior. 40 (2): 160–166. Bibcode:2019EHumB..40..160K. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.10.003. S2CID   149744620.
  15. ↑ Schug, Joanna; Yuki, Masaki; Maddux, William (2010). "Relational mobility explains between-and within-culture differences in self-disclosure to close friends". Psychological Science. 21 (10): 1471–1478. doi:10.1177/0956797610382786. hdl: 2115/47193 . PMID   20817913. S2CID   21074390.
  16. ↑ Yamagishi, Toshio; Yamagishi, Midori (1994). "Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan". Motivation and Emotion. 18 (2): 129–166. doi:10.1007/BF02249397. S2CID   144863790.
  17. ↑ Thomson, Robert; Yuki, Masaki; Ito, Naoya (2015). "A socio-ecological approach to national differences in online privacy concern: The role of relational mobility and trust". Computers in Human Behavior. 51: 285–292. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.068.
  18. 1 2 Talhelm, Thomas; Lee, Cheol-Sung; English, Alexander S.; Wang, Shuang (2023-11-01). "How Rice Fights Pandemics: Nature–Crop–Human Interactions Shaped COVID-19 Outcomes". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 49 (11): 1567–1586. doi:10.1177/01461672221107209. ISSN   0146-1672. PMID   35856451.
  19. ↑ Salvador, Cristina E.; Berg, Martha K.; Yu, Qinggang; San Martin, Alvaro; Kitayama, Shinobu (2020-10-01). "Relational Mobility Predicts Faster Spread of COVID-19: A 39-Country Study". Psychological Science. 31 (10): 1236–1244. doi:10.1177/0956797620958118. hdl:10171/60925. ISSN   0956-7976. PMID   32915703.
  20. ↑ Freeman, Jason D.; Schug, Joanna (2021-09-27). "Freedom to Stay-at-Home? Countries Higher in Relational Mobility Showed Decreased Geographic Mobility at the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic". Frontiers in Psychology. 12. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.648042 . ISSN   1664-1078. PMC   8502811 . PMID   34646188.
  21. ↑ Wei, Xindong; Talhelm, Thomas; Zhang, Kaili; Wang, Fengyan (2024-10-01). "When Interdependence Backfires: The Coronavirus Infected Three Times More People in Rice-Farming Areas During Chinese New Year". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 50 (10): 1471–1486. doi:10.1177/01461672231174070. ISSN   0146-1672. PMC   10200808 . PMID   37204229.
  22. ↑ Noë, Ronald; Hammerstein, Peter (1994). "Biological markets: supply and demand determine the effect of partner choice in cooperation, mutualism and mating". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 35 (1): 1–11. Bibcode:1994BEcoS..35....1N. doi:10.1007/BF00167053. S2CID   37085820.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.