Transcript how you think about friendship

Inequity in Empathic Support
Between Cross-Sex Friends
Perception or Reality?
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to explore the
empathic inequity reported by women in their
close, cross-sex relationships.
How do the perceptions of cross-sex
friendships and relational exclusivity
influence the under benefitted/over
benefitted dichotomy expressed between
the sexes when communicating support?
What is gender based “empathic
inequity?”
Among married couples, it is known as
“the support gap.”
A situation in which husbands report
receiving more support and helpful
support from their wives than wives
report receiving from their husbands.
Perception or reality?
Research indicates that there are no gender
differences in seeking or providing support.
That’s the reality.
However, some researchers and lay persons
cling to the heuristic that men and women
do support communication differently
because men and women are different.
That’s the perception.
Where might the perception
come from?
• Expecting (and being willing to provide)
different communication in specific
relational contexts
• Pursuing different individual and
relationship goals related to those
specific relational contexts
Let’s define some terms
• Specific relationship contexts means how
you think about friendship (strictly
platonic, potential for romance, “friends
with benefits”)
• Different communication refers the
communication behaviors used to
maintain a friendship (emotional support
and positivity and instrumental support)
Pursuing Relationship Goals
• For women—enjoying “nice guy”
companionship
• For men—exploring the potential for
sexual/romantic involvement
Balance Individual Goals
Emotional bond challenge—high social
investment with no/low sexual involvement
Sexual challenge—high/moderate sexual
involvement with no/low emotional
investment
Research Design
Social exchange approach—cost/benefit analysis
of relationship vs. individual goals
What motivates men not to offer empathic
support in a strictly platonic cross-sex
friendship?
What motivates women to continue providing
empathic support in a strictly platonic crosssex friendship?
Bibliography
Afifi, W. A. & Faulkner, S. L. (2000). On being ‘just
friends’: The frequency and impact of sexual activity in
cross-sex friendships. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 17(2), 205-222.
Guerrero, L. K. & Chavez, A. M. (2005). Relational
maintenance in cross-sex friendships characterized by
different types of romantic intent: An exploratory study.
Western Journal of Communication, 69(4), 339-358.
Messman, S. J., Canary, D. J. & Hause, K. S.
(2000). Motives to remain platonic, equity, and the use of
maintenance strategies in opposite-sex friendships.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(1), 67-94.
Bibliography
O’Meara, J. D. (1989). Cross-sex friendship: Four
basic challenges of an ignored relationship. Sex Roles,
21(7/8), 525-543.
Rawlins, W. K. (1993). Communication in cross-sex
friendships. In L. P. Arliss and D. J. Borisoff Women & men
communicating: Challenges and changes, (pp. 51-70) Fort
Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.