Dynamics of Social Support for Relationships

What is it about?

Where do you get the greatest amount of support for your relationship? Does it come from your best friend that you consider to be very close to you and whom you see every day or does it come from your distant third cousin that you see once per year? Similarly, do you get more support for your relationship from your parents or your peers? Do you actively distance yourself from individuals who are unsupportive of your relationship? How do you respond to support that is ambiguous, where it is unclear exactly how much one of your friends or family members actually likes your partner and supports your relationship? This study asked people to describe the amount of social support (approval/disapproval) for their relationships that they perceive from INDIVIDUAL friends and family members. By asking the participants to describe their relationship to each individual network member and to describe how close they are to each individual, we were able to analyze how social support for relationships differs as a function of how close (psychologically, emotionally, physically) a network member is to the participant. Overall, across relationship types, individuals perceived less support for their relationship from individuals that they felt were more distant from them in their social network. Individuals in same-sex relationships perceived less support for their relationship from family members, but equal amounts of support as mixed-sex couples from their friends, potentially underscoring the ability for LGBTQ individuals to build networks of "chosen family" when family members are unsupportive of their relationships. Finally, individuals who perceived more overall social support for their relationship also reported greater relationship, mental and physical well-being. However, the strength of these associations were weaker for those in same-sex relationships, potentially demonstrating a source of resiliency for LGBTQ individuals if they are able to better withstand potentially lower levels of social support for their relationships. Potential explanations, including the role of ambiguous social support, are discussed in the paper. For example, if an individual in a same-sex relationship is able to "discount" a family member's disapproving (unsupportive) opinion of their relationship as being prejudiced, this may help to buffer the negative consequences of the lack of social support for their relationship. Conversely, if individuals are in non-marginalized relationships, they may find it harder to think of "alternative" explanations for a social network member's disapproval for their relationship, leaving them with no option but to take that disapproval as a sign that, at least in the eye's of their social network member, there is something less than ideal about their current relationship.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

This is the first article examining social support for relationships to do so from the perspective of looking at MULTIPLE individual social network members at the same time. Most research in this area uses global measures of social support for a relationship. For example, how much social support do you perceive for your relationship from your friends? From your best friend? From your parents? In addition to using global measures of social support for a relationship, this study also asked about the amount of support for the participant's relationship that the participant perceived from EACH AND EVERY member of their social network (best friend Jim, acquaintance John, mom, dad, brother, step-mom, Uncle Bobby, etc.). This method allowed for a more nuanced examination of how social support for relationships differs based on social network member type (friend, family, acquaintance), as well as how close or distant the participant perceived each individual to be within the context of their overall social network. Finally, by including individuals in same-sex and mixed-sex relationships, this study demonstrates the utility (and feasibility) of LGBTQ inclusive research methods within the relationships literature.