to know from kellas (2010) tie b/w intergen. narrat’s & future relat. schemas be able to...
TRANSCRIPT
To Know from Kellas (2010)
• Tie b/w intergen. narrat’s & future Relat. Schemas• Be able to provide examples of each subtype w/i
the 4 main Memorable Message supratypes:– Value Self (4 subtypes: independ&time, self-esteem&don’tsettle,
progressive sex/rel views, more than 1)
– Charac’s of good rel. (5 subs: good qual’s, behav expect, emot/intim expect, homogamy, extend family)
– Warnings (3 subs: general, pers regret, judg/expect females)
– Sanctity of love (2 subs: virgin&morals, the “one”)
• 3 main implications drawn from results Discussed
CIRCUMPLEX MODEL (Olson, 2000)
Patterns & Environment
• Largely based on Cohesion/Flexibility dimension of family systems theory
• COHESION– Ability to
• FLEXIBILITY– Ability to
How to ID a Family System TYPE• COHESION
– Emotional bonding twrd one another• FLEXIBILITY
– Amount of change in leadership, roles, rules• COMMUNICATION
– Group norms • Listening• Speaking• Clarity• Self-disclosure• Continuity-tracking (meta-comm.)• Respect• Regard
• COMMUNICATION!– Continuum: Open to Closed (same as boundary permeability
covered next lecture)
COHESION types/levels•
– Extreme, emotional separateness & Little involvement b/w– Lot of personal separateness & indep. – Indiv’s “do their own thing” & have separate interests
• – Some emot. separateness but not as extreme – Time apart important, but some together & some joint decision-making– Activities/interests generally separate but few are shared
• – Some emot closeness & loyalty– Time together more important than time apart; Emphasis on togetherness– Separate friends, but also shared
• – Extreme emot closeness & loyalty demanded; Indiv’s very depend & reactive– General lack of personal separateness & little privacy permitted– Energy of indiv’s mainly focused inside family & few outside friends/interests
Olson (2006)
• Balanced• Rigidly Cohesive• Midrange• Flexibly Unbalanced• Chaotically Disengaged• Unbalanced
Family flexibility has four levels
• Chaotic
• Flexible
• Structured
• Rigid
Rigidly Enmeshed
• Strictly enforce • Negotiations are • Rules are • Roles are • Little separation of self• Time together & little private space• Few outside friends• Decisions made by the whole not individual
Chaotically Disengaged
• Little • Limited • Impulsive decision making• Little • Frequently • Emotional • Low • Private space • Individual friendships
But….
• Studies show these things are
• They’re
Family Communication Patterns(Chaffee et al., 1971)
• – Values open, controversial discussion– Kids stimulated to express ideas, even if disagree
• – Stresses mainten. of harmony & IP relations– Kids encouraged to avoid controversy & repress anger
• Pros?• Cons?