Psychology and Enduring Relationships Essay

Introduction

Relationships are often linked with many social and psychological benefits, such as improved health, low-stress levels, a sense of belonging, and even longer life. However, these benefits can only be realized when connections last long. In line with this view and drawing on the link between the length and benefits of coupling, it is important to understand the psychology of enduring relationships to predict the extent that people stay together.

This study investigates this topic in two parts. The first one highlights attachment and cultural psychology as two theoretical predictors of enduring relationships, while the second one interrogates additional evidence from peer-reviewed journals regarding the psychology of enduring relationships and their connection with the two theoretical foundations mentioned above. In the last section of the paper, a summary of the two contextual arguments is provided.

Psychological Stances

Attachment Psychology

Holliman and Critten (2015) explained the concept of childhood attachment as a set of social and emotional relationships that a person develops with their primary caregivers during their first years of development. It stems from developmental psychology and early childhood development studies, which presuppose that childhood relationships are the foundation of adult unions (Holliman and Critten, 2015).

Stated differently, in their arguments, proponents of the attachment theory believe that infants develop bonds of attachment with their primary caregivers during their formative years and use the same basis of interaction to nurture relationships as adults (Holliman and Critten, 2015). Therefore, it is believed that infants develop fundamental ideas about intimacy and attachment in their formative years of growth (Parolin and Simonelli, 2016).

The theory of attachment also suggests that the predisposition of children to their caregiver’s control and influence during early childhood development shapes their perception of intimacy in relationships (Gabb and Fink, 2015). Therefore, based on varied childhood experiences, it is possible for partners, in the same relationship, to have different levels of intimacy. This statement explains the basis for the existence of different versions of love and friendship in society because partners may have diverse opinions about what friendship and love mean to them, subject to their needs of attachment developed during childhood (Alinejad, 2019).

Gabb and Fink (2015) use people’s diverse interpretations of emotional attachment to demonstrate that love is a “slippery” concept because it has no common definition. In other words, they suggest that although couples may invoke the concept of love at one point in their relationships, its meaning and articulation are debatable (Gabb and Fink, 2015). Relative to this assertion, Watts and McDermott (2015) say that varied interpretations of love and friendship significantly impact how people endure relationships. Therefore, conceptions of intimacy have to be understood within the framework of how partners view the attachment in relationships.

Cultural Psychology

Cultural psychology is the second basis for understanding endurance in relationships because attachment can explain how relationships evolve and are sustained within sociocultural contexts. Stated differently, a child’s interpersonal bonds that are developed during childhood may be replicated in families and across generations, thereby drawing a link between how communities view intimacy and how their members endure relationships.

Therefore, it is possible to identify causality when analysing how long people stay together. For example, diversity in parenting styles across different regions, cultures, and societies provides a broad contextual understanding of how partners endure relationships. They also draw attention to the arguments made by proponents of the attachment theory, who trace people’s conceptions and ideas of intimacy and love, to their childhood experiences (Duschinsky and Solomon, 2017; Rapoza et al., 2016). These factors predict how couples satisfy their needs for security in their childhood and adult years (Prager et al., 2019).

Cultural differences have implications on how couples endure relationships because it is difficult to sustain such unions if two people do not share the same meaning of love. This argument can be extrapolated to explain how people gift each other in relationships. While some cultures may deem gifting as an act of kindness, the feelings underlying the process are more important in predicting the level of satisfaction that partners would have in their relationships.

This is why some societies may consider a simple act of love, such as picking a rose from the garden, as more meaningful than buying a bouquet at the florist. Such variations in perceptions of love stem from people’s socialization processes that eventually influence how they endure relationships. The common understanding of love and friendships also infer the same reasoning because it is built on communication and trust between partners. Furthermore, it draws on theories of attachment and relationships, especially when deconstructing ideas of love and intimacy in a sociocultural context.

Additional Evidence

The link between attachment, culture, and adult intimacy is highlighted in many pieces of literature, such as those authored by Velotti et al. (2018), Graci and Fivush (2017), and Toft and Yip (2018). They suggest that behaviours of love and intimacy are based on the type of relationship a child was exposed to during childhood. For example, Velotti et al. (2018), Toft and Yip (2018) suggest that a person who grew up in an abusive household may tolerate the same vice from a partner because of the false belief that they are “enduring” out of love. In such a case, love is linked to abuse.

The opposite is also true because a child who grows up in a happy and loving household may not tolerate abuse as an adult. After all, it contradicts their ideas of love and intimacy in relationships. Therefore, Velotti et al. (2018), Graci and Fivush (2017) provide additional evidence showing the extent that endurance can be measured by assessing childhood conceptions of attachment.

The concept of shared time also contributes to the attachment theory because it is important for partners to set some time aside from their busy schedules to nurture their relationships. Albury and Byron (2016) support this view through their investigations of intimacy in relationships. They reinforce the position that shared time is essential in nurturing long-term relationships. Relative to this assertion, Gabb and Fink (2015) demonstrate the importance of striking a balance between work and relationship commitments because, in as much as shared time is desired, partners also need some time apart to work on personal goals. This balance creates the foundation for fulfilling and happy relationships.

Additional literature from van Lankveld et al. (2018), Denes, Afifi and Granger (2017) also supports the use of cultural conditioning as a basis for predicting endurance in long-term relationships because they say that communication is a by-product of sociocultural factors, such as religion, societal beliefs, sexual norms, intimacy and other aspects of interpersonal bonding.

These attributes reinforce long-term relationship building. Based on this reasoning, Gabb and Fink (2015) suggest that good communication is linked to the idea of “having a laugh,” which is also integral in sustaining relationships because fulfilling unions are fun. Consequently, humour is a product of good communication and it plays an integral role in deescalating conflicts among couples and building satisfactory relationships.

Lastly, Gabb and Fink (2015) also draw attention to the subjectivity of intimacy as a predictor of long-term relationships. They explain their views by highlighting the importance of practising good communication styles in sustaining long-term relationships. Stemming from this view, Monteiro and Balogun (2015) also add those in-depth conversations and casual chats between partners could help to predict how long couples endure relationships. They further argue that the closeness formed between partners (through effective communication) plays an integral role in managing the stresses of being in long-term relationships (Monteiro and Balogun, 2015). Given that communication styles are products of sociocultural conditioning, the importance of understanding the sociocultural influences of relationship-building suffice.

Conclusion

The insights provided in this paper draw attention to the need to respect diversity in understanding how people endure relationships. A link has been established between the concepts of endurance, love, and intimacy because they are predictors of lasting relationships among partners. Attachments developed during infancy have also been cited as possible predictors of how couples endure relationships. Subject to cultural influences, it can be deduced that although who and how people love is changing, the common desire to be in a relationship lives on. Such desires influence intimacy and affect how people develop trust in relationships or manage challenges that arise from them.

They also influence how partners understand the emotional and practical efforts needed to sustain long-term relationships. This is why partners from diverse backgrounds may have varied communication styles while pursuing the same goal – to be loved. Such social constructs of intimacy and love explain how relationships are sustained within each cultural context. Lastly, differences in attachment among partners also highlight communication as a possible basis for developing intimacy in relationships.

Furthermore, effective communication among partners confers the importance of time and mutual respect in relationships. Indeed, by listening to each other, couples tend to understand and reassure themselves of their love and commitment. Broadly, these findings influence how couples perceive the everyday mundanities required in making long-term relationships work.

Reference List

Albury, K. and Byron, P. (2016) ‘Safe on my phone? Same-sex attracted young people’s negotiations of intimacy, visibility, and risk on digital hook-up apps’, Social Media and Society, 2(1), pp. 1-10.

Alinejad, D. (2019) ‘Careful co-presence: the transnational mediation of emotional intimacy’, Social Media and Society, 5(3), pp. 1-10.

Denes, A., Afifi, T. D. and Granger, D. A. (2017) ‘Physiology and pillow talk: relations between testosterone and communication post-sex’, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34(3), pp. 281-308.

Duschinsky, R. and Solomon, J. (2017) ‘Infant disorganized attachment: clarifying levels of analysis’, Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 22(4), pp. 524-538.

Gabb, J. and Fink, J. (2015) Couple relationships in the 21st century. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Graci, M. E. and Fivush, R. (2017) ‘Narrative meaning-making, attachment, and psychological growth and stress’, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 34(4), pp. 486-509.

Holliman, A. and Critten, S. (2015) ‘What is the point of childhood? Early experiences and social relationships’, in Capdevila, R., Dixon, J. and Briggs, G. (eds.) Investigating psychology 2 from biological to developmental. Milton Keynes: The Open University, pp. 59-81.

Monteiro, N. M. and Balogun, S. K. (2015) ‘Psychosocial predictors of relationship conflict styles as mediated by emotional intelligence: a study of Botswana adults’, SAGE Open, 1(2), pp. 1-10.

Parolin, M. and Simonelli, A. (2016) ‘Attachment theory and maternal drug addiction: the contribution to parenting interventions’, Frontiers in Psychiatry, 7(1), pp. 152-154.

Prager, K. J. et al. (2019) ‘Withdrawal, attachment security, and recovery from conflict in couple relationships’, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(2), pp. 573-598.

Rapoza, K. A. et al. (2016) ‘Attachment as a moderating factor between social support, physical health, and psychological symptoms’, SAGE Open, 6(4), pp. 1-10.

Toft, A. and Yip, A. (2018) ‘Intimacy negotiated: the management of relationships and the construction of personal communities in the lives of bisexual women and men’, Sexualities, 21(2), pp. 233-250.

van Lankveld, J. et al. (2018) ‘The associations of intimacy and sexuality in daily life: temporal dynamics and gender effects within romantic relationships’, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35(4), pp. 557-576.

Velotti, P. et al. (2018). Exploring relationships: a systematic review on intimate partner violence and attachment. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(1), pp. 1166-1168.

Watts, S. and McDermott, V. (2015) ‘Why would I hang around with you? The psychology of personal relationships’, in Capdevila, R., Dixon, J. and Briggs, G. (eds.) Investigating psychology 2 from biological to developmental. Milton Keynes: The Open University, pp. 231-269.