与家人和朋友的积极、消极和矛盾的二元组合和三元组合:个人网络研究:它们如何与年轻人的幸福感相关联

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Vera de Bel , Eric D. Widmer
{"title":"与家人和朋友的积极、消极和矛盾的二元组合和三元组合:个人网络研究:它们如何与年轻人的幸福感相关联","authors":"Vera de Bel ,&nbsp;Eric D. Widmer","doi":"10.1016/j.socnet.2024.02.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Although negative ties may cause stress and harm well-being, they are also considered fundamental in close and ongoing relationships. This study distinguishes positive, negative, and – when characterized by both valences – ambivalent ties. Analyzing almost 10,000 personal networks from the Swiss CH-X study shows that: (1) ambivalence among family members is more prevalent than among non-family members, (2) ambivalent family dyads or triads are not negatively associated with well-being, and (3) certain balanced family triads are associated with higher well-being and an unbalanced non-family triad is associated with lower well-being. These results suggest that conflicts are not necessarily detrimental to young adults’ well-being.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48353,"journal":{"name":"Social Networks","volume":"78 ","pages":"Pages 184-202"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037887332400011X/pdfft?md5=6d0c27471623ae5ecb5ad865c29a4911&pid=1-s2.0-S037887332400011X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Positive, negative, and ambivalent dyads and triads with family and friends: A personal network study on how they are associated with young adults’ well-being\",\"authors\":\"Vera de Bel ,&nbsp;Eric D. Widmer\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.socnet.2024.02.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Although negative ties may cause stress and harm well-being, they are also considered fundamental in close and ongoing relationships. This study distinguishes positive, negative, and – when characterized by both valences – ambivalent ties. Analyzing almost 10,000 personal networks from the Swiss CH-X study shows that: (1) ambivalence among family members is more prevalent than among non-family members, (2) ambivalent family dyads or triads are not negatively associated with well-being, and (3) certain balanced family triads are associated with higher well-being and an unbalanced non-family triad is associated with lower well-being. These results suggest that conflicts are not necessarily detrimental to young adults’ well-being.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48353,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Networks\",\"volume\":\"78 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 184-202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037887332400011X/pdfft?md5=6d0c27471623ae5ecb5ad865c29a4911&pid=1-s2.0-S037887332400011X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Networks\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037887332400011X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Networks","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037887332400011X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然负面纽带可能会造成压力和损害幸福感,但它们也被认为是亲密和持续关系中的基本纽带。本研究区分了积极联系、消极联系和矛盾联系(当两者都具有价值时)。通过对瑞士 CH-X 研究中的近 10,000 个个人网络进行分析,结果表明(1)家庭成员之间的矛盾关系比非家庭成员之间的矛盾关系更普遍;(2)矛盾的家庭二人组或三人组与幸福感没有负相关;(3)某些平衡的家庭三人组与较高的幸福感相关,而不平衡的非家庭三人组与较低的幸福感相关。这些结果表明,冲突并不一定会损害青少年的幸福感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Positive, negative, and ambivalent dyads and triads with family and friends: A personal network study on how they are associated with young adults’ well-being

Although negative ties may cause stress and harm well-being, they are also considered fundamental in close and ongoing relationships. This study distinguishes positive, negative, and – when characterized by both valences – ambivalent ties. Analyzing almost 10,000 personal networks from the Swiss CH-X study shows that: (1) ambivalence among family members is more prevalent than among non-family members, (2) ambivalent family dyads or triads are not negatively associated with well-being, and (3) certain balanced family triads are associated with higher well-being and an unbalanced non-family triad is associated with lower well-being. These results suggest that conflicts are not necessarily detrimental to young adults’ well-being.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Networks
Social Networks Multiple-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
12.90%
发文量
118
期刊介绍: Social Networks is an interdisciplinary and international quarterly. It provides a common forum for representatives of anthropology, sociology, history, social psychology, political science, human geography, biology, economics, communications science and other disciplines who share an interest in the study of the empirical structure of social relations and associations that may be expressed in network form. It publishes both theoretical and substantive papers. Critical reviews of major theoretical or methodological approaches using the notion of networks in the analysis of social behaviour are also included, as are reviews of recent books dealing with social networks and social structure.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信