男子气概、社会联系和孤独:男性社会关系和亲密关系的语境行为科学方法

IF 3.4 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Elizabeth C. Neilson, Daniel W.M. Maitland
{"title":"男子气概、社会联系和孤独:男性社会关系和亲密关系的语境行为科学方法","authors":"Elizabeth C. Neilson,&nbsp;Daniel W.M. Maitland","doi":"10.1016/j.jcbs.2025.100892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Loneliness—the discrepancy between actual and desired levels of social connection—is a pervasive public health concern. Research suggests that many men report loneliness and desire more intimate relationships. The Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy posits that intimacy, the meaningful connection between two individuals, is a critical variable in preventing loneliness and develops through a bidirectional process of vulnerable self-disclosure, responsiveness, and perceived partner responsiveness. This manuscript applies the Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy, as interpreted from a contextual behavior science lens, to contextualize the existing research on masculinity and men's social relationships to inform future research and clinical practice. We review the research on men's engagement in different components of the model (vulnerable self-disclosure, responsiveness, perceived partner responsiveness), emphasizing how masculinity informs men's behavior. Research indicates that men often do not engage in behaviors essential to a contextual behavioral model of intimacy (e.g., vulnerable emotions, distress, or asking for help) because such behaviors are inconsistent with masculinity. Research also indicates men often do not acknowledge others' disclosures or respond with judgment or confusion. Men may also perceive responsiveness as stressful due to social proscriptions regarding receiving help. We discuss implications for research and clinical interventions to ameliorate men's loneliness.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","volume":"36 ","pages":"Article 100892"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Masculinity, social connection, and loneliness: A contextual behavioral science approach to men's social relationships and intimacy\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth C. Neilson,&nbsp;Daniel W.M. Maitland\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcbs.2025.100892\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Loneliness—the discrepancy between actual and desired levels of social connection—is a pervasive public health concern. Research suggests that many men report loneliness and desire more intimate relationships. The Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy posits that intimacy, the meaningful connection between two individuals, is a critical variable in preventing loneliness and develops through a bidirectional process of vulnerable self-disclosure, responsiveness, and perceived partner responsiveness. This manuscript applies the Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy, as interpreted from a contextual behavior science lens, to contextualize the existing research on masculinity and men's social relationships to inform future research and clinical practice. We review the research on men's engagement in different components of the model (vulnerable self-disclosure, responsiveness, perceived partner responsiveness), emphasizing how masculinity informs men's behavior. Research indicates that men often do not engage in behaviors essential to a contextual behavioral model of intimacy (e.g., vulnerable emotions, distress, or asking for help) because such behaviors are inconsistent with masculinity. Research also indicates men often do not acknowledge others' disclosures or respond with judgment or confusion. Men may also perceive responsiveness as stressful due to social proscriptions regarding receiving help. We discuss implications for research and clinical interventions to ameliorate men's loneliness.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47544,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science\",\"volume\":\"36 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100892\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144725000237\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144725000237","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

孤独——实际与期望的社会联系水平之间的差异——是一个普遍存在的公共健康问题。研究表明,许多男性感到孤独,渴望更亲密的关系。亲密关系的人际过程模型认为,亲密关系是两个人之间有意义的联系,是预防孤独的关键变量,它是通过脆弱的自我表露、回应和感知伴侣回应的双向过程发展起来的。本文运用亲密关系的人际过程模型,从情境行为科学的角度进行解释,将现有的关于男性气质和男性社会关系的研究背景化,为未来的研究和临床实践提供信息。我们回顾了男性参与模型的不同组成部分(脆弱的自我披露、反应性、感知伴侣反应性)的研究,强调了男子气概如何影响男性的行为。研究表明,男性通常不会做出与亲密关系的情境行为模式相关的行为(例如,脆弱的情绪、痛苦或寻求帮助),因为这些行为与男子气概不符。研究还表明,男性通常不承认他人的信息披露,也不会做出判断或困惑的回应。男性也可能认为反应性是一种压力,因为在接受帮助方面受到社会的排斥。我们讨论了改善男性孤独感的研究和临床干预的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Masculinity, social connection, and loneliness: A contextual behavioral science approach to men's social relationships and intimacy
Loneliness—the discrepancy between actual and desired levels of social connection—is a pervasive public health concern. Research suggests that many men report loneliness and desire more intimate relationships. The Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy posits that intimacy, the meaningful connection between two individuals, is a critical variable in preventing loneliness and develops through a bidirectional process of vulnerable self-disclosure, responsiveness, and perceived partner responsiveness. This manuscript applies the Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy, as interpreted from a contextual behavior science lens, to contextualize the existing research on masculinity and men's social relationships to inform future research and clinical practice. We review the research on men's engagement in different components of the model (vulnerable self-disclosure, responsiveness, perceived partner responsiveness), emphasizing how masculinity informs men's behavior. Research indicates that men often do not engage in behaviors essential to a contextual behavioral model of intimacy (e.g., vulnerable emotions, distress, or asking for help) because such behaviors are inconsistent with masculinity. Research also indicates men often do not acknowledge others' disclosures or respond with judgment or confusion. Men may also perceive responsiveness as stressful due to social proscriptions regarding receiving help. We discuss implications for research and clinical interventions to ameliorate men's loneliness.
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
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
18.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
61 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science is the official journal of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS). Contextual Behavioral Science is a systematic and pragmatic approach to the understanding of behavior, the solution of human problems, and the promotion of human growth and development. Contextual Behavioral Science uses functional principles and theories to analyze and modify action embedded in its historical and situational context. The goal is to predict and influence behavior, with precision, scope, and depth, across all behavioral domains and all levels of analysis, so as to help create a behavioral science that is more adequate to the challenge of the human condition.
×
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