Passion and Compassion: Psychology of Kin Relations Within and Beyond the Family

Park, Justin H.; Ackerman, Joshua M.

doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396690.013.0019

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 97 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kin care refers to the manner in which people manage relationships with biologically related others. Biological kinship involves a different type of interpersonal tie, characterized by unique psychological mechanisms, than the typical affiliative relationship (Park & Ackerman, 2011). From an inclusive fitness perspective (Hamilton, 1964), people should be more inclined to deliver benefits to kin than nonkin.…”

Section: Family Members: Challenge Of Kin Carementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, what matters is the aggregate success of individuals who have genes in common. Inclusive fitness refers to the mechanisms that might facilitate this aggregate success, such as those for biological kin recognition and altruism among genetic relatives (Hamilton, 1964;Lieberman, Tooby, & Cosmides, 2007;Park & Ackerman, 2011). Inclusive fitness theory does not predict that people always prefer or help their relatives; rather, it predicts that psychological mechanisms that tended to increase the reproductive success of relatives will evolve.…”

Section: Inclusive Fitnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolution and close relationships.

Griskevicius

Haselton

Ackerman

2015

APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology, Volume 3: Interpersonal Relations.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Family Members: Challenge Of Kin Carementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Inclusive Fitnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution and close relationships.

Griskevicius

Haselton

Ackerman

2015

APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology, Volume 3: Interpersonal Relations.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nor has there been a single theoretical perspective that lies beneath, or precipitates a concern with, the concept of fictive kinship. Some studies emerge from an interest in social capital (Ebaugh & Curry, ; McCarthy, Hagan, & Martin, ); some have used fictive kinship to explore exchange relationships and issues of reciprocity (Stack, ); others have drawn on evolutionary psychology to suggest that the use of kin terms is designed to induce altruism (Park & Ackerman, ; Quirko, ). Concerns with sexuality theory and an understanding of social support have also given rise to an interest in fictive kin (Barker, Herdt, & De Vries, ).…”

Section: The Problem Of Different Terms and The Goals Of This Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Fictive Kin, Families We Choose, and Voluntary Kin: What Does the Discourse Tell Us?

Nelson

2013

J of Family Theo & Revie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholarship on fictive kinship has relied on many different terminologies. I argue for a new precision. I review existing discussions and draw on those to suggest a new, experimental typology. I suggest that the typology illuminates a variety of issues, including the aspects of family that are accomplished through fictive kin. I also discuss issues surrounding fictive kinship for which no information exists but about which the typology might help make predictions.

show abstract

“…Kin and non-kin relations differ fundamentally in the extent of psychological maintenance required of them. While kin interactions are more instrumental and robust, nonkin interactions typically provide greater emotional support despite degrading quickly in the absence of constant social investment (Park and Ackerman, 2011;Roberts and Dunbar, 2011). Compared to their counterparts who scored lower on openness, individuals with higher openness tend to establish warmer relationships with their siblings (Walęcka-Matyja, 2018).…”

Section: Openness and The Social Brainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Viewing Romantic and Friendship Interactions Activate Prefrontal Regions in Persons With High Openness Personality Trait

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The personality traits we have and the closeness we experience in our relationships inevitably color the lenses through which we perceive social interactions. As such, the varying perceptions of our social relationships could indicate underlying differences in neural processes that occur in the prefrontal cortex (PFC), a brain region involved in social cognition. However, little is known of how personality traits and relationship closeness with others influence brain responses when viewing social interactions between kin (i.e., siblings) and non-kin (i.e., romantic, friends) partners. In the present study, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) was employed to investigate prefrontal cortical activation patterns in response to three 1-min mute video clips depicting a male-female couple interacting with comparably mild levels of affection while baking, exercising, and eating. The context of the interaction was manipulated by informing participants about the type of relationship each couple in the three video clips was in: (a) romantic partners, (b) friends, or (c) siblings. By changing only the contextual labels of the videos, we revealed distinct PFC responses to relationship type as a function of openness trait, closeness with romantic partner, and closeness with siblings. As openness score increased, we observed an enhanced activation of the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), the left anterior PFC (aPFC), and the right frontal eye fields (FEFs) in response to the video labeled romantic and friendship, but a reduction in these areas in the siblings condition. Similarly, individuals with higher romantic and sibling closeness showed increased activation in the IFG and dorsolateral PFC (dlPFC) in response to romantic and friendship conditions, but decreased activation in the siblings condition. Differences in PFC activations toward romantic, friendship, and sibling relationships reflect underlying variations in the cognitive processing of social interactions, depending on the personality (i.e., openness) and experiences (i.e., relationship closeness) of the individual, as well as the relationship type with which the interaction is labeled.

show abstract

Passion and Compassion: Psychology of Kin Relations Within and Beyond the Family

Cited by 8 publications

References 97 publications

Evolution and close relationships.

Evolution and close relationships.

Fictive Kin, Families We Choose, and Voluntary Kin: What Does the Discourse Tell Us?

Viewing Romantic and Friendship Interactions Activate Prefrontal Regions in Persons With High Openness Personality Trait

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About