论文部分内容阅读
[Abstract] Interpersonal relationship plays an important part in all human beings’ life. It goes without saying that no one can live all by himself and have no relation with others, whether he is a Chinese or a westerner. My thesis is about the comparison of Chinese and western interpersonal relationships. Both Chinese and westerners have their own styles and characters of interpersonal relationships and they cannot be simply identified by good or bad. In order to build a more harmonious interpersonal relationship, Chinese and westerners should learn from each other.
[Key words] interpersonal relationships Chinese western comparison
1. Introduction
Interpersonal relationship plays an important part in all human beings’ life. It goes without saying that no one can live all by himself and have no relation with others, whether he is a Chinese or westerner. My thesis is about The Comparison of Chinese and western interpersonal relationships. There are many issues concerned in this subject, such as relationships inside a family; between friends; and relationships in workplaces and so on. There are some talks about interpersonal relationship. Susan Dellinger, a professor in New York states the main three factors irrelevant to interpersonal relationships: key interpersonal relationship, professional relationship and casual acquaintances. This paper mainly adopts two simple approaches of research-analysis and example and they are all through the whole process.
2. The definition of interpersonal relationships
Interpersonal relationship can be defined as a way of communication. In so doing, we would examine how many people are involved, how physically close they are to one another, how many sensory channels are used, and the feedback provided. Interpersonal communication differs from other forms of communication in that there are few participants involved, the interactions are in close physical proximity to each other, there are many sensory channels used, and feedback is immediate. An important point to note about the contextual definition is that it does not take into account the relationship between the interactions. Some researchers have proposed an alternative way of defining interpersonal communication. This is called the developmental view. From this view, interpersonal communication is defined as communication that occurs between people who have known each other for some time
3. Types of interpersonal relationships
Family
There are 4 characteristics of Families: a) Defined roles. Members understand the roles each of them serves. b) Recognition of responsibilities. Members realize that each person has certain responsibilities to the relationship. c) Shared history and future. Members have an interactional past and an anticipated future together. d) Shared living space. Generally, members live together.
Friendship
The types of friendships are: a) Reciprocity, characterized by loyalty, self-sacrifice, mutual affection, and generosity. b) Receptivity, characterized by a comfortable and positive imbalance in the giving and receiving of rewards; each person’s needs are satisfied by the exchange. c) Association, a transitory relationship, more like a friendly relationship than a true friendship. Friendships serve a variety of needs and give us a variety of values, among which are the values of utility, affirmation, ego-support, stimulation, and security. Friendship demands vary between collectivist and individualist cultures. Women share more and are more intimate with same-sex friends than are men. Men’s friendships are often built around shared activities rather than shared intimacies.
4. Theories of Interpersonal Relationships
According to Roberta Gilbert, social psychology has several approaches to the subject of interpersonal relationships, among them closure and also trust, as trust between parties can be mutual. This may lead to enduring relationships. Social exchange theory interprets relationships in terms of exchanged benefits. The way people feel about relationships will be influenced by the rewards of the relationship, as well as rewards they may potentially receive in alternate relationships. Systemic coaching analyzes relationships as expressions of our human need to love and be loved. Relationships can be confused by transferences, entanglements and substitution. Systemic coaching offers solutions for many relationship difficulties. Equity theory is based on criticism of social exchange theory. Proponents argue that people care more than just maximizing rewards; they also want fairness and equity in their relationships. Relational dialectics is based on the idea that a relationship is not a static entity. Instead, a relationship is a continuing process, always changing. There is constant tension as three main issues are negotiated: autonomy vs. connection, novelty vs. predictability, and openness vs. closeness.
5. The comparison of Chinese and western interpersonal relationships
Family relationships
In U.S. couples, wives play a key role in maintaining the emotional climate of the relationship and are concerned about and monitor the degree to which the members of the couple are attending to their relationship. Among Chinese couples, wives traditionally have left their families of origin to become part of their husband’s family, and their personal values (and standards) may be more subjugated to those of the husband. Chinese society has a longer and more consistent history of being hierarchical, with females valued less than males from birth. Even though Chinese women’s status is improving and many couples now report egalitarian decision making, gender roles are in flux in China, and it is not surprising that many individuals see a need for exercising power as partners struggle to define their degrees of influence with each other. Chinese partners place their own needs over the welfare of the relationship. Indeed, Chinese couples did not differ from U.S. couples in standards for egalitarian outcomes in decision making suggests that Chinese couples may differentiate more than U.S. couples do between the process of trying to influence each other versus the outcome of having a relationship that is equitable overall. The Chinese couples also held stronger standards than the U.S. couples for sharing values, instrumental investment in one’s relationship, and efforts to make their relationships perfect, consistent with prior research indicating a Chinese cultural emphasis on collectivist values, including harmony and devotion to the family. Thus the control strategies that Chinese partners believe it is acceptable to use with each other may not be viewed as incompatible with investment in the relationship and overall marital harmony.
As to couple consensus, Chinese couples have less than U.S. couples on degree of boundaries around their relationship might reflect rapid changes in family structure within China, with increasing numbers of couples developing autonomy from their families of origin. The Chinese couples’ lower consensus on sharing time together may be due to increasing demands that partners’ jobs and opportunities for further education (including abroad) place on the time that they can spend together, as China and its economy grow rapidly. For many Chinese couples there is a conflict between traditional collectivist valuing of family relationships and pressures to pursue education and jobs that take one away from the family. Evidence of the strength of this potential conflict can be found in the greater consensus we found among Chinese couples than among U.S. couples on standards for seeking perfection in the relationship, a reflection of the high value still placed on quality of the couple and family relationships in Chinese society (Zheng Yongting, 1988).
Friendships
Friendship, which consists of mutual love, trust, respect, and unconditional acceptance, and usually implies the discovery or establishment of common ground between the individuals involved. Friendship based on utility. Utility is an impermanent thing: it changes according to circumstances. So with the disappearance of the ground for friendship, the friendship also breaks up, because that was what kept it alive. Friendships of this kind seem to occur most frequently between the elderly (because at their age what they want is not pleasure but utility) and those in middle or early life who are pursuing their own advantage. Such persons do not spend much time together, because sometimes they do not even like one another, and therefore feel no need of such an association unless they are mutually useful. For they take pleasure in each other’s company only in so far as they have hopes of advantage from it. Friendship based on pleasure. Friendship between the young is thought to be grounded on pleasure, because the lives of the young are regulated by their feelings, and their chief interest is in their own pleasure and the opportunity of the moment. With advancing years, however, their tastes change too, so that they are quick to make and to break friendships; because their affection changes just as the things that please them do and this sort of pleasure changes rapidly. “Perfect friendship is based on goodness. Only the friendship of those who are good, and similar in their goodness, is perfect. For these people each alike wish good for the other good, and they are good in themselves. And it is those who desire the good of their friends for the friends’ sake that are most truly friends, because each loves the other for what he is, and not for any incidental quality. Accordingly the friendship of such men lasts so long as they remain good; and goodness is an enduring quality (Kathleen M. Galvin& Pamela J. Cooper, 2003).
Here, there are some differences about the understanding of friendship based on Chinese and western contexts. According to Emily Post, Western people apologize to their friends over things like asking for help in some small matter or telephone calls late at night. And they tend to use polite forms such as ‘could you’ and ‘would you’ even with their friends. To the Chinese ear, westerners may sound cold and distant, however, they fell perfect friendly. On the contrary, Chinese people consider it’s a duty to help a friend in need and make requests to their friends directly as well as address those they know quite well in a very direct way. To the westerners’ ear, Chinese people may sound rude and demanding when they intend to sound friendly. Even they are intimate friends, the westerners don’t share with each other some private information, such as love affairs, salaries and financial states. It’s an unwritten rule that such questions shouldn’t be asked. However, the situation is quite the opposite in China. It seems there isn’t any thing that couldn’t be shared between friends. If people have to keep something a secret from their friends, they even feel guilty. In traditional Chinese friendships, there is no privacy.
The typical characters of Chinese relationships in workplace
Gift-giving is very common in China and in fact, the boundary between bribery and gift-giving is unclear in workplace. For example, it’s very common for teachers to pay bribes to the principals of the school where they hoped to be assigned. In order to be assigned to a particular community, the teacher would have to part with money, and some form of words is used so that it doesn’t seem like a bribe, but effectively they would pay for the pleasure of being assigned to a particular community. This was not such an unusual practice, but, strictly speaking, that is a case of corruption. To some extend, gift-giving should not be blamed in China. “On the one hand, there is a strong feeling that the people you really know--for example, your family or friends--are the people you can trust. At the same time, there is the problem that these are also the people from whom it is very hard to make a profit. This creates a slightly awkward situation when it comes to doing business. In fact the approach to anonymity in business relationships is quite a complicated, because there are some contradictions built into the morality of exchange” (Huang Huaxin & Zhu Fazhen, 1995).
The typical characters of western relationships in workplace
According to Modern Human Relations at Work which was written by Hodgetts, the idea was issued that in the current U.S. service and knowledge-based economy, information has replaced tangible resources as a measure of power and is the fundamental ingredient in today’s organizations. With more than half of the U.S. labor force involved in the processing of information, individuals with the best access to information, and organizations with the most well-informed employees, are the most likely to succeed. Supervisor-subordinate relationship quality was positively related to both the amount and quality of information employees received from their immediate supervisor.
The Similarity that Chinese and Western Share in Working Place
The boss is very important.“Like all relationships in life, the ones you develop at work can be mutually beneficial if handled with a genuine interest and sincere approach. The key is to nurture these relationships with the respect they deserve because you never know what door of opportunity a successful relationship can open. Possibly the most important relationship you will develop, your boss can play many key roles in your career development. Your boss can entrust you with the next big account, recommend you for that promotion you’ve been hoping for, give you that much needed salary increase and be a sounding board for new ideas or tough decisions. You should try to learn something about your boss’ personal life, hobbies and interests, it helps your career’s development a lot ( Judith Rich Harris, 2005).
6. Conclusion
Interpersonal relationships are social associations, connections, or affiliations between two or more people. It should also be notified that the Chinese culture has absorbed a lot of the western traditions that have influenced them. As changes occurred in China, many Chinese embraced all the new things that came in with the growing Western influence. On the reverse, many Chinese outside of China are actually turning their attentions back to these traditional festivities. It is seen as a way to connect with their roots. So, interpersonal relationship works for both of Chinese and westerns.
Reference:
[1] Aiken, Lewis R.Human Differences.New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc Inc, 1999.
[2] Dellinger, Susan.Psychogeometrics: How to Use Geometric Psychology to Influence People. New York: Prentice Hall Direct, 1989.
[3] Harris, Judith Rich.No Two Alike: Human Nature And Human Individuality. New York: Norton & Co Inc, 2010.
[4] 黃华新,朱法贞. 现代人际关系. 浙江:浙江大学出版社,1995.
[5] 臧乐源,陈承镶. 人际关系学. 天津:天津人民出版社,1990.
[Key words] interpersonal relationships Chinese western comparison
1. Introduction
Interpersonal relationship plays an important part in all human beings’ life. It goes without saying that no one can live all by himself and have no relation with others, whether he is a Chinese or westerner. My thesis is about The Comparison of Chinese and western interpersonal relationships. There are many issues concerned in this subject, such as relationships inside a family; between friends; and relationships in workplaces and so on. There are some talks about interpersonal relationship. Susan Dellinger, a professor in New York states the main three factors irrelevant to interpersonal relationships: key interpersonal relationship, professional relationship and casual acquaintances. This paper mainly adopts two simple approaches of research-analysis and example and they are all through the whole process.
2. The definition of interpersonal relationships
Interpersonal relationship can be defined as a way of communication. In so doing, we would examine how many people are involved, how physically close they are to one another, how many sensory channels are used, and the feedback provided. Interpersonal communication differs from other forms of communication in that there are few participants involved, the interactions are in close physical proximity to each other, there are many sensory channels used, and feedback is immediate. An important point to note about the contextual definition is that it does not take into account the relationship between the interactions. Some researchers have proposed an alternative way of defining interpersonal communication. This is called the developmental view. From this view, interpersonal communication is defined as communication that occurs between people who have known each other for some time
3. Types of interpersonal relationships
Family
There are 4 characteristics of Families: a) Defined roles. Members understand the roles each of them serves. b) Recognition of responsibilities. Members realize that each person has certain responsibilities to the relationship. c) Shared history and future. Members have an interactional past and an anticipated future together. d) Shared living space. Generally, members live together.
Friendship
The types of friendships are: a) Reciprocity, characterized by loyalty, self-sacrifice, mutual affection, and generosity. b) Receptivity, characterized by a comfortable and positive imbalance in the giving and receiving of rewards; each person’s needs are satisfied by the exchange. c) Association, a transitory relationship, more like a friendly relationship than a true friendship. Friendships serve a variety of needs and give us a variety of values, among which are the values of utility, affirmation, ego-support, stimulation, and security. Friendship demands vary between collectivist and individualist cultures. Women share more and are more intimate with same-sex friends than are men. Men’s friendships are often built around shared activities rather than shared intimacies.
4. Theories of Interpersonal Relationships
According to Roberta Gilbert, social psychology has several approaches to the subject of interpersonal relationships, among them closure and also trust, as trust between parties can be mutual. This may lead to enduring relationships. Social exchange theory interprets relationships in terms of exchanged benefits. The way people feel about relationships will be influenced by the rewards of the relationship, as well as rewards they may potentially receive in alternate relationships. Systemic coaching analyzes relationships as expressions of our human need to love and be loved. Relationships can be confused by transferences, entanglements and substitution. Systemic coaching offers solutions for many relationship difficulties. Equity theory is based on criticism of social exchange theory. Proponents argue that people care more than just maximizing rewards; they also want fairness and equity in their relationships. Relational dialectics is based on the idea that a relationship is not a static entity. Instead, a relationship is a continuing process, always changing. There is constant tension as three main issues are negotiated: autonomy vs. connection, novelty vs. predictability, and openness vs. closeness.
5. The comparison of Chinese and western interpersonal relationships
Family relationships
In U.S. couples, wives play a key role in maintaining the emotional climate of the relationship and are concerned about and monitor the degree to which the members of the couple are attending to their relationship. Among Chinese couples, wives traditionally have left their families of origin to become part of their husband’s family, and their personal values (and standards) may be more subjugated to those of the husband. Chinese society has a longer and more consistent history of being hierarchical, with females valued less than males from birth. Even though Chinese women’s status is improving and many couples now report egalitarian decision making, gender roles are in flux in China, and it is not surprising that many individuals see a need for exercising power as partners struggle to define their degrees of influence with each other. Chinese partners place their own needs over the welfare of the relationship. Indeed, Chinese couples did not differ from U.S. couples in standards for egalitarian outcomes in decision making suggests that Chinese couples may differentiate more than U.S. couples do between the process of trying to influence each other versus the outcome of having a relationship that is equitable overall. The Chinese couples also held stronger standards than the U.S. couples for sharing values, instrumental investment in one’s relationship, and efforts to make their relationships perfect, consistent with prior research indicating a Chinese cultural emphasis on collectivist values, including harmony and devotion to the family. Thus the control strategies that Chinese partners believe it is acceptable to use with each other may not be viewed as incompatible with investment in the relationship and overall marital harmony.
As to couple consensus, Chinese couples have less than U.S. couples on degree of boundaries around their relationship might reflect rapid changes in family structure within China, with increasing numbers of couples developing autonomy from their families of origin. The Chinese couples’ lower consensus on sharing time together may be due to increasing demands that partners’ jobs and opportunities for further education (including abroad) place on the time that they can spend together, as China and its economy grow rapidly. For many Chinese couples there is a conflict between traditional collectivist valuing of family relationships and pressures to pursue education and jobs that take one away from the family. Evidence of the strength of this potential conflict can be found in the greater consensus we found among Chinese couples than among U.S. couples on standards for seeking perfection in the relationship, a reflection of the high value still placed on quality of the couple and family relationships in Chinese society (Zheng Yongting, 1988).
Friendships
Friendship, which consists of mutual love, trust, respect, and unconditional acceptance, and usually implies the discovery or establishment of common ground between the individuals involved. Friendship based on utility. Utility is an impermanent thing: it changes according to circumstances. So with the disappearance of the ground for friendship, the friendship also breaks up, because that was what kept it alive. Friendships of this kind seem to occur most frequently between the elderly (because at their age what they want is not pleasure but utility) and those in middle or early life who are pursuing their own advantage. Such persons do not spend much time together, because sometimes they do not even like one another, and therefore feel no need of such an association unless they are mutually useful. For they take pleasure in each other’s company only in so far as they have hopes of advantage from it. Friendship based on pleasure. Friendship between the young is thought to be grounded on pleasure, because the lives of the young are regulated by their feelings, and their chief interest is in their own pleasure and the opportunity of the moment. With advancing years, however, their tastes change too, so that they are quick to make and to break friendships; because their affection changes just as the things that please them do and this sort of pleasure changes rapidly. “Perfect friendship is based on goodness. Only the friendship of those who are good, and similar in their goodness, is perfect. For these people each alike wish good for the other good, and they are good in themselves. And it is those who desire the good of their friends for the friends’ sake that are most truly friends, because each loves the other for what he is, and not for any incidental quality. Accordingly the friendship of such men lasts so long as they remain good; and goodness is an enduring quality (Kathleen M. Galvin& Pamela J. Cooper, 2003).
Here, there are some differences about the understanding of friendship based on Chinese and western contexts. According to Emily Post, Western people apologize to their friends over things like asking for help in some small matter or telephone calls late at night. And they tend to use polite forms such as ‘could you’ and ‘would you’ even with their friends. To the Chinese ear, westerners may sound cold and distant, however, they fell perfect friendly. On the contrary, Chinese people consider it’s a duty to help a friend in need and make requests to their friends directly as well as address those they know quite well in a very direct way. To the westerners’ ear, Chinese people may sound rude and demanding when they intend to sound friendly. Even they are intimate friends, the westerners don’t share with each other some private information, such as love affairs, salaries and financial states. It’s an unwritten rule that such questions shouldn’t be asked. However, the situation is quite the opposite in China. It seems there isn’t any thing that couldn’t be shared between friends. If people have to keep something a secret from their friends, they even feel guilty. In traditional Chinese friendships, there is no privacy.
The typical characters of Chinese relationships in workplace
Gift-giving is very common in China and in fact, the boundary between bribery and gift-giving is unclear in workplace. For example, it’s very common for teachers to pay bribes to the principals of the school where they hoped to be assigned. In order to be assigned to a particular community, the teacher would have to part with money, and some form of words is used so that it doesn’t seem like a bribe, but effectively they would pay for the pleasure of being assigned to a particular community. This was not such an unusual practice, but, strictly speaking, that is a case of corruption. To some extend, gift-giving should not be blamed in China. “On the one hand, there is a strong feeling that the people you really know--for example, your family or friends--are the people you can trust. At the same time, there is the problem that these are also the people from whom it is very hard to make a profit. This creates a slightly awkward situation when it comes to doing business. In fact the approach to anonymity in business relationships is quite a complicated, because there are some contradictions built into the morality of exchange” (Huang Huaxin & Zhu Fazhen, 1995).
The typical characters of western relationships in workplace
According to Modern Human Relations at Work which was written by Hodgetts, the idea was issued that in the current U.S. service and knowledge-based economy, information has replaced tangible resources as a measure of power and is the fundamental ingredient in today’s organizations. With more than half of the U.S. labor force involved in the processing of information, individuals with the best access to information, and organizations with the most well-informed employees, are the most likely to succeed. Supervisor-subordinate relationship quality was positively related to both the amount and quality of information employees received from their immediate supervisor.
The Similarity that Chinese and Western Share in Working Place
The boss is very important.“Like all relationships in life, the ones you develop at work can be mutually beneficial if handled with a genuine interest and sincere approach. The key is to nurture these relationships with the respect they deserve because you never know what door of opportunity a successful relationship can open. Possibly the most important relationship you will develop, your boss can play many key roles in your career development. Your boss can entrust you with the next big account, recommend you for that promotion you’ve been hoping for, give you that much needed salary increase and be a sounding board for new ideas or tough decisions. You should try to learn something about your boss’ personal life, hobbies and interests, it helps your career’s development a lot ( Judith Rich Harris, 2005).
6. Conclusion
Interpersonal relationships are social associations, connections, or affiliations between two or more people. It should also be notified that the Chinese culture has absorbed a lot of the western traditions that have influenced them. As changes occurred in China, many Chinese embraced all the new things that came in with the growing Western influence. On the reverse, many Chinese outside of China are actually turning their attentions back to these traditional festivities. It is seen as a way to connect with their roots. So, interpersonal relationship works for both of Chinese and westerns.
Reference:
[1] Aiken, Lewis R.Human Differences.New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc Inc, 1999.
[2] Dellinger, Susan.Psychogeometrics: How to Use Geometric Psychology to Influence People. New York: Prentice Hall Direct, 1989.
[3] Harris, Judith Rich.No Two Alike: Human Nature And Human Individuality. New York: Norton & Co Inc, 2010.
[4] 黃华新,朱法贞. 现代人际关系. 浙江:浙江大学出版社,1995.
[5] 臧乐源,陈承镶. 人际关系学. 天津:天津人民出版社,1990.