Come join me!

Come join me at: https://darciedixon.wordpress.com/

On why your girlfriend hates me

It might be hardwired into us to be suspicious of, or dislike, close friends of our significant other who are the same gender as us. 

According to my very scientific survey of the internet, there seems to be lots of articles out there on why girlfriends hate their boyfriend’s female friends, or boyfriends being uncomfortable about their girlfriend’s close male friends (and all the LGBTQ equivalents).

Apparently, the argument goes that the close friend of your boyfriend or girlfriend presents a risk to your relationship because of supposed underlying or residual feelings on the part of your significant other or the friend. These supposed feelings pose a risk to your own relationship, regardless of whether you end up forming a friendship with your significant other’s close friend or not (which can be done to build trust).

Do we live in a world where the close friends of our significant other are waiting ready to pounce when we stop watching – and monogamy means nothing – or is there something else going on here?

Identity Threat. Identity threat is an experience that you perceive to signify potential harm to the value, meaning, or enactment of your identity. Threats to your identity can be very unsettling, and can cause people to respond in all kinds of seemingly irrational ways. Identity threats are also associated with lowered self-esteem, resistance to change, and stigmatiszation.

An individual’s identity is a complex thing – people form identities over time and often in relation to group-membership roles and unique characteristics. Some identities are involuntary (race or eye colour), but most are voluntary (in a serious relationship with so-and-so). Our identity is intrinsically tied to our psychological well-being, defining an identity positively is tied with our self-worth. On the flip side, taking hits to an identity can lead to serious negative consequences.

A threat to an identity can take a couple of different forms.

• It can be something that devalues an identity in the future (ex. “people from this town tend to be stupid”). 
• It can be something that makes the association between an identity and its meaning unsustainable in the future (ex. when an artisan baker is forced to work on an assembly line making the same things day after day rather than applying the artistic talents normally associated with ‘artisan’).  
• It can be something that prevents someone from enacting their identity (ex. a chronic illness).
  

I am suggesting that your boyfriend’s close female friend could be an identity threat… and that’s why you don’t like her.

Why the close friend is an identity threat:  

I see two major reasons. The first being that your significant other has a list of qualities he/she likes and doesn’t like in people. As a result, I’d wager this close friend has some of the same qualities that you have. The similarities feel like more direct competition.[1] The second reason is that this close friend directly threatens the enactment of your relationship. Enactment here refers to the special connection two people have together – knowing each other’s preferences, shared memories, same community of family and friends. There will also be a similar body of knowledge and a connection with a close friend – maybe they have been a friend from childhood, they know and share in a passion of your boyfriend/girlfriend, a close friend is there to listen when the boyfriend/girlfriend is having a tough time. These are things that, by virtue of them taking place with the close friend, are not always taking place with just you. It threatens the enactment of your relationship, but it also potentially threatens the meaning and value. If your boyfriend/girlfriend can have this special connection with someone else, is yours really special?

There are a couple of tactics associated with identity threat that could translate into behaviour. Let me list them, and you can judge if you’ve seen this happen before:

• Derogation. To protect your identity as a couple, it’s possible to discredit the source of the threat, diminishing the potential harm. This has been observed in competitive situations, and helps an individual cope with a potentially negative identity. This might take the form of: smack-talking the close friend, pointing out their flaws, embarrassing them in a group setting, etc. 
• Identity-enhancing. This is when an individual presents identity-enhancing information, often in an attempt to change the attitude of the individuals or groups who are the source of the threat. This is done in an effort to boost their identity in the face of the threat, creating distinction between oneself and the negative identity. This might take the form of: boasting in front of the significant other, boasting in front of the close friend, doing things that get the significant other’s attention whenever the friend is around or mentioned.  
• Other responses: making friends with the close friend, intensifying the couple-relationship, or breaking up. Making better friends with the close friend can create the illusion of trust. We would feel slightly more confident that he/she wouldn’t make a move because he/she would then be making a transgression against you as a friend. Intensifying the couple-relationship could also happen – creating closer bonds with the significant other also increases trust (getting engaged, getting a pet, moving in together, etc.) as the significant other would have more to lose if they transgressed. Finally, breaking up. This is doing away with the couple identity altogether.
  

Have you seen people react that way before – or have you yourself done this? 

It might not be your girlfriend’s fault that she hates me. I probably didn’t do anything to deserve it either. Just my mere presence might be enough to act as an identity threat.

Here is some helpful advice for you to contemplate:

• Boundaries: make it clear to your significant other that there are some topics and memories that are special to just the two of you. Perhaps you both enjoy watching Scrubs on a Sunday night, or book a trip just the two of you where you’ll have those shared memories. Create positive distinctiveness surrounding the core of the couple-identity. 
• Emotion-recognition: understand that you might be hardwired to be uncomfortable. Question if the close friend ever actually did anything that legitimately warrants suspicion. Make sure you recognize these feelings and act accordingly. Ask questions if you feel uncomfortable.  
• Sensitivity: be sensitive if you see your significant other having trouble with the proximity of your own close friend. There is a way to manage it where everyone feels appreciated and valued.  
• Appreciate: it might be a great thing that your boyfriend’s best friend is a girl, or vice versa. It might make him more understanding and more empathetic.
  

Now for a poll:

Have you ever felt the significant other of a close friend dislikes you? Have you ever disliked the close friend of your significant other? 
Link to the survey:
https://imperial.eu.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_5zKhV5qKr2mbUO1




DD

P.s. I try really hard to make sure no one hates me! This title was an attempt at some flashy eye-catching language.

-------------------------
Afifi, W. A., & Guerrero, L. K. (2000). Motivations underlying topic avoidance in close relationships. Balancing the secrets of private disclosures, 165-180.
Blades, Lincoln Anthony (08/12/2011) Why GIRLFRIENDS INHERENTLY Hate Their Boyfriends Female-Friends. This Is Your Conscience. http://www.thisisyourconscience.com/2011/08/why-girlfriends-inherently-hate-their-boyfriends-female-friends/#sthash.Xm3hmwdO.dpuf
Nagi, Ariel (11 March 2013) Should You Be Jealous If Your Boyfriend's Best Friend is a Girl? Cosmopolitan. http://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/a4263/boyfriend-best-friend-is-a-girl/
Petriglieri, J. L. (2011). Under threat: Responses to and the consequences of threats to individuals' identities. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 641-662.
[1] Some fun research about trying your luck at the bar when you go with a friend who is very (physically) similar to you: https://realityswipe.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/improve-your-attractiveness/

On When the World is Turned Upside Down

These are indeed uncertain times. Any Facebook user can attest to this statement. Most of us face a barrage of political opinion, news, and satire all waking hours of the day. This is just one example of how tension and change in the global political atmosphere trickle down to our individual lives. We see things happening out in the world and try to make sense of what it will mean for us and our loved ones. With many changes taking place in the American political landscape, and the response by civil society and government alike, I’m turning to some concepts in psychology and organisational studies to better understand how we make sense of it all. 

Do uncertain times cause us to stick more closely to our belief systems or let in new information? I’m exploring the concepts of cognitive dissonance and sense-making.

Cognitive Dissonance. Leon Festinger’s (1957) theory of cognitive dissonance relies on the assumption that people are motivated to maintain internal consistency. Cognitive dissonance refers to the psychological tension that someone experiences when they hold two or more conflicting beliefs or values, behaves inconsistently with their own beliefs or values, or when an individual receives new information that contradicts their beliefs and values. For example, consider the conflict embedded in the belief of “I trust my government to protect the rights of all its citizens, including the right to freely practice their religion” and new information, say, that your government will not allow immigrants and green card holders from seven countries of a particular majority religion to immigrate, flee war, or return home.
 
Essentially, when you experience internal conflict, it feels bad. It feels so bad that we are motivated to get rid of the internal conflict. Do we accept the new information, or cling to the old beliefs? What if the old beliefs are religious beliefs? We are starting to learn more and more about what we actually do to alleviate cognitive dissonance.

Recent research from Jagiellonian University, led by Małgorzata Kossowska, researched this human instinct to “cling to the rocks of dogma”. Dogma is the philosophical tenet, doctrine, or set of principles put forwards by an authority of a school of thought - often in reference to religion. Past research had identified that uncertainties, ones that often fit well with the concept of cognitive dissonance, can be relieved by reaffirmation of dogmatic beliefs. Unfortunately, in doing so, any group or individual with opposing beliefs can soon seem like the enemy. This can lead to prejudice and bias against opposing groups and opposing opinions. Kossowska’s team finds that this process isn’t unique to religious folk; we are all motivated by the need to cope with uncertainty. They measured the ability to cope with uncertainty and level of dogmatic belief in both religious individuals and atheists. They found inability to cope with uncertainty was correlated with dogmatic beliefs for both religious and non-religious alike. In the next step of the study, they manipulated feelings of uncertainty and found that both groups were more prejudice against non-similar social groups. What does this mean? Those who hold stronger beliefs are at risk of becoming more prejudiced in times of uncertainty. This is significant because it is a human response not unique to religious believers, but our natural reaction to uncertainty.

Sense-making. The act of searching for meaning in order to deal with uncertainty[1]. Making sense of our world is important in that it guides and constrains our actions. Finding meaning in a way that corresponds with others’ sense-making is also important. Numerous elements intertwine in how individuals make sense of events:

- Self-identity: who one is within the context in question. Given that our identities can be fluid and context-dependent, understanding the role we play within the context in question is a part of the sense-making process;
- Environment: looking to the context for cues in understanding what information is important and relevant;
- Plausibility: understanding that shared accounts are potentially politically-infused, accepting what seems realistic rather than what seems entirely accurate;
- Narrative: building narrative accounts of the uncertain situation helps to organise how an individual experiences, interprets, and controls the event;
- Shared: sense-making is a process that is personal but also social in that narratives, accounts, and meaning can be shared and communicated with others to generate shared meaning;
- Retrospect: a shift in time gives people a new perspective from which to sense-make a particular event;
- Continuity: sense-making is an ongoing process that shifts and evolves in response to the uncertain environment or event. Just as chaos is dynamic and ever-changing, the sense-making process is too. It forces us to continue this process of finding and sharing meaning.

Understanding the way in which we search for meaning and share it with others is a fascinating part of dealing with uncertainty. Combined with gaining a better understanding of how uncertainty – specifically dissonant information, behaviours, or beliefs – impacts our own thoughts and motivates us to act, can help us in moving forwards into this new world.

Some closing thoughts:

• Stay open-minded. Understand that uncertain times will motivate us to cling more committedly to our beliefs. This will help us have better politics conversations.  
• Uncover what elements, and at what level, make you feel more uncertain or insecure (political and policy change, organisational change, social change, etc.).
• Analyse how you yourself sense-make.

And above all, try to treat non-similar others with compassion and understanding, as you would hope they'd do the same for you.


DD


------------------------
[1] Since I come from a sub-discipline of management, my understanding of sense-making originates from Weick (1979), who identified factors that individuals work through to make sense of uncertain or ambiguous situations within an organization.
Jarrett, Christian (24 January 2017). Are These Uncertain Times Drawing Us Into A Cycle of Dogma and Prejudice? The British Psychology Society Research Digest. https://digest.bps.org.uk/2017/01/24/are-these-uncertain-times-drawing-us-into-a-cycle-of-dogma-and-prejudice/
Kossowska, M., Czernatowicz‐Kukuczka, A., & Sekerdej, M. (2016). Many faces of dogmatism: Prejudice as a way of protecting certainty against value violators among dogmatic believers and atheists. British Journal of Psychology.
Maitlis, S. & Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in organizations: taking stock and moving forward. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57–125.
Weick, K. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Weick, K. (1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies, 25, 305–317. 

Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative science quarterly, 628-652.