Jump to content

Relational models theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Citation bot (talk | contribs) at 07:52, 5 December 2019 (Add: hdl, pmc, pmid. | You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here.| Activated by User:Nemo bis | via #UCB_webform). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Relational models theory (RMT) is a theory of interpersonal relationships, authored by anthropologist Alan Fiske and initially developed from his fieldwork in Burkina Faso.[1][2][3][4] RMT proposes that all human interactions can be described in terms of just four "relational models", or elementary forms of human relations: communal sharing, authority ranking, equality matching and market pricing (to these are added the limiting cases of asocial and null interactions, whereby people do not coordinate with reference to any shared principle).

The four relational models

Communal sharing (CS) relationships are the most basic form of relationship where some bounded group of people are conceived as equivalent, undifferentiated and interchangeable such that distinct individual identities are disregarded and commonalities are emphasized, with intimate and kinship relations being prototypical examples of CS relationship.[2] Common indicators of CS relationships include body markings or modifications, synchronous movement, rituals, sharing of food, or physical intimacy.[4][5]

Authority ranking (AR) relationships describe asymmetric relationships where people are linearly ordered along some hierarchical social dimension. The primary feature of an AR relationship is whether a person ranks above or below each other person. Those higher in rank hold greater authority, prestige and privileges, while subordinates are entitled to guidance and protection. Military ranks are a prototypical example of an AR relationship.[2]

Equality matching (EM) relationships are those characterized by various forms of one-for-one correspondence, such as turn taking, in-kind reciprocity, tit-for-tat retaliation, or eye-for-an-eye revenge. Parties in EM relationships are primarily concerned with ensuring the relationship is in a balanced state. Non-intimate acquaintances are a prototypical example.[2]

Market pricing (MP) relationships revolve around a model of proportionality where people attend to ratios and rates and relevant features are typically reduced to a single value or utility metric that allows the comparison (e.g., the price of a sale). Monetary transactions are a prototypical example of MP relationships.[2]

The four relational models are argued to be innate, intrinsically motivated, and culturally universal (though with culture-specific implementations).[4] These four elementary relationships can be combined to form more complex configurations of relationships called meta-relational models that entail or prohibit certain obligations, behaviors or relationships between dyads within the configuration (e.g., A being in a CS relationship with B prohibits B from being in a CS relationship with A's enemy, C).[6]

According to RMT, mis-matching of relational models is a common cause of interpersonal conflict, given that different relational models will often imply different behaviors in the same situation. Taking two housemates sharing dishwashing as a simple example, Fiske suggests[4] that if housemate A assumes dishwashing is governed by a CS framework and housemate B assumes an EM framework, A will expect both of them to wash dishes whenever they can, and B will expect them to take turns. If A is busy and B is not, A will expect B to wash the dishes, but if B washed the dishes last, they'll assume it's B's turn, and conflict will ensue because of A and B's mis-matched relational models.

Correspondence with Stevens's levels of measurement

Fiske proposed that the four discrete types of relationships correspond to Stevens's four levels of measurement.[2] CS relationships resemble the categorical (nominal) scales of measurement in that all members of the relationship are equivalent. AR resembles an ordinal scale given that members of the relationship are placed in a linear ordering. EM relationships resemble interval measurement given that they are kept in balance by addition and subtraction. Finally, MP relationships resemble a ratio scale (whose origin corresponds, for example, to a price of zero) given that they involve proportions, multiplication and division and the distributive law.

Influence

The two main, original publications on Relational Models Theory[2][3] have been cited over 4000 times. The theory has also been extended to explain moral judgments in the context of interpersonal relationships in the form of Relationship Regulation Theory,[7] and to explain interpersonal violence in the form of Virtuous Violence Theory.[8] Additionally, RMT was influential in the development of Steven Pinker's theory of indirect speech,[9] and one of the more prominent theories in moral psychology, moral foundations theory.[10]

Recently, RMT has also been used to help explain the positive social emotion of "Kama Muta," typically described as the experience of "being moved" (also labelled Elevation), where according to this view, "Kama Muta" is triggered by witnessing the sudden intensification of a Communal Sharing relationship.[11][12]

References

  1. ^ Fiske, Alan Page (June 1990). "Relativity within Moose ("Mossi") Culture: Four Incommensurable Models for Social Relationships". Ethos. 18 (2): 180–204. doi:10.1525/eth.1990.18.2.02a00040.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g Fiske, Alan P. (1992). "The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations". Psychological Review. 99 (4): 689–723. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.99.4.689.
  3. ^ a b Fiske, Alan Page (1991). Structures of social life: The four elementary forms of human relations: Communal sharing, authority ranking, equality matching, market pricing. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0029103452.
  4. ^ a b c d Fiske, Alan Page (2007). "Relational Models Theory". In Baumeister, Roy F; Vohs, Kathleen D (eds.). Encyclopedia of Social Psychology. SAGE Publications, Inc. pp. 743–745. doi:10.4135/9781412956253.n445. ISBN 9781412956253.
  5. ^ Miller, Lisa; Rozin, Paul; Fiske, Alan Page (May 1998). "Food sharing and feeding another person suggest intimacy; two studies of American college students". European Journal of Social Psychology. 28 (3): 423–436. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199805/06)28:3<423::AID-EJSP874>3.0.CO;2-V.
  6. ^ Fiske, Alan Page (February 2012). "Metarelational models: Configurations of social relationships". European Journal of Social Psychology. 42 (1): 2–18. doi:10.1002/ejsp.847.
  7. ^ Rai, Tage Shakti; Fiske, Alan Page (2011). "Moral psychology is relationship regulation: Moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality". Psychological Review. 118 (1): 57–75. doi:10.1037/a0021867. PMID 21244187.
  8. ^ Fiske, Alan Page; Rai, Tage Shakti (2014). Virtuous Violence: Hurting and Killing to Create, Sustain, End, and Honor Social Relationships. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781316104668.
  9. ^ Pinker, S.; Nowak, M. A.; Lee, J. J. (16 January 2008). "The logic of indirect speech". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105 (3): 833–838. doi:10.1073/pnas.0707192105. PMC 2242675. PMID 18199841.
  10. ^ Haidt, Jonathan; Joseph, Craig (September 2004). "Intuitive ethics: how innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues". Daedalus. 133 (4): 55–66. doi:10.1162/0011526042365555.
  11. ^ Zickfeld, Janis H.; Schubert, Thomas W.; Seibt, Beate; Blomster, Johanna K.; Arriaga, Patrícia; Basabe, Nekane; Blaut, Agata; Caballero, Amparo; Carrera, Pilar; Dalgar, Ilker; Ding, Yi; Dumont, Kitty; Gaulhofer, Valerie; Gračanin, Asmir; Gyenis, Réka; Hu, Chuan-Peng; Kardum, Igor; Lazarević, Ljiljana B.; Mathew, Leemamol; Mentser, Sari; Nussinson, Ravit; Onuki, Mayuko; Páez, Darío; Pásztor, Anna; Peng, Kaiping; Petrović, Boban; Pizarro, José J.; Schönefeld, Victoria; Śmieja, Magdalena; Tokaji, Akihiko; Vingerhoets, Ad; Vorster, Anja; Vuoskoski, Jonna; Zhu, Lei; Fiske, Alan Page (April 2019). "Kama muta: Conceptualizing and measuring the experience often labelled being moved across 19 nations and 15 languages". Emotion. 19 (3): 402–424. doi:10.1037/emo0000450. hdl:10071/16718.
  12. ^ Seibt, Beate; Schubert, Thomas W.; Zickfeld, Janis H.; Zhu, Lei; Arriaga, Patrícia; Simão, Cláudia; Nussinson, Ravit; Fiske, Alan Page (20 December 2017). "Kama Muta: Similar Emotional Responses to Touching Videos Across the United States, Norway, China, Israel, and Portugal". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 49 (3): 418–435. doi:10.1177/0022022117746240.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Relational_models_theory&oldid=929354062"