Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Đorđe Maričić
Communication and Culture
John McCabe-Juhnke
19 August 2005
difference between the two terms and the influence of culture on relationships, we need
to begin with their definitions. James W. Neulip is the author of a helpful, comprehensive
and behaviors shared by an identifiable group of people with a common history and a
verbal and nonverbal symbol system. This implies that each culture has an intrinsic and
distinct worldview; the group of people that share this worldview are interrelated. A
The character of relationships and marriages has changed in the United States
since the divorce boom of the 1960’s and the legalization of non-marital cohabitation in
the 1970’s. “Dating” has become a common form of relationship among young people.
companionship with members of the opposite sex, and as a means of mate sorting and
selection.2
1
Julia T. Wood
2
Tang, Shengming, Zuo, Jiping, page 1
Maričić 2
such as the emphasis on individuality, the low power distance, the proximity of
adolescents, the monochromic time frame, and the low uncertainty avoidance on the scale
understandable. The way in which the American youth perceive dating is influenced by
the fact that since the 60’s divorce boom, the quality of marriages has not changed
significantly.3 Most youngsters see dating as a normal, intermediary step towards a long-
term and meaningful relationship. A survey by the Institute for Social Research at the
University of Michigan, data gathered from 1976 to 1992 shows that most Americans,
collectivity and cooperation between individuals. For example most Americans listed a
The same study shows that many Americans since the 1970’s are involved in
in a relationship. One of the advantages of cohabitation in the U.S. is that there are fewer
legal or social pressures between the two people than in a marriage. For many,
cohabitation is seen as temporary arrangement between two people that either get married
or break up after two years.5 Gender roles have also changed; women are now often in a
position to contribute significantly to household incomes and some men have jobs with
lower compensation. This change in the economic realities of daily life in the U.S. has in
3
Decline and Renewal of Marriage in America, page 17
4
Decline and Renewal of Marriage in America, page 21, table 2.1
5
The Case for Marriage, pages 36-37
Maričić 3
turn redefined the relationship between men and women since the 1960’s. The traditional
residual roles in a relationship, with the man taking care of finances and the woman
Many of these changes are due to the individualism and low uncertainty
avoidance features of American culture. Americans see their own self-interest as a first
priority and thus they seek relationships primarily to have fun, to be recognized by others,
the U.S. is the competitive aspect: people seek significant others based on the image that
their partner will help them present. Other characteristics of the American approach to
avoid the anxieties associated with marriage, and acceptance of women as bread-winners
in addition to their role as nurturers. As an outsider I have noticed that relationships in the
US follow the same patterns. For example people that are “dating” in the US tend to go
out on dates. This includes going to a movie, a restaurant, the theatre, or another socially
acceptable event. Partners spend time based on plans which are often made well in
advance and the physical distance separating the people tends not to be a deciding factor.
socializes for personal and social growth. In this case finding the right person is a
contribution to the community at large because the cooperation between the individuals is
more far-reaching and synchronized. Rather than a series of activities shared, the
Maričić 4
cultures like Serbia, for example, people in relationships are much more interdependent.
As a result of the polychromic time society individuals share time through impromptu
meetings; “dates” are relatively rare. Although there special occasions when a couple will
people who spend time together regularly and have a strong commitment to one another.
cultures like Serbia. A Serbian proverb says: away from the eyes, away from the heart.
Proximity makes it possible for couples in Serbia to spend more time together which in
turn is a reflection of their strong commitment. Just by looking at couples on the street in
Serbia, including married couples, it is easy to notice that haptics play an important role
touching and holding hands is common practice among best friends, one shows affiliation
The last example shows the way how relationships are manifested differently in
the same across cultural boundaries. Relationships start as a result of mutual feelings
between two people who share their affections, although this does not guarantee a long-
term commitment which is the goal in collectivistic cultures.6 Partners everywhere face
6
Tang, Shengming, Zuo, Jiping, p. 5
Maričić 5
questions like the rules of the relationship, the level of commitment, autonomy versus
Nuelip’s and Wood’s text books tend to emphasize the ways that relationships are
shaped by culture. However the important thing to remember is that categories for
comparison. In reality cultures have both collectivist and individualist features; the same
individualist society, dating patterns tend, conversely, to be predictable whereas the form
that relationships take is actually more varied in a place like Serbia. In Serbia and other
places where life is less structured around work than in the U.S., everyday life in a
relationship is less planned and left to the whim of each partner. Since couples do not go
on dates, the ways in which time shared can vary greatly. Although the everyday patterns
are unpredictable, there is a high level of trust in relationships as most coupling is a direct
Members of a couple in the U.S. seem to respect each other’s personal privacy
more than in collectivist cultures where even minor details of the individuals’ lives are
shared with one another. This is perhaps because in the U.S. it is more common to engage
contrasts with the comfort of relationships in collectivistic countries which tend towards
long term relationships immediately. In the U.S. it is also more common to start a
Maričić 6
relationship with a complete stranger, whereas in collectivist cultures the initial meeting
is frequently through a common friend which reinforces the security of both individuals.
It is understandable that complete strangers would have a lower level of instinctive trust
and therefore would be more likely to end the relationship early on.
countries like China, Japan and in several African countries where arranged marriages are
still common. The arranged marriage is a relationship which is designed to benefit the
families rather than the individuals. In this case the couple’s relationship represents their
contribution to the common wealth and welfare.7 Arranged marriages are an example of
relationships that are clearly influenced by culture. Relationships are also affected by the
evolution of any given culture over time. Certain European countries like Austria and
Serbia had arranged marriages in the past, but due to their exposure with individualistic
cultures that particular part of the societies has disappeared. Microcultures also influence
relationship patterns; for example the growing immigrant population of Central and
South Americans in the U.S. has influenced the dominant culture in the U.S. These
immigrants are well-known for their devotion to the family and their passion in
relationships.
diverse set of people I have developed a clear sense of the role culture plays in shaping
7
Tang, Shengming, Zuo, Jiping, page 3
Maričić 7
References: