Establishing Social Network - Essay Example

? Social Support Networks Lecturer: Social support networks is not a new concern in exploring social structures that have continued to generate widespread interest from the field of sociology in addition to other disciplines, policy areas and public discourse. This interest in social support networks is informed by the perception of many sociologists and other experts’ who view social networks as the essence of social structure that prop the needs of members of the society to overcome difficulties in life. However, in order to paint the real picture regarding how social support networks continue to affect the wellbeing of the members, different aspects of these support networks like gender, culture and age must be explored. Consequently, this essay explore social support networks, but through the lenses of the benefits derived by members based on whether they are male or female in order to make a discovery of how gender dictates the level of participation, the structure, and influence that social support networks have in the lives of its members. Social support is about establishing social network that are essential in the provision of psychological and material resources that have the main goal of benefiting an individual’s efforts to cope with difficult situations in life. Social support is mostly distinguished based on different types of resources; instrumental and interpersonal support (Segall and Fries, 2011). Instrumental support involves the provision of material support to members of the social network where mostly care giving, money, housekeeping and security are the common forms of assistance. On the other hand, interpersonal support involves both informational and emotional support were one is provided with of relevant information whose intended purpose is to help the individual cope with immediate difficulties in life and typically takes the form of advice or guidance in dealing with one’s problems. As part of interpersonal support to individuals, emotional support entails the expression of caring, empathy, trust and reassurance all which provides a chance for emotional expression and venting (Cohen, 2004). Research has found a correlation between social support networks and health status of individuals. The absence of social ties with others in society has been shown to be an essential factor that contributed to psychological well being, illness, and even death. Social support systems promote protection against illness, influences health-related behaviour and maximize adjustment and healing from illness (Sjolander and Ahlstrom, 2012). Research has further shown that men and women respond differently to these support systems whether instrumental or interpersonal. The difference in structure and how men and women use social support networks can also determine the benefit that either gender generates from the current arrangement (Segall and Fries, 2011). It is evident that, other socio-demographic characteristics apart from gender, including age, class and race determine the kind of structure of social support networks that individuals are involved in. Structural differences are common between men and women relating to factors that affect their use of such networks. In creating further contrasts in the kind of social support networks between men and women, Taylor, Klein, Lewis, Gruenewald, Gurung and Updegraff (2000) claim the functions and structures of the groups that men and women form for the purpose of assistance during needy time are different in terms of the purpose of forming such networks. Men are said to form networks whose main goal is to create a defensive mechanism against a perceived aggression in addition to having a preference for larger social groups than can be said of women. Further, it is emphasized that the social support networks formed by men tend to be organized around a strictly defined purpose or tasks to be achieved at some point in time. Even as men have genuine orientation toward and participate in a large number of social networks, many of these networks accentuate hierarchies of status and power as opposed to having intimate bonding among members (Taylor et al., 2000). In contrast, female social support networks are more likely to be smaller, in most cases comprising of dyad or a few women, who might organize themselves for such social activities as food preparation, stitching, or communal child care. However, these social support networks often have the creation and maintenance of socio-emotional relations at the core which is less true of male networks. Additionally, women in their social support networks demonstration more communal behaviours, comprising of attention to others, ingratiation, smiling and disclosure while also interacting at closer physical distances than do men in their networks (Segall and Fries, 2011). Apart from the difference in structure, the functioning of these support systems is another variance that determines how both men and women benefit from the social support network (Segall and Fries, 2011). The support networks of men provide more instrumental help while on the other hand those of women allow for a more intimate interaction therefore making women attain greater benefit. A good example of how social support networks functions can be taken from the networks available to married couples and how such couples use such avenues to channel their difficulties in marriage. The difference in how men and women benefit from social support networks can be explored by assessing the role support networks play in marriages and how the couples perceive the significance of the network in handling different marital problems. Research have indicated that Husbands and wives may differ in extend that support specifically aimed at marital relations associated with marital success (Schwarzer and Gutierrez-Dona, 2005). Indeed, there is a growing literature that points to the difference in the functioning and influence of social support networks in marriage life of couples especially when faced with difficulties. These difference stems from the couple’s considerations of how networks of family members and friends perceive their relationship the need for network approval being the driving force. In these type of social set ups, networks of family members and friends has been found to be more influential for women than for men in forecasting the future of premarital relationships among members. Additionally, women will be more willing to open up to friends and relatives in the social support network about their personal lives and relationships than do men. Further, women in relationships value the opinions of friends concerning the prospects of the relationship more than men (Schwarzer and Gutierrez-Dona, 2005). Cultural values of that the society holds dear are among important factors underlining how both male and female members react towards social support networks. Gender norms in any given society dictates what the particular group of people deem as being appropriate behaviours that should be exhibited by members based on their orientations as being either male or female. For example, in many societies, the culture socializes males to be in control and to avoid talking about their emotions. Men who complain about different problems or difficulties in their lives are at risk of being seen as weak by fellow men and other members of the society. Consequently, to avoid being judge as weak by society, men in such communities prefer handling problems themselves and are reluctant to seek social support so that they might not be deemed weak by the society. Contrastively, females in society are socialized to freely express their emotions and interact with those around them about their problems making them more willing to open up to the social support networks more easily (Barker, 2007). Such gendered cultural perceptions about handling life difficulties make women too benefit more from the available social structures like social support networks. Cornwell (2011) explores the role played by an intermediary who acts as a bridge between two beneficiaries of social networking support especially in older men and women. Conwell (2011) notes that the concern over bridging potential in social networks should be explored by looking into larger concerns regarding gendered access to both independence and power. The researcher in the area of social support networks asserts that it is widely accepted for women to have less bridging potential in their networks than men based on the assumption that while social networking for women usually involves larger groups than those for men, women maintain social networking groups that are stronger, kin-based with connections that are not welcoming to bridging. On the other hand, men’s social networks are characterized by weaker instrumental ties thereby finding enough room for bridging. As they find themselves in need of a third person to come in between when communicating issues they would not express to other members easily. Further, Conwell (2011) points that beyond both independence and power men and women have different life-course experiences, which contributes to major differences in bridging potential in later life. Among the contributors of the differences over the years, is based on professional life of both men and women where older men are more likely to experience retirement, so they are more likely to go through a sudden drop in their access to weak and non-kin ties. Beyond life course experiences, bridging is dependent on cognitive and functional health of those involved in the network, which is mostly compromised when an individual’s network members increase communication and coordination among themselves to provide social support during health problems. At this stage in life, close friends and family members frequently make the social networks stronger by uniting around and coordinating care giving duties. Moreover, given that men are more likely to be dependent on their partners for caregiver support than their female counterparts, (Schwarzer & Gutierrez-Dona, 2005), older men may go through a lot of constraints that limit how much they might be willing to share with other people in the social support network. Socio-emotional selectivity theory can also explain why men are more likely to benefit from social support networks than women where the theory postulates that individuals increasingly become oriented over the years to strong, emotionally and rewarding relationships especially as they advance in age (Charles and Carstensen, 2010). This progression can lead to the loss of weaker contacts mostly if they were based on non-kin relationship. This increased selectivity appears to be more pronounced among men than women especially since men at a younger age are more oriented towards instrumental forms of social support networks. However, even as men in their younger years favour instrumental social support systems, gendered life-course perspectives assert that men tend to be inclined towards a more emotional attitude towards relationships as they age. At a more advanced age men tend to adopt a lesser concentration on instrumental relationships that enables personal accomplishments and lean more on those ties that provide emotional contentment (Adams & Ueno, 2006). Men’ social support networks are affected more by the realities and challenges like health decline and retirement that characterize later life. These changes make conventionally masculine main concerns about power and autonomy less interesting and more challenging to sustain. The benefit that men and women derive from social support systems can also be explored through the biological assumption that woman is predisposed to pursue social association in response to stress and a man’s propensity to employ a strategy of self-reliance. Research has shown that women possess an inborn preference to tend to the welfare of their family in addition to having a natural tendency to turn to their social group in stressful times. Taylor et al. (2000) named this disposition as the “tend and befriend response” to stressful circumstances where the author assets that in turbulent times, women depend on the established social support networks for help in finding their out of the difficult situation. However, the authors’ theoretical assumptions present a significant divergence from the familiar psychological principle of fight or flight response to stress. According to the fight or flight premise, human beings have a physiological disposition to react to dangerous or stressful situations that obliges them to either engage face the problem heads on or to run away from it. Taylor et al. (2000) claims this sort of response is more practical for men but not applicable to women who the authors claim is unable to engage in confrontations or to escape a dangerous or stressful situation due to their obligation to protect their families. According to Taylor et al. (2000), this biological disposition makes females more likely to marshal social support, especially from their female counterparts, in stressful circumstances. Women put more efforts in seeking social support, receive more it, and as a consequence are more satisfied with the support they receive from those around them. This goes further to confirm that women invest more into the social support networks and are therefore more likely to report higher levels in terms of how the support system has been able to sort out their issues. From the foregoing, men and women benefit differently from the social support networks that they are involved with. This difference is based on the structure, functions, levels of participation and the innate uniqueness that comes with being either a man or woman. Based on structure women favor small and compact social support systems while men will prefer larger groups that have do not have stringent traditions. It has been shown that women are more open to the members of their social support networks therefore making interactions and assistance during times of need more productive. One the other hand, men tend to keep most of their issues inwards and therefore create a barrier when members of their social support network try to offer assistance. These differences in the nature of men and women make the benefits they get as members of social support networks to differ due to the different approaches they take. References Adams, R and Ueno, K. (2006). Middle-aged and older adult men’s friendships. In: Bedford VH, Turner BF, editors. Men in relationships: A new look from a life course perspective. New York: Springer; p. 103-124. Barker, G. (2007). Adolescents, social support and help-seeking behavior. Geneva, Switzerland: world health organization. Charles T, Carstensen L. (2010). Social and emotional aging. Annual Review of Psychology, 61:383-409. Cohen, S. (2004). Social relationships and health. American psychologist, 59(8), 676-684. Cornwell, B. (2011). Independence through social networks: Bridging potential among older women and men. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 66(6), 782-794. Schwarzer R, & Gutierrez-Dona B. (2005). More spousal support for men than for women: A comparison of sources and types of support. Sex Roles, 52:523-532. Segall, A., & Fries, C. J. (2011). Pursuing health and wellness: Healthy societies, healthy people. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sjolander, C., & Ahlstrom, G. (2012). The meaning and validation of social support networks for close family of persons with advanced cancer. BMC nursing, 11(1), 17-31. Taylor, S. E., Klein, L. C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gurung, R. A., & Updegraff, J. A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: tend-and-befriend, not fight-or-flight. Psychological review, 107(3), 411-429. Read More