User:JRMcCumber1/sandbox

Article evaluation: Social Penetration Theory
Social Penetration Theory; the Wikipedia page is tied to WikiProject Psychology

Rated start-class with mid-importance

In the first paragraph, I did note that there is not a wiki page/link for Dalmas Taylor, which is obviously fine, just a little surprising given the large amount of work done for such an integral communication theory. I found the article to be extremely insightful, with links bearing significance and providing good, reliable, sources. I will say there are several grammatical errors that could stand to be corrected which would improve the overall look of the page. By reviewing the talk page, it is evident that this is a student project - conversations are surrounding the additions of applications and reactions to the author's request for assistance with structuring the contents.

The reason I chose to review and evaluate this wiki page is in large part due to the discussion of parasocial relationships in class this week, and the correlation of this theory due to it occurring primarily through self-disclosure. I wonder if it would be relevant to add an application regarding Parasocial Relationships and move 4.3.1 and 4.4.1 to the new established area? (I included the suggestion on their Talk page)

Friends with benefits article brainstorm & bibliography
With this article, I will seek to understand the correlation of friendship and sexual intimacy. Can the two really be combined? I will comb through varying publications to determine what other forms of communication should be tied to this considerable new way of defining a relationship. Already, I can see that this page will have to include various relationship types.

Currently, I have found the following references:

Friends with benefits
Lead: A friends with benefits (FWB) relationship is defined as a sexually intimate relationship between two friends with no romantic feelings. FWB is most commonly linked to the Cross-sex friendship and casual sex relationship types. Many studies have been completed to determine the social stigmas surrounding men versus women within the FWB relationship; and also, to delineate the incentives and obstacles more readily associated with this relationship type. Another highly analyzed area is how being sexually intimate emotionally impacts the participants and their friendship when sex is eliminated from the relationship.

Background: The direct inception of the term friends with benefits (FWB) cannot be defined. However, this term is linked to casual sex and cross-sex friendship types. The cross-sex friendship is a comparatively new term used by scholars when examining relationship types. Donald O’Meara presents information regarding the types of challenges cross-sex friendships might face, which ultimately includes sexuality; acknowledging that men and women should be considerate of the high probability for sexual desire within the cross-sex relationship. O’Meara also refers to the works of William Rawlins and his theory of “friendship love,” which can have characteristics belonging to both mental and physical attraction– faced with impactful moments, these can become more prevalent to the individuals. In 2000, Afifi and Faulkner indicate that sexual intimacy in a Cross-sex friendship can actually aid in making the friendship feel more comfortable, by stripping away sexual tension and curiosity.

The casual sex relationship type can be broken down into varying sub-sets, or definitions. The FWB relationship, one of these sub-sets, is among others such as, hooking-up, and one night stands. All of the terms mentioned define a sexual relationship outside of an exclusively committed relationship. The FWB relationship appears to be the only casual sex relationship type that signifies any emotional connection with the sexual partner. The connection stems from the commitment founded through the friendship characteristic of the relationship type.

The FWB term seems to have surfaced at some point in the late 90’s to define these types of cross-sex friendship relationships and sexual intimacy between students on college campuses. While the FWB relationship is not necessarily confined to the college aged individual (18-25), there have been studies to include high school students and individuals well in to their 30’s, it is the most studied demographic.

Social stigmas
Several studies have been completed to gain information from the college aged demographic to determine how they perceive many aspects of FWB relationships. Among these studies, social stigmas attached to men versus women in the FWB relationship is a common theme. Gender double standard s are applied to people within this relationship type. It has been, socially, accepted that women are not as sexually driven as men; and the women who are very sexually driven are promiscuous or dissolute. A more contemporary, or slang, term for this would be slut-shaming. However, men are able to engage in sexual intimacy with several partners without much, or any, social repercussion.

A particular study performed by Jovanovic and Williams, studied the gender-roles in self-perception as well as the opposite sex within the confined of the FWB relationship. The outcome of this study showed that women enjoyed being in charge of their own sexuality, citing comfortability within the confines of a FWB relationship, and the ability to avoid slut-shaming. While the study indicated the freedom of sexual agency, women were still very hesitant to share all details of the relationship with same sex friends, due to the fear of rejection. However, men spoke of feeling more pressure to divulge more information due to societal norms that correlate the number of sexual partners with masculinity.

Other studies have determined that while the FWB relationship is a common relationship among undergraduate college aged adults, disclosure is still highly secretive among same-sex friends. Research studies show the the FWB relationship is most commonly accepted by peers who have also engaged in this relationship type.

Incentives and obstacles
Incentives for the FWB relationship type are vast and subjective, the most common themes appearing in studies are safety, "trust and comfort" , as well as non-monogamy. In regard to safety, several studies show that the participant, typically female, feels more comfortable being sexually expressive with someone personally known rather than risk the harm that could come from engaging in activity with a stranger. Safety is also relevant regarding rejection, a FWB relationship is less likely to result in rejection, and if so, it can be conceptualized that the turn down is due more to an inconvenience of time, or circumstance, rather than personal rejection; which also highlights "trust and comfort " within a FWB relationship. Trust and comfort are established through the friendship and aid the participants in rationalizing correspondence. Another incentive, is 'not being tied down,' or non-monogamy. Individuals are able to meet their primary sexual needs without being in a committed romantic relationship.

Obstacles in the FWB relationship include fears of blurring the relationship lines (one individual developing romantic feelings), trepidation towards the potential loss of friendship, or social stigmas, as mentioned above, being applied to one or both participants by peers. These obstacles can quite often be combined, such as the fear of losing a friendship due to worry that one individual is feeling more romantic feelings towards the relationship. This can often result in the loss of the friendship or emotional affects.

Emotional after effects
In various studies, the common concern about the FWB relationship is if the friendship can be sustained following the removal of sexual intimacy. In a study done by Owen, Fincham and Manthos (2013), the determination was that while there are some FWB relationships that do not continue following the removal of intimacy, 50% of their participants actually indicated higher levels of closeness within the friendship. The relationships which fail to maintain friendship, potentially ceased due to one of the individuals developing romantic feelings. Another study relating to the emotional well-being of individuals in a FWB relationship type found that those participating are at no higher a risk for “harmful psychological outcomes ,” than those in a committed relationship type.

Triangular theory of love
Bisson and Levine refer to Robert Sternberg's Triangular theory of love upon trying to define the FWB relationship. The Triangle Theory of love utilizes intimacy, passion, and commitment, by increasing or decreasing the levels for each aspect based on the relationship type. Using the theory as related to the FWB relationship, intimacy is in the high range, while commitment and passion remaine in the lower range. This study demonstrates that the FWB relationship is a "hybrid" of the friendship and romantic relationship types.

Love Attitudes Scale (LAS)
Hughes, Morrison and Asada used the Love Attitudes Scale (LAS) created by Hendrick and Hendrick using the works of Lee, to determine how they would be related to the new relationship type. The LAS consists of six different love types used to clarify attitudes towards love: storgic, agapic, manic, pragmatic, ludic and erotic. Upon conclusion of the study, the LAS was found to be associated with both the motivations and outcomes of FWB relationship. The love attitude best equipped to deal with the FWB relationship was found to be ludic love, due to the provocation of remaining friends and being sexually intimate. Ludics were also found able to more easily maintain FWB relationships due to their ability to recategorize sex and romantics feelings. The love attitude least likely to seek or remain in a FWB relationship is the storgics, whose love evolves from a deep friendship and who are unlikely to seek sex without commitment.

Critique
The FWB relationship is difficult to rationalize due to the parameters surrounding the friendship relationship and the sexual intimacy generally related to the romantic relationship which implicitly cross over in a magnitude of areas. While many aim to define it using gender norms, some seek to define it by the associated advantages and disadvantages. These studies have all provided a plethora of understanding to the parameters surrounding a FWB relationship, which is ultimately a Cross-sex friendship engaging in a type of Casual sex relationships, all while avoiding the romantic relationship. This relationship type would benefit from research surrounding the rules used, by individuals, when delineating a partner to engage the FWB relationship. Unlike most casual sex relationship types, the FWB relationship is on-going and relationship maintenance rules must be distinguished. Identifying how individuals select a partner and initially engage in the relationship might distinguish what makes this relationship type so prevalent in today's society.