User:Ktjannat/sandbox

= Affection Exchange Theory = *** I am editing (changing & adding new sections) an existing article for a class project***

Affection exchange theory (AET) '''claims that relational bonds become strengthened through affectionate communication. This theory defines ‘Affectionate Communication’ “as encompassing those behaviors that encode feelings of fondness and intense positive regard and are generally decoded as such by their intended receivers” (Floyd, 2006b; Floyd, Hesse, & Generous, 2015, p. 312). It is a scientific communication theory, which was originally proposed by Kory Floyd in 2001 and later it was articulated completely in 2006. Floyd [Deleted 'who'] is currently a professor in the Department''' of Communication at the University of Arizona. '''Floyd’s research concentrates on how does affection communicate in close relationships and how does its consequences impact on stress and physiological functioning. AET by Floyd (2001), was the first theory to address some of the short and long-term effects of the exchange of affection from an evolutionary standpoint and this theory is mostly affiliated with the paradigmatic assumptions of the post-positivist tradition. Therefore, the principle purpose of AET is to describe why human beings communicate affection when interacting others and what consequences they can have.'''

Contents
1 Background

2 Theoretical Assumptions and Propositions of AET

3 Conceptualizing Communication in AET

4 Research and Practical Application of AET

5 Strengths and Limitations of AET

6 References

Background [Added the title]
The theory was first presented in two of Floyd’s research projects. The first was in a paper presented to the Western States Communication Association in Coeur d’Alene, ID in February 2001. The paper was titled "Elements of an affection exchange theory: Socioevolutionary paradigm for understanding affectionate communication". The second was in an article titled “Human Affection Exchange I: Reproductive probability as a predictor of men’s affection with their sons,” published in The Journal of Men’s Studies in Fall 2001. When this theory was constructed, Floyd was working as a professor at Arizona State University in Tempe, Arizona in the Hugh Downs School of Human Communication. Many studies had been done up to this point (including some of Floyd’s own research pieces) regarding affection and its involvement in interpersonal relationships, particularly between romantic partners and between parents and their children.

Theoretical components [Deleted this part: Added a new section 'Theoretical Assumptions and Propositions of AET]
Floyd explains, “affection exchange theory treats affectionate communication as an adaptive behavior that contributes to humans’ long-term viability and procreative success” (Floyd, 2001, p. 40). He also described AET this way: “AET posits that affection exchange contributes to survival because it promotes pair bonding and the increased access to resources pair bonds provide” (Floyd, 2001, pp. 40–41). Another facet of AET was that the exchange of affection served as an indicator to another individual that he or she was a good prospect for parenthood (Floyd, 2001). Lastly, Floyd indicated that when parents show affection to their children, their children are more likely to be successful in reproducing; thus, the parents’ genes will be passed down further (Floyd, 2001). To Floyd, this was seen as a benefit of affection exchange.

Motivation to develop AET [Deleted the title, added it under the new section 'Theoretical Assumptions and Propositions of AET']
Floyd had done much work in the area of affection involved in communication processes before introducing this theory. One of the areas that was so unique in the study of affection was the idea of the expectations involved in affection exchange. Canary et al. (2008) point out that the expectations involved in affection exchange as well as a curiosity about the evolutionary and biological bases for affection expectations are what led Floyd to develop this theory (p. 72). Canary et al. (2008) also note, “In AET, affection is thought of as an adaptive behavior that is helpful to long-term human survival by promoting bonding and increased access to resources. If this theory is correct, affection ought to increase as its ability to enhance survival increases” (p. 72).

Theoretical Assumptions and Propositions of AET
'''AET is grounded in an evolutionary standpoint. Despite other evolutionary theories, this theory is considered to be distinctive as it aims to ‘‘cast affectionate communication in adaptive terms and to begin to specify the biological and environmental factors through which it serves humans’ most pressing evolutionary needs’’ (Floyd, 2006a, p. 160). AET is emerged in new-Darwinian’s fundamental assumptions (Floyd, Hesse, & Generous, 2015, p. 310): It considers ‘communication behaviors’ serving as superordinate human goals, such as: (1) Procreation, and (2) Survival. For instance, when we are in need of shelter or food, we seek for close relationships with friends who can help us getting those, that contributes to survival. As for procreation, friends can introduce us to potential romantic partners. Another aspect is: “Individuals need not be consciously aware of the evolutionary goals their behaviors serve” (Floyd, Hesse, & Generous, 2015, p. 310). The above assumptions direct two even more fundamental assumptions: “(1) humans, like other living organisms, are subject to the principles of natural selection and sexual selection, and (2) human communication behavior is only partially subject to the willful control of the communicator” (Floyd, Hesse, & Generous, 2015, p. 310).'''

Following Darwinian’s thought, these are five derived propositions of AET (Floyd, Hesse, & Generous, 2015):

(1) The need for affection is innate and it’s a fundamental necessity for human, such as: having the ability and/or desire to feel affection since birth.

'''(2) Humans can feel affection without expressing it, for example, even you love someone, but you are not expressing that emotion to that person due to fear of getting rejected. On the other hand, humans can have the ability to express affection without feeling it, for example, when we help someone like someone can ask you to do a favor, demonstrates affection for that person but not necessarily you are feeling it.'''

(3) Affectionate communication is adaptative when it comes to human viability and fertility, for example, fulfilling superordinate human goals (i.e., survival and procreation)- like providing food, shelter, or social support to others.

(4) The optimal tolerance for affectionate behaviors is not same for all humans, for example, not everyone is fond of hugging, therefore, (5) To cause violations as physiologically aversive in the range of optimal tolerance.

Floyd had done much work in the area of affection involved in communication processes before introducing this theory. One of the areas that was so unique in the study of affection was the idea of the expectations involved in affection exchange. Canary, Cody, and Manusov (2008) [Changed 'et al'] point out that the expectations involved in affection exchange as well as a curiosity about the evolutionary and biological bases for affection expectations are what led Floyd to develop this theory ['''Deleted 'page number']. In addition, Canary et al. (2008) [Deleted ‘also’]''' note, “In AET, affection is thought of as an adaptive behavior that is helpful to long-term human survival by promoting bonding and increased access to resources. If this theory is correct, affection ought to increase as its ability to enhance survival increases” (p. 72).

Conceptualizing Communication in AET [Added a new section]
'''Rather than explaining overall communication patterns, this theory only focuses on affectionate communication to the understanding of why we tend to use affectionate behaviors when interacting with each other. Affectionate communication, consisting of verbal and non-verbal messages, displays affection which is defined as ‘‘feeling warmth and fondness toward someone’’ (Andersen & Guerrero, 1998, p. 59). For example, several studies have reported that when physicians use affective forms of communication behaviors during medical consultations (i.e., exhibiting concern, courtesy, and attentiveness through engaging in psychosocial discussion, building rapport and trust, and demonstrating lower physician dominance), patients are more likely to be satisfied with their care (Carrard, Schmid Mast, Jaunin-Stalder, Perron, & Sommer, 2018; Conlee & Olivera, 1993; De Boer, Delnoij, & Rademakers, 2013; Roberts & Aruguette, 2000; Pieterse, Van Dulmen, Beemer, Bensing, & Ausems, 2007).'''

'''We tend to communicate more and comfortably to those people who demonstrate affectionate behaviors and build rapport with them. In this theory, “Affectionate communication is defined as encompassing those behaviors that encode feelings of fondness and intense positive regard and are generally decoded as such by their intended receivers” (Floyd, 2006b; Floyd, Hesse, & Generous, 2015, p. 312). This theory considers giving and receiving affection as a survival mode from a biological perspective where it demonstrates what benefits we get when we communicate affection to one another as well as what costs we can have when we lack affection while communicating. Floyd, Hesse, and Generous (2015) stated, “AET conceives of affectionate communication as a behavior that is affected by both socially constructed and evolutionarily derived influences, and that is only partially under the conscious control of the communicator” (p. 312).'''

Given on the importance of the conceptual clarity of affectionate behaviors, the tripartite model of Floyd and Morman (1998) describes the distinction between three forms of affectionate display, for instance, verbal communication (things that we tend to mention to each other with written or spoken affectionate expressions during interactions like, ‘I miss you’ or ‘I love you’ or ‘You mean the world to me’), direct nonverbal communication (nonlinguistic or paralinguistic behaviors used within the relationship or speech community, which demonstrate affection such as: smile, hug, touch, kiss, etc. ), and indirect nonverbal communication (behaviors that take form of social or material support, for example, ways to assist someone like, driving a friend to his workplace, helping someone in cooking, etc.).

Research and Practical Application of AET [Changed the title ‘Implications of the theory’]
'''There are approximately 30 distinctive experiments, which have been conducted since AET was initially proposed in 2001 for the better understanding of the procedures of interpersonal communication (Floyd, 2001). Most of these examinations are grounded in either of the two following categories (Floyd, Hesse, & Generous, 2015, p. 312):'''

'''(1) those that have focused on which relationships are more affectionate than others (as well as the relational consequences of that affection). For instance, studies have shown that fathers display less affection toward their sons if the sons identify as homosexual or bisexual (Canary et al., 2008; Floyd, 2001; Floyd, Sargent, & Di Corcia, 2004) [Deleted 'page number']. Another case in point: Parents are more likely to show affection to their children who are most likely to pass on the family genes (Floyd, 2001).'''

'''(2) those that have focused on the mental and physical health benefits of being affectionate. For example, research has indicated 'affection' as the predictor of relational satisfaction and commitment (Denes, 2012; Horan & Booth-Butterfield, 2010).'''

Deleted most part, modified few sentences and added in above sections: [A great deal of this theory’s premise can be linked back to Darwin’s principles that state reproductivity and survival are what serve as humans’ most fundamental motivations. With these ideas in mind, it follows that humans would do everything they could to make sure that their genes carry on, even if that means (intentionally or unintentionally) showing more affection to a child that the parent knew was more likely to reproduce. Linked to this idea, Floyd’s studies have shown that fathers display less affection toward their sons if the sons identify as homosexual or bisexual (Canary et al., 2008). In general, AET presents the idea that parents are more likely to show affection to their children who are most likely to pass on the family genes. AET has been used a great deal in studies dealing with relationships between fathers and sons, particularly as it relates to men’s sexuality and how that impacts the amount of affection a father shows to his son, the communicative behaviors involved in AET, and how the amount of affection that a father shows to his son correlates with the amount of affection that the son displays toward his children and the generations that follow.]

Strengths and Limitations of AET [Added a new section]
'''This was the first comprehensive theory which focused on explaining about affectionate communication like most importantly, answering why we in the first place, tend to be affectionate. In this way, this theory has made it possible to describe findings derived from other studies within diverse theoretic traditions to a great extent. The assumptions of AET have gained significant empirical support in relation to family relationships, health, nonverbal communication as well as persuasion (Floyd & Ray, 2003; Floyd, Erbert, Davis, & Haynes, 2006).'''

A notable limitation could be- this theory emphasizes more on evolutionary factors rather than socially constructed factors with regard to the variance in affectionate behaviors, therefore, to indicate the lack of attention to social learning (Floyd, Hesse, & Generous, 2015).