Module 06 · Relationship Satisfaction and Dissolution关系满意度与解体
Different Types of Relationships关系类型
Overview 概述
Although we spent a good amount of time talking about the importance of tracking relationships’ costs and benefits, now it’s time to talk about situations in which that concern applies less or not at all. That is, in addition to relationships that follow the dictates of social exchange theory (called exchange relationships below), there is also another type of relationship where those concerns get put aside in favor of different concerns. On this page, we’re going to focus on those two types of relationships.
尽管我们花了大量时间讨论追踪关系成本和收益的重要性，但现在该讨论那些关注较少或根本不适用的情况了。也就是说，除了遵循社会交换理论（以下称为交换关系）的关系之外，还存在另一种关系，在这些关系中，这些关注被放在一边，以换取不同的关注。在本页，我们将关注这两种关系。
Communal Versus Exchange Relationships 社区关系与交换关系
One of the dimensions along which relationships can vary is the degree of closeness people feel to each other. For example, two people going on a first date, or two coworkers meeting for the first time, likely won’t feel very psychologically close to each other. However, as time passes and the two interact more, they have the opportunity to develop more intimacy. As that intimacy develops, the way they view the relationship and the types of obligations they feel to each other will begin to change.
一个人际关系可以变化的维度之一是人们彼此感觉的亲近程度。例如，两个初次约会的情侣，或者两个初次见面的同事，可能不会感到彼此在心理上非常亲近。然而，随着时间的推移，两人互动增多，他们有机会发展更多的亲密感。随着这种亲密感的增强，他们对关系的看法以及他们对彼此感到的义务类型将会开始改变。
Reflection Activity 反思活动
Think about one of your relationships that started out relatively distant (as most do) and then became closer. How did your behaviors toward the other person change? Specifically, how did you feel and behave when one of you did a favor for the other?
考虑一下你的一段关系，最初相对疏远（大多数关系都是如此），然后变得亲密。你对对方的行为是如何改变的？具体来说，当其中一方为另一方做了一件好事时，你感觉和表现如何？
Consider the relationship that you just identified. At the start of the relationship, when you didn’t feel particularly close to the other person yet, you two were likely in an exchange relationship. Specifically, your relationship obeyed the dictates of social exchange theory in that your satisfaction with the relationship was based on whether its costs and benefits exceeded your comparison level or not. However, as the relationship became closer, you likely began to feel less pressure to maximize your benefits and minimize your costs. Instead, you started focusing on being responsive to the other person’s needs. In the language of Clark and Mills (1979, 2012), you went from being in an exchange relationship to being in a communal relationship.
考虑你刚刚确定的关系。在关系的开始阶段，当你还没有特别接近对方时，你们可能处于一种交换关系。具体来说，你的关系遵循社会交换理论的规定，即你对关系的满意度基于其成本和收益是否超过你的比较水平。然而，随着关系的亲密，你可能会开始感到减少压力以最大化收益和最小化成本。相反，你开始专注于对对方的需要的响应。用 Clark 和 Mills（1979，2012）的话来说，你从处于交换关系转变为处于共通关系。
In communal relationships, when one person acts in a way that benefits the other, neither person has the expectation that the benefit must be repaid. The benefit may or may not be repaid, but the primary focus of the person who gave the benefit was to improve the recipient’s quality of life (Clark & Mills, 2012). For example, if a husband in a communal relationship with his wife plans a romantic evening with her, he’s not doing it with the belief that she should return the romantic gesture so that they’re even. His wife may indeed reciprocate, but, again, it would be to make her partner happy, not to erase the debt she had acquired.
在社区关系中，当一个人以有利于另一个人的方式行事时，双方都没有期望这种好处必须得到回报。这种好处可能得到回报也可能得不到回报，但给予好处的人的主要关注点是提高接受者的生活质量（Clark & Mills，2012）。例如，如果一个与妻子有社区关系的丈夫为她计划一个浪漫的夜晚，他并不是出于认为她应该回报这个浪漫的举动以保持平衡的信念。他的妻子确实可能会回报，但再次强调，这是为了让她的伴侣开心，而不是为了消除她所欠的债务。
As an aside, although the dictates of social exchange theory become less important in communal relationships, there is more ambiguity about what happens with equity concerns. Some theorists argue that the desire for fairness is lessened in communal relationships while others suggest that fairness remains vital. Social psychologist Elaine Hatfield and her colleagues (1985) made a strong argument in support of the importance of equity, including providing evidence that equitable long-term relationships are more stable and longer-lasting than inequitable ones. At the same time, a parent–child relationship is both clearly communal and frequently profoundly inequitable, especially in the case of young children (Clark & Mills, 2012). So, while equity does still seem to be a concern in some communal relationships, the details of the relationship matter in determining the exact role that equity concerns play.
作为旁白，尽管社会交换理论的指导原则在社区关系中变得不那么重要，但对于公平问题的处理却更加模糊。一些理论家认为，在社区关系中，对公平的追求减弱了，而另一些理论家则认为公平仍然至关重要。社会心理学家伊莱恩·哈特菲尔德及其同事（1985 年）提出了强有力的论据来支持公平的重要性，包括提供证据表明，公平的长期关系比不公平的关系更加稳定和持久。同时，亲子关系既是明显的社区关系，又常常是极其不公平的，尤其是在幼儿的情况下（Clark & Mills，2012 年）。因此，尽管公平在有些社区关系中仍然是一个关注点，但关系的具体细节在确定公平问题所扮演的确切角色时至关重要。
Attributes of Communal and Exchange Relationships 属性：社区和交换关系
It’s not always easy to categorize a relationship as communal or exchange, as there is a continuum between the two. As a relationship becomes closer, the importance of tracking costs and benefits decreases while the desire to meet the partner’s needs grows. However, there are some general rules that can help differentiate the two. First, as we suggested previously, duration of the relationship can often indicate the closeness of the relationship. However, it is possible for long-term acquaintances to never attain a level of intimacy that would cause the exchange relationship to shift into a communal relationship. In general, business relationships tend to be exchange relationships regardless of how long-term they are. However, business relationships can spawn friendships that develop into communal relationships. Finally, some people just tend to gravitate more strongly and quickly to communal relationships than others (Clark et al., 1987), leading them to find themselves in communal relationships more frequently. Overall, determining whether a relationship is exchange or communal requires looking at multiple aspects of the relationship.
关系被归类为社区或交换并不总是容易，因为两者之间存在连续性。随着关系的亲密，跟踪成本和收益的重要性降低，而满足伴侣需求的需求增加。然而，有一些一般规则可以帮助区分两者。首先，正如我们之前所建议的，关系的持续时间通常可以表明关系的亲密程度。然而，长期熟人可能永远达不到导致交换关系转变为社区关系的亲密程度。一般来说，商业关系往往是交换关系，无论其持续时间如何。然而，商业关系可以孕育出发展成为社区关系的友谊。最后，有些人可能比其他人更强烈、更快地倾向于社区关系（Clark 等人，1987 年），导致他们更频繁地发现自己处于社区关系中。总的来说，确定关系是交换还是社区关系需要考虑关系的多个方面。
When members of a relationship have different ideas about whether the relationship is communal or exchange, conflicts and hurt feelings can emerge (Clark & Mills, 1979). For example, imagine your car broke down on the way to an important job interview. You called a close friend with whom you have a communal relationship and asked for help. They dropped what they were doing, picked you up, and got you to your job interview on time. As you arrived at your interview, you said, “Thanks so much. You’re a lifesaver; I really appreciate it.” This would be an entirely appropriate interaction that would leave both people satisfied. Now, imagine that at the end of your trip, you instead pulled out your phone and said, “Thanks. I’m going to send you some money to pay you for gas and for your time.” Your friend would likely react negatively to that, and research suggests they might actually like you less as a result!
当关系中的成员对关系是共同体还是交换有不同的看法时，可能会出现冲突和伤害感情（Clark & Mills，1979）。例如，想象一下你的车在去一个重要工作面试的路上抛锚了。你给一个与你有共同体关系的好朋友打电话寻求帮助。他们放下手中的事情，接你并准时把你送到工作面试地点。当你到达面试地点时，你说：“非常感谢。你是救星；我真的很感激。”这将是完全合适的互动，会让两个人都感到满意。现在，想象一下在旅行结束时，你拿出手机说：“谢谢。我打算给你发一些钱，以支付汽油费和你的时间。”你的朋友可能会对这种反应持负面态度，研究还表明，他们可能会因此更加不喜欢你！
Contrast this with the same situation, but now you call for a taxi or a rideshare. You and the driver have a purely exchange relationship, so if, at the end of the trip, you tell them, “Thanks so much! I was really in a bind and you helped me out,” and then you neglect to pay them, there would likely be a substantial problem and a very angry driver.
与这种情况相比，现在你叫一辆出租车或拼车。你和司机之间只有纯粹的交易关系，所以如果在旅程结束时你对他们说，“非常感谢！我真的很麻烦，你帮了我大忙，”然后你却忘记付钱，很可能会出现严重问题，司机也会非常生气。
The same type of interaction—one person acting too communally in an exchange relationship—plays out often in the dating world. One partner, wanting the relationship to be communal, gives enough benefits to upset the equity in the relationship, thereby making the exchange-focused partner uncomfortable. The uncomfortable partner might say something like, “This relationship is moving too fast” as a way of indicating they don’t feel the relationship should be becoming communal at that point.
同一种类型的互动——一个人在交换关系中过于社区化——在约会世界中经常发生。一方希望关系具有社区性，给予足够的利益以破坏关系的平衡，从而让以交换为重点的伴侣感到不舒服。不舒服的伴侣可能会说：“这种关系进展得太快了”，以此来表明他们不认为关系在那个阶段应该变得具有社区性。
A Final Contrasting Opinion 一个最终对比意见
Not everyone believes that the differences between communal and exchange relationships are this stark. For example, Batson (1993) argues that communal relationships can be thought of as relationships in which people exchange behaviors for emotions. For example, caring for a relationship partner might make a person feel like a good person, conveying an emotional benefit to them in exchange for the cost of caregiving. While this is certainly true, the range of differences between communal and exchange relationships extends beyond whether benefits are or aren’t reciprocated. So, even if you believe Batson’s contention, the distinction between communal and exchange relationships is still a valuable one.
并非每个人都认为社群关系和交换关系之间的差异如此明显。例如，Batson（1993）认为，可以将社群关系视为人们为了情感而交换行为的关系。例如，照顾关系伴侣可能会让人觉得自己是个好人，通过照顾的代价换取情感上的收益。虽然这确实如此，但社群关系和交换关系之间的差异范围并不仅限于是否互惠。因此，即使你认同 Batson 的观点，社群关系和交换关系之间的区别仍然是有价值的。