In this article, the author presents a theoretical scheme focusing on the relation between closeness and distance in intimate relationships. This challenges a commonly held notion, which maintains that the two constructs are opposite poles on a single continuum. The authors present an alternative conceptualization employing dialectical and reflective thinking, resulting in a multidimensional conceptual model. Accordingly, apparent opposites at preliminary dimensions of experience may be unified into a shared construction of dyadic closeness and distance, when reflected on through a higher systemic mode of thinking. This process leads to a second-order level of dyadic closeness, which is indicative of the quality of the intimate relationship. The relevance of the model to different cultural contexts, as well as its implications for theory, research, and practice, are elaborated and discussed.
AltmanI.VinselA.BrownB. (1981). Dialectic conceptions in social psychology: An application to social penetration and privacy regulation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 107-160.
2.
AlvessonM.SkoldbergK. (2000). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3.
AronA.AronE. N. (1986). Love as the expansion of self: Understanding attraction and satisfaction. New York, NY: Hemisphere.
4.
AronA.AronE. N.SmollanD. (1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596-612.
5.
AronA.FraleyB. (1999). Relationship closeness as including other in the self: Cognitive underpinnings and measures. Social Cognition, 17, 140-160.
6.
AronA.MashekD. J.AronE. N. (2004). Closeness as including other in the self. In MashekD. J.AronA. (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 27-41). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
BaxterL. A.ErbertL. A. (1999). Perceptions of dialectical contradictions in turning points of development in heterosexual romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 547-569.
8.
BaxterL. A.MontgomeryB. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
9.
BeierE. G.SternbergD. P. (1977). Marital communication: Subtle cues between newlyweds. Journal of Communication, 27(3), 92-97.
10.
Ben-AriA.EnoshG. (in press). Reflexivity, reflection and knowledge construction in qualitative research. Qualitative Social Work.
11.
Ben-AriA.LaveeY. (2004). Cultural orientation, ethnic affiliation, and negative daily occurrences: A multi-dimensional cross-cultural analysis. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74, 102-111.
12.
Ben-AriA.LaveeY. (2007a). Dyadic closeness in marriage: From the inside story to a conceptual model. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24, 627-644.
13.
BerscheidE.SnyderM.OmotoA. (1989). The relationship closeness inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 792-807.
14.
BirtchnellJ. (1993). How humans relate: A new interpersonal theory. London, England: Praeger.
15.
BirtchnellJ.VoortmanS.DeJongC.GordonD. (2006). Measuring interrelating within couples: The Couple’s Relating to Each Other Questionnaires (CREOQ). Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 79, 339-364.
16.
ClarkM. S.MillsJ. (1993). The difference between communal and exchange relationships: What it is and is not. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 684-691.
17.
ConvilleR. I. (1991). Relational transitions: The evolution of personal relationships. New York, NY: Praeger.
18.
De BonoE. (1990). I am right–You are wrong. London, England: Penguin.
19.
DijkstraI. C.StroebeM. S. (1998). The impact of a child’s death on parents: A myth (not yet) disproved?Journal of Family Studies, 4, 159-185.
20.
EnoshG.Ben-AriA. (2009). Cooperation and conflict in qualitative research: A dialectical approach to knowledge production. Qualitative Health Research, 20, 125-130.
21.
EnoshG.Ben-AriA.BuchbinderE. (2008). Sense of differentness in the construction of knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 14, 450-465.
22.
FeeneyJ. A. (1999). Issues of closeness and distance in dating relationships: Effects of sex and attachment style. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 571-590.
23.
FrijdaN. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
24.
HarveyJ. H. (1995). Odyssey of the heart: The search for closeness, intimacy, and love. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
25.
HelgesonV. S.ShaverP.DyerM. (1987). Prototypes of intimacy and distance in same-sex and opposite-sex relationships. Journal of Personal and Social Relationships, 4, 195-233.
26.
HessJ. A. (2002). Distance regulation in personal relationships: The development of a conceptual model and a test of representational validity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 663-683.
27.
HessJ. A. (2003). Measuring distance in personal relationships: The Relational Distance Index. Personal Relationships, 10, 197-215.
28.
HessJ. A.FanninA. M.PollomL. H. (2007). Creating closeness: Discerning and measuring strategies for fostering closer relationships. Personal Relationships, 14, 25-44.
29.
JacobsonN. S. (1989). The politics of intimacy. The Behavior Therapist, 12, 29-32.
30.
JohnsonA. J.WittenbergE.HaighM.WigleyS.BeckerJ.BrownK.ElizabethC. (2004). The process of relationship development and deterioration: Turning points in friendships that have terminated. Communication Quarterly, 52, 54-66.
31.
JohnsonA. J.WittenbergE.VillagranM. M.MazurM.VillagranP. (2003). Relational progression as a dialectic: Examining turning points in communication among friends. Communication Monographs, 70, 230-249.
32.
KantorD.LehrR. (1975). Inside the family. New York, NY: Harper.
33.
KelleyH. H.BerschildE.ChristensenA.HarveyJ. H.HustonT. L.LevingerG.… PetersonD. R. (1983). Close relationships. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
34.
KreilkampT. (1984). Psychological closeness. American Behavioral Scientist, 27, 771-784.
35.
LaRossaR.ReitzesD. C. (1993). Symbolic interactionism and family studies. In BossP. G.DohertyW. J.LaRossaR.ShummW. R.StiennmetzS. K. (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp. 135-163). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
36.
LaunganiP. (1995). Stress in eastern and western cultures. In SpielbergerC. D.SarasonI. G.BrebnerJ. M. T.GreenglassE.LaunganiP.O’RoarkA. M. (Eds.), Stress and emotion: Vol. 15. Anxiety, anger, and curiosity (pp. 265-280). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
37.
LaveeY.Ben-AriA. (2007a). The effects of work-related stress on negative mood and dyadic closeness: Mediating and moderating effects. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 1021-1035.
38.
LaveeY.Ben-AriA. (2007b). Dyadic distance: From the inside story to a conceptual model. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24, 645-655.
39.
LaveeY.Ben-AriA. (2008). The association of daily hassles and uplifts with family and life satisfaction: Does cultural orientation make a difference?American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 89-98.
40.
MaranhaoT. (1991). Reflection, dialogue and the subject. In SteierF. (Ed.), Research and reflexivity. London, England: Sage.
41.
MehrabianA. (1981). Silent messages: Implicit communication of emotions and attitudes. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
42.
MesquitaB.FrijdaN. H. (1992). Cultural variations in emotions: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 179-204.
43.
MillsJ.ClarkM. S.FordT. E.JohnsonM. (2004). Measurement of communal strength. Personal Relationships, 11, 213-230.
44.
MillsT. L.WakemanM. A.FeaC. B. (2001). Adult grandchildren’s perceptions of emotional closeness and consensus with their maternal and paternal grandparents. Journal of Family Issues, 22, 427-455.
45.
MontgomeryB. M. (1993). Relationship maintenance versus relationship change: A dialectical dilemma. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 205-223.
46.
MontgomeryB. M.BaxterL. A. (Eds.). (1998). Dialectical approaches to studying personal relationships. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47.
NollerP.WhiteA. (1990). The validity of the communication patterns questionnaire. Psychological Assessment, 2, 478-482.
48.
ParksM. R. (1982). Ideology in interpersonal communication: Off the couch and into the world. Communication Yearbook, 5, 79-107.
49.
ParksM. R.FloydK. (1996). Meanings for closeness and intimacy in friendship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 13, 85-107.
50.
PollnerM. (1991). Left of ethnomethodology: The rise and decline of radical reflexivity. American Sociological Review, 56, 370-380.
51.
PopovicM.MilneD.BarrettP. (2003). The scale of perceived interpersonal closeness (PICS). Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 10, 286-301.
52.
RawlinsW. K. (1989). A dialectical analysis of the tensions, functions and strategic challenges of communication in young adult friendships. In AndersonJ. A. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 12 (pp. 157-189). Newbury, CA: Sage.
53.
RawlinsW. K. (1992). Friendship matters: Communication, dialectics, and the life course. Hawthorne, NY: de Gruyter.
54.
RyderR. G.BartleS. (1991). Boundaries as distance regulators in personal relationships. Family Process, 30, 393-406.
55.
SolomonR. C. (1997). Beyond ontology: Ideation, phenomenology and the cross cultural study of emotion. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 27, 289-303.
