Two studies were conducted on the rules of relating communicated in the social network interactions of young adults. Study 1 involved 68 university students who completed a two week diary recording interactions with others in which rules for conducting relationships were communicated. In general, rules for relating tended to be communicated among same-sex dyads or triads through advice-giving, sanctioning, and gossip. Rules dealt primarily with romantic relationships (qualities of desirable/eligible partners, and how to initiate, sustain, and dissolve relationships) and friendships (how to conduct them). Study 2 was a survey administered to 127 university students on the extent to which they followed these rules, the degree to which they would receive negative sanctions if the rules were violated, and whether they perceived the rules to be gender-linked. Although several rules were perceived to be gender-linked, few sex differences emerged on perceived sanctioning and on reported rule compliance. In general, rules of loyalty, openness/honesty, and respect applied to both friendship and romantic relationships.
Anderson, P. A. (1993). Cognitive schemata in personal relationships. In S. Duck (Ed.), Individuals in relationships (pp. 1-29). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
Argyle, M. , & Henderson, M. (1984). The rules of friendship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1, 211-237.
3.
Aries, E. (1996). Men and women in interaction: Reconsidering the differences. New York: Oxford University Press.
4.
Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of social information. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461-484.
5.
Bandura, A. , & Walters, R. H. (1963). Social learning and personality development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
6.
Baxter, L. A. (1986). Gender differences in the heterosexual relationship rules embedded in break-up accounts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 3, 289-306.
7.
Baxter, L. A. , Mazanec, M., Nicholson, J., Pittman, G., Smith, K., & West, L. (1997). Everyday loyalties and betrayals in personal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 655-678.
8.
Baxter, L. A. , & Widenmann, S. (1993). Revealing and not revealing the status of romantic relationships to social networks. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 321-337.
9.
Baxter, L. A. , & Wilmot, W. W. (1986). Interaction characteristics of disengaging, stable, and growing relationships. In R. Gilmour & S. Duck (Eds.), The emerging field of personal relationships (pp. 145-159). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10.
Berger, C. R. (1993). Goals, plans, and mutual understanding in relationships. In S. Duck (Ed.), Individuals in relationships (pp. 30-59). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
11.
Bergmann, J. R. (1993). Discreet indiscretions: The social organization of gossip. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
12.
Canary, D. J. , & Emmers-Sommer, T. M. (with S. Faulkner). (1997). Sex and gender differences in personal relationships. New York: Guilford Press.
13.
Duck, S. , & Miell, D. (1986). Charting the development of personal relationships. In R. Gilmour & S. Duck (Eds.), The emerging field of personal relationships (pp. 133-144). Hills-dale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14.
Duck, S. , Rutt, D. J., Hurst, M. H., & Strejc, H. (1991). Some evident truths about conversations in everyday relationships: All communications are not created equal. Human Communication Research, 18, 228-267.
15.
Eder, D. (1985). The cycle of popularity: Interpersonal relations among female adolescents. Sociology of Education, 58,154-165.
16.
Fletcher, G. J. O. , & Fitness, J. (Eds.). (1996). Knowledge structures in close relationships: A social psychological approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17.
Fletcher, G. J. O. , & Thomas, G. (1996). Close relationship lay theories: Their structure and function. In G. J. O. Fletcher & J. Fitness (Eds.), Knowledge structures in close relationships: A social psychological approach (pp. 3-24). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18.
Goldsmith, D. J. , & Baxter, L. A. (1996). Constituting relationships in talk: A taxonomy of speech events in social and personal relationships. Human Communication Research, 23, 87-114.
19.
Goldsmith, D. J. , & Fitch, K. (1997). The normative context of advice as social support. Human Communication Research, 23, 454-476.
20.
Harvey, J. H. , Weber, A. L., & Orbuch, T. L. (1990). Interpersonal accounts: A social psychological perspective. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
21.
Honeycutt, J. M. , Woods, B. L., & Fontenot, K. (1993). The endorsement of communication conflict rules as a function of engagement, marriage, and marital ideology. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 285-304.
22.
Hopper, R. , & LeBaron, C. (1998). How gender creeps into talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 31, 59-74.
23.
Johnson, M. P. (1982). Social and cognitive features of the dissolution of commitment to relationships. In S. Duck (Ed.), Personal relationships, 4: Dissolving personal relationships (pp. 51-74). New York: Academic Press.
24.
Jones, E. , & Gallois, C. (1989). Spouses' impressions of rules for communication in public and private marital conflicts. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 957-967.
25.
Knapp, M. L. , Stohl, C., & Reardon, K. K. (1981). 'Memorable' messages. Journal of Communication, 31, 27-41.
26.
Knee, C. R. (1998). Implicit theories of relationships: Assessment and prediction of romantic relationship initiation, coping, and longevity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 360-370.
27.
Metts, S. (1994). Relational transgressions. In W. R. Cupach & B. H. Spitzberg (Eds.), The dark side of interpersonal communication (pp. 217-240). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28.
Mongeau, P. , & Johnson, K. (1995). Predicting cross-sex first-date sexual expectations and involvement: Contextual and individual difference factors. Personal Relationships, 2, 301-312.
29.
Montgomery, B. M. (1992). Communication as the interface between couples and culture. Communication Yearbook, 15,475-507.
30.
Parks, M. R. (1997). Communication networks and relationship life cycles. In S. Duck (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships (2nd ed., pp. 351-372). New York: Wiley.
31.
Planalp, S. , & Rivers, M. (1996). Changes in knowledge of personal relationships. In G. J. O. Fletcher & J. Fitness (Eds.), Knowledge structures in close relationships: A social psychological approach (pp. 299-324). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
32.
Planalp, S. , Rutherford, D. K., & Honeycutt, J. M. (1988). Events that increase uncertainty in personal relationships II: Replication and extension. Human Communication Research, 14, 516-547.
33.
Reis, H. T. , & Wheeler, L. (1991). Studying social interaction with the Rochester Interaction Record. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 269-318.
34.
Romberger, B. V. (1986). 'Aunt Sophie always said...': Oral histories of the commonplaces women learned about relating to men. American Behavioral Scientist, 29, 342-367.
35.
Shimanoff, S. B. (1980). Communication rules: Theory and research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
36.
Simon, R. W. , Eder, D., & Evans, C. (1992). The development of feeling norms underlying romantic love among adolescent females. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 29-46.
37.
Sprecher, S. , & McKinney, K. (1993). Sexuality. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
38.
Strauss, A. , & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
39.
Surra, C. A. (1988). The influence of the interactive network on developing relationships. In R. Milardo (Ed.), Families and social networks (pp. 48-82). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
40.
Surra, C. A. , & Bohman, T. (1991). The development of close relationships: A cognitive perspective. In G. J. O. Fletcher & F. D. Fincham (Eds.), Cognition in close relationships (pp. 281-305). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
41.
Wilmot, W. W. , & Shellen, W. N. (1990). Language in friendships. In H. Giles & R. P. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 413-431). New York: Wiley.
42.
Wood, J. T. (1997). First response: Clarifying the issues. Personal Relationships, 4, 221-228.
