Abstract
Scholarship indicates that there are many benefits of social support, yet theoretical questions remain as to whether the perceived efficacy of support depends upon its source. Drawing on in-depth interviews with a sample of collegiate athletes with access to a vast support network, this research examined the perceived utility of support received from significant others, similar others, and individuals who were both personally significant and experientially similar, albeit to varying degrees. Five categories of similar and/or significant other supporters emerged, each of which seemed to fulfill a different support function. Significant-only others provided support based in personal significance, whereas similar-only others supplied experience-based coping assistance. And a particularly valued resource, individuals who were both significant and similar were solicited based on the relative salience of their significant and similar other role identities and the uniquely specialized support they could provide to match the needs of both individuals and their stressful circumstances. In support of theory, findings highlight the potential for support interventions aimed at cultivating different types of similar and significant other relationships.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
