Recent orders
Relationship Maintenance
Relationship Maintenance
Name:
Institutional Affiliation:
Date:
In order to keep a relationship going, couples must have deliberate steps to help them maintain it. Relationships need effort because the two people in the relationship are independent individuals, and hence they have many different characteristics that may at times, clash with their partner. For example, one partner may be quite messy and leave a room in disarray, while the other may be quite obsessive about order and neatness. To resolve such issues, couples must choose to consciously maintain their relationship through the good and bad times, both of which are inevitable.
There are several reasons why relationships require maintenance. The first is to ensure that the two people in the relationship maintain their bond. Without the conscious effort to keep the relationship going, they will drift apart and end the relationship. The second reason to maintain a relationship is to work through conflicts that the two people have (Priem 2019). Difficult times and conflict are a normal part of a relationship; thus couples must be prepared to work through them. Resolving conflicts in a way that leaves both parties satisfied is essential for the relationship to grow. The third reason why relationships require maintenance is to ensure stability. Each party in the relationships has certain expectations that they want to be met in the relationship. To maintain the relationship, the two must discuss their needs so that they are aware of each other’s expectations. Doing this will avoid a volatile environment where no one feels that their needs and expectations are met.
Couples can apply five strategies to maintain their relationship. The first strategy is openness (Priem 2019). Openness involves complete honesty between partners. This includes communicating how a person feels and thinks clearly with their partner. There should be no secrets between the two people; instead, they should strive to always talk honestly about what is going on in each other’s lives. In this way, no one gets blindsided by any strange information or events about their partner that they did not know about. The second strategy in relationship maintenance is positivity (Priem 2019). A positive person tries to be happy and see the positive side of things. While this may not always be possible, it is crucial to cultivate an atmosphere of positivity so that other people around you feel positive as well. Between partners, this is a vital strategy to help them enjoy each other’s company.
The third strategy of maintaining relationships is assurances. Assurances are encouraging and positive words and statements. They are most useful when one partner feels low or uncertain about an issue. They help the couple create positivity and clarity about the future of their relationship. The final two strategies of sharing tasks and keeping the same social networks (Priem 2019). Sharing tasks for example chores around the house as well as other tasks outside the home, make the partners feel valued and supported. Maintain social networks such as friends and family also helps maintain the relationship. For example, couples can go out or arrange visits with friends and family. Such actions are essential towards keeping the relationship healthy.
In conclusion, all relationships require effort to maintain. It is vital to recognize that individuals have different desires and characteristics, and sometimes they may clash with those of their partners. Partners must, therefore, be deliberate in how they address issues in their relationship. The five strategies used to maintain relationships are openness, positivity, assurances, sharing tasks, and social networks. When couples apply these five strategies in their relationship, it will help them grow as a couple and also as individuals. They will also be able o handle conflicts more effectively.
References
P. Jennifer. “Rethinking How We Maintain Our Relationships” Psychology Today. 5 February 2019. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/stressing-communication/201902/rethinking-how-we-maintain-our-relationships
Relationship between Theory, Research and Practice
Relationship between Theory, Research and Practice
Theory, research, and practice in nursing have an interlinked relationship, with each relying on the other to inform and make the nursing profession better. An interlink between theory, research, and practice brings up a true integration of knowledge gained from vast sources and experiences and is designed to support services to clients and improve society’s health (Whitehead & Hutton, 2020). In the nursing profession, the practice involves the actual implementation of knowledge obtained while studying, which means the application of theories and conducting more research to keep on improving the quality of care. Every day is a learning opportunity, and with the nurses being exposed to new challenges every now and then, they need to come up with possible solutions that will effectively and efficiently help in their continuum of care. Based on this, a nurse must dig deeper into research, conducting their own research and consulting with researchers on the same field to amass as much knowledge that will enable them to get a solution to the problem.
Conducting research is not a blind mission but involves a series of presenting challenges that need to be tackled, removing the stumbling block to ensuring nursing success in the provision of care. This means that nurses need to be in practice to encounter these problems, some of which might have ready solutions, but others require more research to reach a conclusion. When a problem has no immediate solution, it doesn’t mean it will forever remain that way, as nurses must keep trying new things to improve patient care. Due to the need to obtain solutions to difficult challenges, nurses develop theories on how the specific problem needs to be addressed; theories need to be further researched with the postulated hypothesis tested (Black, 2019). As a result, nurses will be required to conduct extensive research to see whether their postulated theories can work, upon which, after testing, they will be required to integrate their theory and research into practice. Based on this, theory, research, and practice are interlinked in that practice involves testing theories that have been found helpful for practice to survive and evolve.
References
Black, B. P. (2019). The science of nursing and evidence-based practice. Professional Nursing E-Book: Concepts & Challenges, 217.
Whitehead, D., & Hutton, A. (2020). Identifying research ideas, questions, statements and hypotheses. Nursing and Midwifery Research: Methods and Appraisal for Evidence Based Practice, 81.
Relationship between Theory of Mind and Family Variables (2)
Relationship between Theory of Mind and Family Variables
Name
Institution
Relationship between Theory of Mind and Family Variables
Theory of mind entails understanding the knowledge, emotions, beliefs, and intentions of other persons and utilizing that understanding to recognize and navigate social situations. It is an essential aspect of the development process of children because it is associated with social competence that influences executive function (Schaafsma et al., 2015). Family contexts such as family social-economics status, mental state talk, mind-mindedness, and siblings’ number directly impact on the development of the theory of mind. Several empirical studies have examined the relationship between family variables and the development of the theory of mind. Overall, the family variables such as economic status, number of siblings, and mental talk state influence the development of the theory of mind since children learn and acknowledge some of these variables to help them navigate in the social situations.
Literature Review
Siblings impact on the theory of mind understanding among children because of the playtime they share. Shahaenian (2015) in a study that included 142 children between the age of 4 and 5 years did not establish any correlation between the number of siblings and the theory of mind development among children. However, they found that the number of days children played together with their siblings and parental interference level in conflict among siblings was directly associated with the theory of mind understanding. Calero et al. (2013), in a study to examine the differences in the theory of mind among boys, found that other factors such as birth order, number of siblings, and coarse personality traits did not have a significant relationship with the results of the theory of mind tasks. In this view, the number of siblings or birth order does not impact theory development, but associative factors such as playtime influence it.
Parents who express mind-mindedness influences the performance of theory of mind development among children. Hughes, Devine, and Wang (2017), in a cross-cultural study, investigated parental mind-mindedness and children’s theory of mind using a sample of 241 parent-child dyads from Hong Kong and the United Kingdom. The study showed that within the two cultures, parental mind-mindedness was directly associated with the theory of mind, and mind-mindedness contributed to the cultural differences in the theory of mind of preschoolers. In the study, the UK parents illustrated a greater mind-mindedness, and their children also had a superior performance in the theory of mind compared to the Hong Kong sample. In this view, parents with a higher level of mind-mindedness influence the development of the theory of mind of their children. Mind-mindedness is the tendency of caregivers to view a child as a person with a mind as opposed to an individual with needs that should be satisfied.
The collaborative acts and social constructions of parents influence the development of children’s theory of mind. With age, children always acknowledge that human actions are guided and governed by mental states, and their desires, beliefs, emotions, and intentions may differ from that of others. Sung and Hsu (2014), in a longitudinal study, examined the effect of mother-toddler collaborative communication on the development of the theory of mind at the age of 4. They found that the higher level of collaborative acts of a mother positively impacted on the development of the theory of mind when a child is engaged in higher collaborative acts level. However, children contribute to their development when they actively participate in supportive co-constructed collaborative conversations. In this case, parents are viewed as facilitators of the development process of the theory of mind. Overall, child and maternal collaborative acts indicate that family-centered initiatives with mother-child dyads impact theory of mind development.
The relationship between siblings and parental influence in their interaction influences the development of the theory of mind. Song and Volling (2018) in a study that involved 208 firstborn and their parents, investigated children’s Theory of Mind of a sibling before and after birth and their interaction as well as parental discipline strategies. The study showed that the Theory of Mind among children before the birth of a sibling indicated a positive interaction with the young sibling. In contrast, antagonistic behavior directed towards a young sibling negatively influenced the theory of mind at 12 months mainly when a parent utilizes the low level of child-centered discipline. The results show the role of patents in the process of social cognitive understanding among young children in the context of sibling interaction. Song et al. (2016), in a study involving firstborns and siblings aggressive behavior, concluded that firstborn’s aggression directly predicted greater sibling antagonism. These results indicate influence among siblings across social-cognitive, behavioral, and relational factors from early life years.
Social-economic status background of children influences the development of the theory of mind. Molzhon (2016) studied the effect of the socioeconomic background of children on the relationship between the executive function and theory of mind. The study indicated a positive correlation between socioeconomic status and executive function. Besides, it offered evidence that the theory of mind is relatively protected from the negative impacts of low socioeconomic status (Molzhon, 2016). However, based on the findings, one can illustrate that the social-economic background affects the theory of mind since it influences the executive functions of the children. In this case, children from a low social-economic experience tend to have little executive function development compared t those from a stable socioeconomic background.
Conclusion
The relationship between family variables and the theory of mind is not conclusively examined based on the review of some empirical studies. Some studies indicate a positive relationship between the number of siblings and the theory of mind, while the reviewed literature does not indicate any association. However, there is a correlation between the theory of mind and socioeconomic status background of children. Besides, siblings’ behavior towards one another and parental discipline strategies impact the development of the theory of mind. Moreover, the studies also show that there is a relationship between collaborative acts of a parent and the theory of mind among children. Therefore, family variables such as parental support and discipline strategies, mind-mindedness, and siblings’ behavior influence theory of mind development among children.
References
Calero, C. I., Salles, A., Semelman, M., & Sigman, M. (2013). Age and gender dependent development of Theory of Mind in 6-to 8-years old children. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 7, 281.
Hughes, C., Devine, R. T., & Wang, Z. (2018). Does parental mind‐mindedness account for cross‐cultural differences in preschoolers’ theory of mind?. Child development, 89(4), 1296-1310.
Molzhon, A. (2016). Exploring the Influence of Socioeconomic Status on the Executive Function and Theory of Mind Skills of Preschoolers.
Schaafsma, S. M., Pfaff, D. W., Spunt, R. P., & Adolphs, R. (2015). Deconstructing and reconstructing theory of mind. Trends in cognitive sciences, 19(2), 65-72.
Shahaeian, A. (2015). Sibling, family, and social influences on children’s theory of mind understanding: New evidence from diverse intracultural samples. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(6), 805-820.
Shahaeian, A., Nielsen, M., Peterson, C. C., & Slaughter, V. (2014). Cultural and family influences on children’s theory of mind development: A comparison of Australian and Iranian school-age children. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(4), 555-568.
Song, J. H., & Volling, B. L. (2018). Theory‐of‐M ind development and early sibling relationships after the birth of a sibling: Parental discipline matters. Infant and child development, 27(1), e2053.
Sung, J., & Hsu, H. C. (2014). Collaborative mother–toddler communication and theory of mind development at age 4. Journal of applied developmental psychology, 35(5), 381-391.