HETEROGENEITY IN SOCIAL NETWORKS: A COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT MODELS LINKING RELATIONSHIPS TO PSYCHOLOGICAL OUTCOMES

126 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The Space Between Us: A Social-Functional Emotions View of Ambivalent and Indifferent Workplace Relationships (2017, background): “, spouse, coworkers, family members, friends), with comparable numbers of positive and ambivalent relationships and more ambivalent than negative relationships (Fingerman et al., 2004; Uchino et al., 2004).”
Social Negativity and Health: Conceptual and Measurement Issues (2011, unknown): “The term ambivalence has been used to describe relationships which involve moderate to high levels of both support and negativity (Uchino et al., 2004).”
Neuroenhancement of Love and Marriage: The Chemicals Between Us (2008, background): “Strong supportive social ties improve life satisfaction and reduce stress and depression more than ambivalent or weak ties [72].”
Perceived social network support and well-being in same-sex versus mixed-sex romantic relationships (2008, background): “Participants rated how helpful and (separately) how upsetting each network member was, when they were turned to for social support, on scales ranging from 1 (not at all) to 6 (extremely; see Uchino, Holt-Lunstad, Smith, & Bloor, 2004 ).”