The relational self: Closeness to ingroups depends on who they are, culture, and the type of closeness

By J. Uleman, Eun Rhee, Nen-shad Bardoliwalla, Gün Refik Semin, Midori Toyama. 2000

118 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.

Interdependence as a Mediator between Culture and Interpersonal Closeness for Euro-Canadians and Turks (2004, unknown): “Previous studies have shown that level of closeness depends on the type of relationship one has with others and who these others are (Rhee et al., 1996; Uleman et al., 2000).”
Culture, trust, and social networks (2008, result): “This latter finding was also replicated in another cross-cultural study using different operationalizations (Uleman et al., 2000).”
Relational mobility: A socioecological approach to personal relationships. (2012, unknown): “…that friends from many East Asian societies tend to be less similar to each other than are friends from North America (Heine, Foster, & Spina, 2009; Igarashi et al., 2008; Kashima et al., 1995; Satterwhite, Feldman, Catrambone, & Dai, 2000; Uleman, Rhee, Bardoliwalla, Semin, & Toyama, 2000).”
Relational mobility and close relationships: A socioecological approach to explain cross‐cultural differences (2017, background): “For instance, people feel closer to parents and friends than to their relatives, and this is true for Euro-Americans, Asian Americans, Turks, Dutch, and Japanese (Uleman, Rhee, Bardoliwalla, Semin, & Toyama, 2000).”