Search

AbstractExperience sampling studies often aim to capture social interactions. A central methodological question in such studies is whether to use event- or signal-contingent sampling. The little existing research on this issue has not taken into account that social interactions occur with unique interaction partners (e.g., Anna or Tom). We analyze one week of social interaction data of 286 students from the University of Pittsburgh (60.8% male, mean age 19.2 years), taking into account the unique interaction partners of each student. Specifically, we investigate the differences between event- and signal contingent sampling in (1) the total number of unique interaction partners captured, as well as (2) the kinds of relationships, and (3) the quality of social interactions with these captured interaction partners. Apart from a larger quantity of interactions and unique interaction partners in the event-contingent sampling design, our analyses indicate subtle differences between the two designs when aiming to assess social interactions with more distant interaction partners, such as coworkers or strangers. Most importantly, in our analyses, specific interaction partners and social roles explained a considerable amount of variance in the quality of social interactions (up to 20.5%), suggesting that future research would benefit greatly from considering “with whom” individuals interact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we both describe and analyze the meeting process and the evolution of a friendship network among sociology freshmen in the Netherlands. We develop a theory that explains how changes in the network structure depend on one or more of four main effects; proximity, visible similarity, invisible similarity, and network opportunity. We formulate expectations with regard to what factors are important at what stages of the friendship development, making a distinction between 'meeting' and 'mating.' To some extent, the results confirm our expectations. The proximity and visible similarity variables determine change in network structure in the early stages, whereas network opportunity is important during all stages. Unfortunately, no significant effects of invisible similarity are found. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A crucial but often overlooked impact of early life exposure to trauma is its far-reaching effect on a person’s relationship with their body. Several domains of body experience may be negatively influenced or damaged as a result of early childhood trauma. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate disturbances in three domains of body experience: body attitude, body satisfaction, and body awareness. Furthermore, associations between domains of body experience and severity of trauma symptoms as well as frequency of dissociation were evaluated. Method: Body attitude was measured with the Dresden Body Image Questionnaire, body satisfaction with the Body Cathexis Scale, and body awareness with the Somatic Awareness Questionnaire in 50 female patients with complex trauma and compared with scores in a non-clinical female sample (n = 216). Patients in the clinical sample also filled out the Davidson Trauma Scale and the Dissociation Experience Scale. Results: In all measured domains, body experience was severely affected in patients with early childhood trauma. Compared with scores in the non-clinical group, effect sizes in Cohen’sdwere 2.7 for body attitude, 1.7 for body satisfaction, and 0.8 for body awareness. Associations between domains of body experience and severity of trauma symptoms were low, as were the associations with frequency of dissociative symptoms. Conclusions: Early childhood trauma in women is associated with impairments in self-reported body experience that warrant careful assessment in the treatment of women with psychiatric disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]