Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-vdhp9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-15T15:01:21.647Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An ethnography of relationships in societies high in relational mobility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 May 2026

Allon Vishkin Open the ORCID record for Allon Vishkin [Opens in a new window]  and
Avital Binah-Pollak
Allon Vishkin*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Data and Decision Sciences, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology allonv@technion.ac.il
Avital Binah-Pollak
Affiliation:
Department of Humanities and Arts, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The model by Kruglanski et al. accounts for a phenomenon that is idiosyncratic and unique to societies high in relational mobility. As such, partner’s merit and appreciation, and actor’s significance quest are neither necessary nor sufficient conditions for romantic love in other societies. To illustrate this, we present the construal of relationships in Chinese society as a case study.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 49 , 2026 , e20
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Chen, J. M., Kim, H. S., Mojaverian, T., & Morling, B. (2012). Culture and social support provision: Who gives what and why. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211427309 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–135. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Illouz, E. (2019). The end of love: A sociology of negative relations. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kalkstein, D. A., Hook, C. J., Hard, B. M., & Walton, G. M. (2023). Social norms govern what behaviors come to mind—and what do not. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(6), 1203–1229. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000412 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kito, M., Yuki, M., & Thomson, R. (2017). Relational mobility and close relationships: A socioecological approach to explain cross-cultural differences. Personal Relationships, 24(1), 114–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12174 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kruglanski, A. W., Molinario, E., Jasko, K., Webber, D., Leander, N. P., & Pierro, A. (2022). Significance-quest theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(4), 1050–1071. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211034825 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, T. C. (2008). Cultural differences in intimacy: The influence of gender-role ideology and individualism-collectivism. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25(1), 143–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407507086810 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, M., & Chesla, C. (2007). Revisiting confucianism as a conceptual framework for Asian family study. Journal of Family Nursing, 13(3), 293–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074840707304400 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schug, J., Yuki, M., & Maddux, W. (2010). Relational mobility explains between- and within-culture differences in self-disclosure to close friends. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1471–1478. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610382786 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, R., Yuki, M., Talhelm, T., Schug, J., Kito, M., Ayanian, A. H., Becker, J. C., Becker, M., Chiu, C. Y., Choi, H. S., Ferreira, C. M., Fülöp, M., Gul, P., Houghton-Illera, A. M., Joasoo, M., Jong, J., Kavanagh, C. M., Khutkyy, D., Manzi, C., …& Visserman, M. L. (2018). Relational mobility predicts social behaviors in 39 countries and is tied to historical farming and threat. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(29), 7521–7526. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1713191115 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tian, K. (2024). Confucian interpersonal relationships and family ethics and its contemporary value. Trans/Form/Ação, 48(3), e025009. https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-3173.2025.v48.n3.e025009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, K., & Dunning, D. (2018). Hypocognition: Making sense of the landscape beyond one’s conceptual reach. Review of General Psychology, 22(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000126 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuki, M., & Schug, J. (2012). Relational mobility: a socio-ecological approach to personal relationships. In Gillath, O., Adams, G. E., & Kunkel, A. D. (Eds.), Relationship science: Integrating evolutionary, neuroscience, and sociocultural approaches (pp. 137–152). American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuki, M., & Schug, J. (2020). Psychological consequences of relational mobility. Current Opinion in Psychology, 32, 129–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.07.029 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed