Search

People often seek advice and social support. One approach for seeking advice is by submitting one's problems/concerns to an advice columnist. More contemporary forms of advice seeking are seen on discussion boards (e.g. Reddit) where individuals ask questions (often anonymously) and gather responses from others. This activity makes use of advice-seeking scenarios so that students better understand and apply interpersonal and health communication theories. Students are guided in the process of providing advice while using course-specific relevant communication theory to craft their responses. In this article, we explain the activity, provide examples of two requests for advice, and include recommendations for assessment. Courses: Interpersonal Communication/Health Communication. Objectives: The goal of this activity is to help students retain and apply communication theories/models by using relatable hypothetical advice-seeking requests.

Objectives: We included two sacrifice constructs to reflect the awareness and (in)equity of behavioral sacrifice in same‐sex relationships: (a) the receiver's awareness (whether the receiver under‐, over‐, or unbiasedly estimated the other's frequency of sacrifice behaviors) and (b) the provider's perceived (in)equity (whether the provider perceived themselves as underbenefitted, overbenefitted, or equitably treated). We then tested how heterosexist discrimination related to same‐sex couples' relationship quality via receivers' awareness and providers' perceived (in)equity. Background: Sacrifices are pro‐relationship efforts in which individuals forgo self‐interests for the partner or the relationship. The links from sacrifice to same‐sex couples' relationship quality are still understudied. Further, no study has examined whether sexual minority stressors relate to sacrifice in same‐sex relationships. Method: We used dyadic, survey data from 141 same‐sex couples and conducted actor–partner interdependence models. Results: For receivers' awareness, unbiased estimation and overestimation were related to higher relationship quality; underestimation was related to lower relationship quality. For providers' perceived (in)equity, being underbenefitted—a situation in which individuals perceived that the other made fewer sacrifices than they did—was related to lower relationship quality. For indirect pathways, when one individual encountered heterosexist discrimination, this individual's sacrifice was likely underestimated by the receiver; in turn, this individual's partner experienced low relationship quality. Conclusions: To better understand sacrifice and relationship quality for same‐sex couples, heterosexist discrimination should be considered. Implications: Interventions are needed when practitioners work with same‐sex couples who feel that their sacrifices were underestimated, and efforts are still needed to reduce heterosexist discrimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We test how three main methods of family financial socialization (retrospectively reported) are uniquely associated with three indicators of financial well‐being, and whether financial self‐efficacy and financial management behaviors mediate these associations. Background: Although the link between family financial socialization and financial well‐being in emerging adulthood is well established, no previous study has differentiated between the three main socialization methods nor tested their unique pathways. We expand on family financial socialization theory to begin addressing this gap. Method: We utilize reliable and valid measures of parent financial socialization and data from 4,182 U.S. emerging adults. Results: Structural equation modeling revealed that (a) parent financial modeling was directly associated with financial behaviors and financial satisfaction and indirectly associated with all three financial outcomes through financial behaviors, (b) experiential learning was directly associated with financial self‐efficacy and indirectly associated with all three financial outcomes through financial self‐efficacy, and (c) parent–child financial discussion had zero direct or indirect associations. Conclusion: To prepare children and adolescents for future financial well‐being, parents should focus on modeling financial behaviors and providing experiential learning opportunities rather than lecturing. Implications: To improve the financial well‐being of emerging adults, educators should promote parent financial modeling and experiential learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While a plethora of research has found that parent financial socialization during childhood and adolescence is linked with financial outcomes in emerging adulthood, recent literature suggests that financial socialization may also impact romantic relationship outcomes in emerging adulthood. Utilizing a sample of 1,950 U.S. emerging adults, we test whether retrospectively recalled parent financial socialization is associated with romantic relationship flourishing and whether this association is mediated by financial behaviors and financial distress. We found that financial socialization was positively associated with financial behaviors and relationship flourishing and was negatively associated with financial distress. Further, financial behaviors partially mediated the association between financial socialization and relationship flourishing, while financial distress did not mediate the association. Together with previous literature, these findings provide useful information for therapists and educators in their pursuit to promote robust parent financial socialization in childhood and adolescence and both financial and relational well-being in emerging adulthood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conducted a systematic review of research on relational sacrifices in romantic relationships from 2002 to 2021 [N = 115 studies] to answer three questions: Q1: Whose voices and vantage points are represented in the research?; Q2: What types of questions are valued?; Q3: What are the reflections and connections about relational sacrifices that were learned during the review? To address Q1, we coded sample demographics of study participants on geographical location, race/ethnicity, education/income/SES, gender (i.e., gender differences explored and beyond gender binaries), sexual orientation, age, and disability, using a coding system of 1 (exclusion/absence) to 5 (focus on context‐relevant experiences for underrepresented samples). Results for Q1 showed that the most frequent codes were 1 (exclusion/absence) for information about the samples' disability status, education/income/SES, and both codes for gender (i.e., gender differences explored and beyond gender binaries); when demographic information was reported, the most frequent codes were 2 (compensatory addition) for age, sexual orientation, geographical location, and race/ethnicity. To address Q2, we coded for aspects of the study designs and conceptual dimensions of sacrifice. Results for Q2 showed that a majority of the studies in our review used quantitative and close‐ended measures emphasizing behavioral frequency of sacrifice. For Q3, we include our own reflections and connections about relational sacrifices, questioning research methods, and challenging assumptions drawn from existing research to move toward a more inclusive science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]