|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tend and befriend |
 |
This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. Please help recruit one or improve this article yourself. See the talk page for details. Please consider using {{Expert-subject}} to associate this request with a WikiProject |
Tend-and-befriend is a behavioural pattern exhibited by human beings and some animal species when under threat. It refers to protection of offspring (tending) and seeking out of the social group for joint protection (befriending).
Contents |
The dominant model of human responses to stress has been the fight or flight response. In response to threat, humans (and other animals) can become aggressive and confront a stressor (fight) or flee either literally or through avoidant coping, such as social withdrawal or substance abuse. From the standpoint of human beings, however, this analysis of stress responses is incomplete. Another tendency is to affiliate, that is, to come together in groups in threatening times (Cohen & Wills 1985). This tend and befriend response refers to the fact that people often manage threats by caring for offspring and seeking social support in time of stress (Taylor et al. 2000).
Many scientists now believe that there is an affiliative neurocircuitry that prompts affiliation especially in response to stress. Research suggests that this system regulates social approach behavior, much as hunger, thirst, or sexual drives are biologically regulated. A biological basis for this regulation appears to be oxytocin (Carter et al. 1999).
Oxytocin has been tied to a broad array of social relationships and activities, including peer bonding, sexual activity, and affiliative preferences (Carter et al. 1999). Oxytocin is released in humans in response to at least some stressors, especially those that may trigger affiliative needs. Oxytocin prompts affiliative behavior, including maternal tending and social contact with peers (Insel 1997). Thus affiliation under stress serves tending needs, including protective response towards offspring, and may also take the form of befriending, namely seeking social contact for one’s own protection, the protection of offspring, and the protection of the social group. These social responses to threat reduce biological stress responses, including elevated heart rate, blood pressures, and hypothalamic pituitary adrenal axis stress responses, such as cortisol (Light et al. 2000).
Why would humans and some animals have a biologically regulated affiliative system? Looking at affiliation from the standpoint of evolutionary theory makes it clear that there would be clear survival benefits of affiliative response to threat. Tending to offspring in times of stress is vital to ensuring the survival of the species. Tending activities also reduce biological stress responses in both parents and offspring, thereby reducing stress-related threats to their health (Taylor 2002).
Likewise “befriending” leads to substantial mental and physical health benefits in times of stress. Social isolation is tied to a significantly enhanced risk of mortality, whereas social support is tied to a broad array of beneficial health outcomes, including reduced risk of illness and death (Cohen & Wills 1985).
Tend and befriend has been heavily studied in female animals and women. One reason for this fact is that estrogen enhances the effects of oxytocin which, as noted, is believed to be an important biological underpinning of tend and befriend (McCarthy 1995).
There are evolutionary bases for believing that female responses to stress may be better characterized by tend and befriend than those of males as well. In early human history when the human stress response evolved, work was largely sex segregated, with women responsible for child care. Accordingly, selection pressures for responses to threat that benefit both self and offspring would have been greater for females than for males, favoring social responses to threat in women. Research shows that women are, in fact, more likely to seek the company of others in times of stress, compared to men (Tamres et al. 2002).
Men’s behavior under stress may be better characterized by the fight or flight response. Although both men and women show the biological fight or flight pattern of arousal (e.g., elevated heart rate and blood pressure), men’s behavior under stress is better characterized by fight (aggression) and by flight (social withdrawal, substance abuse) in response to stress (Williams 2003).
Women have higher life expectancies from birth in most countries where there is equal access to medical care. In the United States, for example, this difference is almost 6 years. It has been hypothesized that one reason may be that men’s responses to stress (which include aggression, social withdrawal, and substance abuse) place them at risk for adverse health-related consequences, whereas women’s more social responses to stress are healthier behaviors (Verbrugge 1985). Whether these gender differences in responsivity to stress help to explain the gender gap in mortality is not yet known.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |