Three Articles All in One!

           In the study “Physical distance and interpersonal characteristics in college students' romantic relationships”, the authors, Roger Van Horn, Angela Arnone, Kelly Nesbitt, Laura Desllets, Tanya Sears, Michelle Giffin, and Rebecca Brudi, have a clear purpose: “To investigate interpersonal characteristics of romantic relationships among college students as a function of physical separation.” In the study “Making Plans: Praxis Strategies for Negotiating Uncertainty- Certainty in Long-Distance Relationships”, the author Erin Sahlstein claims that making plans manages both certainty and uncertainty in long distance dating relationships (LDDRs). In “Long-Distance Pairs Can Last, Researcher Says.” Author Mary Carole suggests that these types of relationships are becoming more and more common, and that they tend to last as long as, if not longer than couples who live in the same city. The three studies work along with each other to prove the common theme that long distance relationships can last, but it requires planning and communication. In terms of content, the three studies are quite different. It is hard to determine which article makes the better case, but in terms of emotional appeal and relevancy, the three studies work beautifully alongside each other.

Before the authors of “Physical distance and interpersonal characteristics in college students” romantic relationships” conducted the study, they assumed that distance would affect a relationship by restricting opportunities for partners to engage in intimacy processes. In the text, intimacy processes are defined as feelings of being understood, cared for, and validated that result from a romantic partners self disclosure. The study concluded of a gathering of 162 students currently in relationships, long distance (LDR) or not (non LDR). These students were asked to fill out a questionnaire about their current relationship based on the ten intimacy processes. They then checked back with the students in three months to see if the status of the relationships had changed. The studies then produced results showing the authors that being in a long distance relationship compared to a geographically close relationship, displayed little to no difference in the break-up rate, nor did the stated intimacy processes change dramatically from LDR to non-LDR. In fact, the study stated that closeness and instrumental help were greater in LDRs.

Erin Sahlstein uses three forms of praxis strategies throughout the course of this study. Praxis is defined as a philosophical term for practical behavior. The author also mentions use of Relational Dialectics within the study, which Sahlstein claims is a “useful lens for examining simultaneous yet competing needs”. Sahlstein states that the reason for this study is clear in the literature, “there is a human desire to reduce uncertainty, to explain the world, and to render it predictable.” She then goes on to state that planning creates certainty. Sahlstein claims that uncertainties come about in LDDRs because of the ebb and flow of their partner’s physical presence in each other’s lives. Certainty is something that LDDR couples strive for because of such infrequencies.

The study consisted of the measure of twenty couples. They were each given a questionnaire to fill out alone, and then they were asked to complete a couple interview, where in which one person read the questions and then answer the question jointly. The questions were as flows: 1) How does your time together positively impact your time apart? 2) How does your time together negatively impact your time apart? 3) How does your time apart positively impact your time together? 4) How does your time apart negatively impact your time together? The participants were asked to tape their answers. The praxis strategies used reflect the couples interview where denial, balance, and segmentation. Planning as denial is when couples engage in planning talk, which produces certainty about future interactions. Planning as denial is when couples plan for conversations that have uncertain outcomes. Lastly, planning as segmentation allows for the clean separation between individual and relational lives. The results showed that over planning could cause anxiety for partners if they don’t finish what they had planned.

Mary Carole focuses less on the experimental side of these relationships and more on the psychological side of them. She suggests that LDRs work in different ways than non LDRS, which is why they tend to last longer. She says that they work differently in the fact that they require more open communication and have fewer petty arguments than those who are always together. This also results in more quality time together. In short, LDRs and non LDRs function differently, but often last similar amounts of time.

Collectively, these authors are saying that if you handle an LDR properly then the success rate will be higher. The skills that they say could help in handling these relationships properly are stated in the articles. Planning, knowledge that these relationships don’t always fail, knowing that the success rate is the same for long distance and non long distance couples, or even knowing that they can last even longer than non LDRs, knowing that the intimacy processes are to be handled differently due to absence of partner’s physical being and how to adjust appropriately to ensure relationship safety. Together, these articles each provide the reader with helpful and valid points to keep the relationship going in a positive direction. So if one were to read these articles right after another, the main theme would be the same. In conclusion, long distance relationships can have a happy ending if they are managed with care.

Mary Carole, Mary, comp. "Long-Distance Pairs Can Last, Researcher Says." 33.17

            (2005): 5. EBSCOhost. 9 Jan. 2006. Web. 3 Feb. 2012. 

Sahlstein, Erin M. "Making Plans: Praxis Strategies for Negotiating Uncertainty-

            Certainty in Long-Distance Relationships." Western Journal of

            Communication70.2 (2006): 147-65. Academic Search Premier. Web. 27 Feb.

            2012.

Van Horn, K. Roger, Angela Arnone, Kelly Nesbitt, Laura Desllets, Tanya Sears,

            Michelle Giffin, and Rebecca Brudi. "Physical Distance and Interpersonal

            Characteristics in College Students    Romantic Relationships - HORN - 2005 –

            Personal Relationships." Personal Relationships 4.1 (1997): 25-34.