Thoughts on reciprocation

Post Reply New Topic

What are your thoughs on reciprication?

How do you tell whether someone is an aquatience or a friend?

How do you tell if someone is interested in you?

I need a better algorithm for working out whether someone's an aquatience or friend than binary search. Basically I use a process of initating contact and then keeping track of how often they initiate return contact and also other factors, like whether or not they discuss their personal issues. I basically view how close or distant a relationship as a scale like this: L|-a--b-----c-d--e-|R with differient kinds of interactions at different points on the scale.
some useful markers:
a: someone who I know, but doesn't or rarely talks to me, does not usually acknowledge my presence.
b: aquatience.
c: friend.
d: close friend.
e: boyfriend or girlfriend.

I start at about just to the left of point b and move left or right according to the signals I get from the person. It doesn't work very well and
there are various special cases like someone who makes eye contact with me for more than the usual 0.6-0.8s (can be an indication someone is attracted to you or at least thinks you're interesting) or so when I walk into class but has never and doesn't come and talk to me, but I have a different algorithm for that.

it's a very clunky process and often NTs take things like me delaying acknowledging someone i know's precense in a class to see if they will acknowledge me first the wrong way and think I don't like them anymore or something. Since I also start with a right most bias (too friendly) I tend to get taken advantage of in various ways, like people will steer the conversation in the direction of a problem on the assignment or something to try and get me to do their work for them and I won't realise i'm being used until they ditch me.

I have a different algorithm for figuring if someone is interested in me that doesn't have too many glaring bugs, but thoughts on that are still welcome.

~EG

Last edited by EGMaria2004 on 27 Oct 2004, 9:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

no idea, egmaria. i'm 42, and still trying to work it all out, and STILL cocking it up on a regular and frequent basis.

my only strategy is to take it as it comes (which i can't do) and go with the results (which i can't manage successfully).

sounds a bit negative, but i'm still here....

V

I'm not sure I can give a definite answer to this question, I've seen NTs have as much difficulty placing relationships accordinging to what you put down for A-E. I have often been naive and sometimes I have treated people my parents called 'true friends' as nothing more than 'acquaintances' or 'objects' while other times it's the exact opposite. I've always had problems trying to know when people are bored of me and all. Sometimes I have found some can be clear and honest, they'll directly come out and say it but sometimes I find myself having to try to switch the topic after a specified amount of time that I try to set for myself, meaning I look at my watch a fair bit. Figure it might be easier to not make others bored. I'm going on 31 and I've come to figure that I am who I am, I'll just make the best of it however I can. As vetivert said, I try to often take things as they come and just got with the result, often it's not always successful but the very few times it was, it seemed to somewhat work.

The algorithm I use to define if someone is an acquaintance, a friend, etc, is somewhat like yours. I start by considering the person as someone I "know" but who is not an acquaintance, and then change the degree according to what happens. But it leads to mistakes, and sometimes it is hard to define which way to make the change because I do not know what they think.

Loy

I am perplexed by you mentioning that the usual length of eye contact is 60-80 milliseconds. First, I do not believe that anyone is able to do such a fast movement. Even if they did, it would be seen as a blur (individual movie frames are displayed for 41.67 milliseconds, but even twice lower frame rate is perceived as continuous movement, albeit jittery). Second, my observations suggest that people tend to keep eye contact for much longer periods. If I grab an attention of a totally uninterested stranger, he would look at me for 250 ms to 1 second. When I talk to someone I know, they stare at me for up to several seconds at a time (they avert their gaze much more when they are talking, apparently keeping eye contact requires effort and is distracting for everyone). Lovers watch each other eyes for extended periods, at least up to one minute. Hmm... everyone, what are your observations?

Heh, heh. Well, I wouldn't know. A blur is about the most I grant to almost anyone, in the way of eye contact, unless I've fallen for them. Then I look to their eyes more often, and it is painful. 60-80 ms sounds ideal to me!

Sorry, I always get my units mixed up. I am off by a factor of 100. I meant to say 0.60 - 0.80 seconds.

I gave up on properly trying to scale levels of interaction years ago...I kinda go on a friend, nearly friend, dont know them, and enemy. trouble is...edges can get blurry- for instance I have a friend who borders on enemy.

There is more then one definition for each of these words which can offten lead to confusion since definitions can colide, however, taken into context of a MEASUREMENT of interactivity with other people, there are some very distinct meanings.

STRANGER (foreign) : one whom you do not know about personally, like a passerby on the street or a celebrity whom you have "heard of". You don't necessarily know anything about them, only assumptions based on other people or from what you see of them. Using the root "strange" as being "foreign".

ACQUAINTANCE (acquire): one whom you have been acquainted with. IE, been introduced to or have met. "Joe, this is mike, mike, Joe, now your are acquainted." Implies a personal knowledge of.

MATE (linked with/ combined): (IE, workmate, classmate, co-worker, roomie) one whom you know, perhaps by name, perhaps not, in your current life situation. differs from an acquaintance due to the level of interactivity. implies that it happens on a regular bases (think, a "mate" aka one's mate, which says they have breed multiple times with the same partner). - a long term repeated acquaintance

FRIEND (love/cares for): A freind is one whom you care about, trust, or like being around. Friends stick together because these qualities are usefull in a complex society in which we must support each other. Not to be confused with "being freindly", which has to do with common curtousy.

CLOSE-FRIEND: one whome you trust, care, and like being around enough that you would lay your life on the line for them. "I trust him with my life". Close freinds are loyal, but not all who are loyal are close freinds.

BEST-FRIEND: the highest rated close-freind. (one whom is everyone's best friend is often overflowing with common curtosy, and thus is more likable.)

LOVER: one whom you are infatuated with, lust over, or have intimate relationships with. lovers aren't necisarily freinds. Sometimes it is offten the case that lovers are second or third to your best freind.

---------


THere are diffrent scales to mesure by, and even ones for family, whih is like a sister scale.

i believe someone is a friend when you share jokes, stories, and all that stuff with them, and they care to listen and they share a great deal as well. it's sort of like an equal exchange. they also like to make plans with you outside of school or work-- set aside time where they'd like to see you. that's a friend.

that's a useful scale, ultimape - thank you.

i would disagree with your definition of "mate" slightly, though. to me a mate is a friend, with whom you have some sort of social interaction (as opposed to "official" interaction, such as a colleague or a schoolmate), on an enjoyable basis.

to me, relationships are "graded" by using a Venn diagram (two intersecting circles) - the intimacy/closeness of a relationships is measured by the amount of overlap within the two circle. part of the overlap is the amount of time you choose to spend with that person (or would like to), and "choose" means not people who you "have to" spend time with, such as colleagues and schoolmates, again. this time doesn't have to be face to face, incidentally.

anyway - what would i know? i'm rubbish at most sorts of relationships....

V

Yeah, I noticed that there are alot of overlaps while I wrote that. but it does show that there are definate schales, and they are very subjective.

hi, i'm new to the forums and i thought i'd enlighten you on how i tell if someone is friend or foe. basically for me, it all comes down to past experiences and from that, I've gathered information on different personalities of who i do and do not get along with. I'd go into more detail of what these personalities are but they may/may not be relevant to you. though one example is, i don't tend to get along with someone who is critical/judgemental of others as to me it shows i would find it even harder to be-friend them due to my natural inhibitedness which seems to be outlawed by society, regarded as someone who is either depressed or simply one who has chosen not to conform to society itself.

Telling if someone is interested in you has been fairly easy for me, but on the desired level (of closeness) it has been hard. Usually its eye contact and body language. If someone appears to be nervous around you, it's either that they like you or are scared of you; both relate to a sense of inferiority (on their side) and if played properly, can be good. It's strange how 1 thing can mean 2 entirely different things. This also applies to eye contact, if someone is staring at you, they can be interested in being acquainted with you. For me, it seems more often than not, they see me as a weird person and simply want to be around me for their own amusement. I know I'm being picky but I guess I prefer friends who are on a deeper level with me.

Experience helps alot imho.

Also, keeping friends seems to be a huge effort but in the end, its worth it imho. You have to keep up with the smalltalk and not leave yourself to be too distant from your friends. Of course, its all easier said than done.

I hope this has helped coming from a 17yr old - just graduated from high school, this discussion has for me.

I actually enjoyed the classifications your guys proposed, but I would say that they are a bit vague. Using words like "close friend" doesn't get you anywhere, can anyone measure how close a friend is? I believe that such a term is too blurry for the typical asp.
It is very important to realize that the intimacy spectrum in human relations cannot be measured as a discrete variable, and surely can't be divided into categories. A lot of data about a relationship would be lost this way.
Think of intimacy as a continuous variable. It would be a lot more helpful this way.
Evolutionary psychology is a very interesting field that studies the evolutionary history of the human mind, and tries to unravel its mysteries and most importantly tries to answer the question: "why we are the way we are?".
From an evolutionary psychology point of view, at the cores of friendship lies the central concept of "reciprocal altruism". The friendship feelings evolved in us to serve as a regulator of our interaction with each other. So in this light you can view friends as: two persons who engage in reciprocal altruistic acts to support each other. Your friend is someone who helps you when you are in trouble, who values your well-being and happiness, and who is ready to sacrifice some of his well being if it increases yours.
With such understanding of the "function" and purpose of friendship, one can better understand the relationship and its aspects. Although Ultimape categorized love relationship as the extreme of friendship, you were thoughtful enough to note that there are separable and actually have little to do with each other.
So my strategy when dealing with people is:
"Intimacy in your relationship with someone is directly proportional to how much s/he might sacrifice for you"
So there are acquaintances for example, who might help you carry your bags at the mall if you are carrying a lot of them. There are classmates who might help you do the math homework, and there are workmates who might cover for you when you make a mistake. There are friends who might lend you a 20% of their salary, and there are others who would lend you 80% of it. There are also friends who might give you the money before you even ask for it. Still there are others who may come up with all sorts of lies and excuses not to lend you any money. There are classmates who might say things about you when you are not listening, and there are others who might stop them. It all depends on how much they are willing to do to make you better off.
So what I basically do, is to try to imagine what person might do for me, and then according to how far s/he can go in helping me, I adjusting my feelings towards him/her. Sometimes you can't correctly guess how far s/he can go in helping you, and on such instance it is helpful to watch their behavior when you need something from them. Sometimes I actually ask them to do things for me and see how would they respond to it, and after I get their reply I might say something like: "you know it is okay, thank you a lot for agreeing to help, but I think I'll do it myself and save you the trouble dear"
Turning the table around, when people approach you asking for your help, you should take the information in that. If they ask you for some really big favors, then this is a reflection of how highly they think of you, and of how intimate a friend they consider you. BUT… there's a fine line between that and between being taken advantage of. A good guideline to not be taken advantage of is "If they ask you for more than they would do for you if you were in their place, then you are probably being taken advantage of." But then again, it is not always bad to offer to people favors that are slightly larger than they actually deserve as a sign of generosity and good well.
Hope you guys can find that interesting and helpful. Please let me know what you think.

For me I have two categories, friend or someone I know. Right there there are only two people on the friends side. I try not to get to attached to people. Since I'm not really a "social person", Its hard to keep friends. Those two people are really the only people who seem to accept my little quirks. They even have a few of the same quirks.

psychic - evolutionary psychology has come in for an awful lot of discreditation recently - it's falling completely out of favour. i, for one, won't be THAT sorry to see it debunked completely, even though it seemed to back up a lot of theories i was trying to substantiate, in my doctoral thesis.