5 ms·

I clicked expecting to see some science-based research about what results in good friendships. Instead I found an opinion based listicle. Not necessarily a bad

by yosito 4y ago

I clicked expecting to see some science-based research about what results in good friendships. Instead I found an opinion based listicle. Not necessarily a bad article for provoking thought, but definitely more opinion than fact. I recently went to cross cultural a meetup where friendship was the topic of discussion. One thing I realized is that people struggle to agree on a definition of friendship. There's an especially noticeable divide between individualist and collectivist cultures. My own definition of a friend is "someone with whom I have shared, positive experiences". But I do find that there's a difference between fast-friends, and long lasting, deep friendships. The six things mentioned in this article are definitely good things to consider if you want to develop long lasting friendships, but they're also not fixed formulas.

multiplegeorges 4y ago
To call this a listicle is technically accurate, but does a large disservice to the experience of the author. She has conducted ~1000 interviews with friends to determine the content of the list. While this is not a peer-reviewed work, I would bet that her dataset and experience amounts to an easily publishable qualitative sociology/psychology paper.
- bradlys 4y ago
  1000? I think it's closer to 100 - isn't it? > That was more than three years ago. Since then, I have done 100 interviews.
  - multiplegeorges 4y ago
    Ah, you are correct. It's 100, I remembered incorrectly. Up to readers to decide if my point still stands. I think it does.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- andreilys 4y ago
  If this is considered a publishable paper then the bar for that publication must be quite low.
pkdpic 4y ago
Agreed, I was expecting more substance from this article. I don't think its much of a stretch to view friendship as a concrete social problem. Especially good friendships in our professional spheres which are vital to career fulfillment and health imo. Anyway there was (sadly) nothing realistically actionable in this article for anyone seeking something even vaguely science or stat based.
- phkahler 4y ago
  >> Anyway there was (sadly) nothing realistically actionable in this article for anyone seeking something even vaguely science or stat based. Actionable to achieve what? It makes clear that there is no fixed procedure for making friends, but there certainly are a lot of suggestions. I suspect the many linked stories have a wealth of information and examples, but they will all be anecdotes where none of them could be forced to happen if we tried.
  - starkd 4y ago
    Since a lot of HN followers work in tech, their work sets their expectations for life in general. So, it's frustrating when something in life cannot be deterministically distilled into a series of steps. It's probably one of the biggest blindspots we have.
throw0101a 4y ago
> I clicked expecting to see some science-based research about what results in good friendships. This article is one in a series. See perhaps "The Friendship Researchers Who Are Also Friends": > This week she talks with two friends who also happen to study friendship. They met at a conference back when very few relationship scholars were focusing on the topic, and became both friends and professional collaborators. They talk about what they’ve learned from their research and how they’ve applied those lessons in their own friendship. * https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2022/04/how-friendship-researchers-stay-friends/629508/ https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2022/04/how-frien... The series has been going on for a number of years: * https://www.theatlantic.com/projects/friendship-files/ https://www.theatlantic.com/projects/friendship-files/
starkd 4y ago
I thought kind of the point of the article is that there is no hard and fast formula to it. Not something that can be distilled in a series of steps. It also requires spontaneity.
dominotw 4y ago
> science-based research about what results in good friendships Isn't research like this deemed totally bunk and unrepeatable. Is it really better than a thoughtful 'listicle'.

by yosito 4y ago

multiplegeorges 4y ago

To call this a listicle is technically accurate, but does a large disservice to the experience of the author. She has conducted ~1000 interviews with friends to determine the content of the list. While this is not a peer-reviewed work, I would bet that her dataset and experience amounts to an easily publishable qualitative sociology/psychology paper.

bradlys 4y ago
1000? I think it's closer to 100 - isn't it? > That was more than three years ago. Since then, I have done 100 interviews.
- multiplegeorges 4y ago
  Ah, you are correct. It's 100, I remembered incorrectly. Up to readers to decide if my point still stands. I think it does.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
andreilys 4y ago
If this is considered a publishable paper then the bar for that publication must be quite low.

pkdpic 4y ago

Agreed, I was expecting more substance from this article. I don't think its much of a stretch to view friendship as a concrete social problem. Especially good friendships in our professional spheres which are vital to career fulfillment and health imo. Anyway there was (sadly) nothing realistically actionable in this article for anyone seeking something even vaguely science or stat based.

phkahler 4y ago
>> Anyway there was (sadly) nothing realistically actionable in this article for anyone seeking something even vaguely science or stat based. Actionable to achieve what? It makes clear that there is no fixed procedure for making friends, but there certainly are a lot of suggestions. I suspect the many linked stories have a wealth of information and examples, but they will all be anecdotes where none of them could be forced to happen if we tried.
- starkd 4y ago
  Since a lot of HN followers work in tech, their work sets their expectations for life in general. So, it's frustrating when something in life cannot be deterministically distilled into a series of steps. It's probably one of the biggest blindspots we have.

throw0101a 4y ago

> I clicked expecting to see some science-based research about what results in good friendships. This article is one in a series. See perhaps "The Friendship Researchers Who Are Also Friends": > This week she talks with two friends who also happen to study friendship. They met at a conference back when very few relationship scholars were focusing on the topic, and became both friends and professional collaborators. They talk about what they’ve learned from their research and how they’ve applied those lessons in their own friendship. * https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2022/04/how-friendship-researchers-stay-friends/629508/ https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2022/04/how-frien... The series has been going on for a number of years: * https://www.theatlantic.com/projects/friendship-files/ https://www.theatlantic.com/projects/friendship-files/

starkd 4y ago

I thought kind of the point of the article is that there is no hard and fast formula to it. Not something that can be distilled in a series of steps. It also requires spontaneity.

dominotw 4y ago

> science-based research about what results in good friendships Isn't research like this deemed totally bunk and unrepeatable. Is it really better than a thoughtful 'listicle'.