Interpersonal compatibility

Interpersonal compatibility is a concept that characterizes durable interaction between two or more individuals by comfortability of such communication.

Existing concepts

Although various concepts of interpersonal compatibility exist from ancient times (see e.g. Plato's "Lysis"), no general theory of interpersonal compatibility has been proposed in psychology. Existing concepts are contradictory in many details, starting from the central point, whether compatibility is provided by matching of psychological parameters or by their complementarity. At the same time, the idea of interpersonal compatibility is extremely popular in non-scientific and anti-scientific circles (see e.g. Astrological compatibility).

Among existing psychological tools of studying and/or measuring of interpersonal compatibility the following are noteworthy:
* a test of interpersonal compatibility proposed by Timothy Leary
* a three-factor hypothesis by William Schutz (further developed into FIRO-B questionnaire)
* Hans Jurgen Eysenck's hypothesis on compatibility between temperaments,
* hypothesis of compatibility between personality attitudes by Russell Ackoff and Frederick Edmund Emery, [1972, On Purposeful Systems: An Interdisciplinary Analysis of Individual and Social Behavior as a System of Purposeful Events, By Russell Ackoff and Frederick Edmund Emery, Aldine-Atherton: Chicago. ]
* DMO tool by Lyudmila Sobchik (DMO stands for "Interpersonal relations diagnostics", " _ru. диагностика межличностных отношений")

Socionics proposed a theory of intertype relationships between psychological types derived from modified C.G.Jung's theory. The communication between types is described through the concept of information metabolism proposed by Antoni Kępiński. However, the socionic theory is full of controversy because of lack of experimental data (although socionic data are much more representative than e.g. those of Ackoff and Emery).

Alternative hypotheses of intertype relationships were later proposed by adherents of MBTI (D. Keirsey's hypothesis of compatibility between Keirsey temperaments [cite book|author=Keirsey, David | origyear=1978 | date=May 1, 1998 |title=Please Understand Me II: Temperament, Character, Intelligence |publisher=Prometheus Nemesis Book Co|edition=1st Ed. |id=ISBN 1885705026] , an intertype relationships chart by Joe Butt and Marina Margaret Heiss [http://www.typelogic.com] , LoveTypes by Alexander Avila [http://www.lovetypes.com] and some other theories [http://www.personalitypage.com/relationships.html] [http://www.massmatch.com/MBTI-2.php?id=3] [http://www.humanmetrics.com/] ) Neither of these hypotheses is commonly accepted in the Myers-Briggs type theory. MBTI in Russia is often confused with socionics, although the 16 types in these theories are described in different terms and do not correlate exactly.

Controversy

The following problems may be reasons of absence of a theory of psychological compatibility:
* lack of generally accepted criteria of measuring of compatibility ('compatibility degrees')
* the terms "compatibility" and "matching", although not identical, are often confused in vernacular speech
* unclear status in social science (the problem may belong to social psychology, sociology, personality psychology etc.)
* different psychological theories propose different parameters of personality, but only few of them are generally accepted among psychologists (e.g. cognitive styles); still, even generally accepted criteria may be irrelevant to interpersonal compatibility;
* some, if not all personality parameters (even those genetically predetermined) may alter with time and/or modify each other in course of interpersonal interaction;
* non-traditional view of psychological dependency, which is considered not as drug dependency but rather as (unilateral or mutual) need for somebody else's psychological support that one cannot or can hardly provide by him/herself.

See also

* Attraction
* Friendship
* Social interaction
* Conflict
* Conflictology
* Love
* Interpersonal communication
* Interpersonal relations
* Psychological dependency
* Sociometry
* Socionics
* Selection of a partner
* Family therapy
* Dating

Note

Links

* [http://typelab.ru/de/articles/sozionik-u-psy.htm R. Landwehr. Sozionik: eine neue Psychoreligion oder eine wissenschaftlich fundierte Lebenshilfe?]
* [http://spacefeelings.com/space-travel-psychological-compatibility-problems-2.shtml Psychological compatibility of the crew members during outer space travel.]
* [http://www.onlinedatingmagazine.com/features/compatibilitytesting.html The Truth about compatibility testing]
* [http://www.scientificpsychic.com/workbook/person.html Personality Compatibility Analysis]
* [http://exist.h1.ru/ps_sovm/ww_sowm.htm Психологическая (межличностная) совместимость]
* [http://pedsoveti.mospsy.ru/s_index.html Л.Н.Собчик. Ещё раз про любовь]
* [http://psychotype.ru/article/a-17.html Интертипные отношения в Соционике, критерии комфортности]

Literature

* J Soc Psychol. 1974 Dec;94(2nd half):243-52. Husband-wife compatibility and the management of stress.Burke RJ, Firth J, McGrattan C. PMID: 4444276 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
* Васильев Вл. Н., Рамазанова А. П., Богомаз С. А. Познай других — найди себя (Лекции о психологических типах и их отношениях). — Томск: 1996. — 185 с.
* Гуленко В. В. Структурно-функциональная соционика: Разработка метода комбинаторики полярностей. — Ч.1 — Киев: «Транспорт України», 1999. — 187 с.
* Обозов Н. Н. Психология межличностных отношений. — К.: Высшая школа, 1990.
* Собчик Л. Н. Диагностика психологической совместимости. — СПб.: «Речь», 2002. — 80 с.
* Филатова Е. С. Соционика личных отношений. — М., «Чёрная белка», 2004. — 76 с.