Motivations for Relationships as Sources of Meaning: Ghanaian and South African Experiences

Abstract

Afrocentric paradigms reflect assumptions of the overarching importance of interconnectedness and social bonds in meaningful experiences. It is, however, not known if types of relatedness vary in importance as meaning sources in the subjective experiences of laypeople, or what the reasons are that they ascribe to the importance of relationships. The empirical and theoretical substantiation of philosophical assumptions is needed to provide a scientific basis for appropriate well-being interventions in African contexts. Therefore, this study aimed to empirically explore the relative importance of various types of relationships as sources of meaning and in particular why relationships are important to laypeople in relatively collectivist African contexts. Using a bottomup qualitative approach with quantification of responses, this study explored how prominently relationships featured as meaning sources compared to other domains of life and then, in particular, the motivations for the importance of various types of relationships as found in four African samples: a Ghanaian urban group (n = 389), a South African multicultural, English-speaking urban group (n = 585), and two South African Setswana-speaking groups (n = 512 rural, n = 380 urban). Findings showed that the relational domains of life, namely, family, interpersonal relations, spirituality/religion, and community/society, made up a large proportion of responses on what provides meaning in life−in particular family and spirituality/religion with community/society occurring the least. The reasons for meaning experienced in various relationship types included domain-typical relational descriptors, such as contributions made or rewards received. However, many intrapersonal motives also emerged: inner well-being, happiness, joy, a sense of competence, and own growth. Material needs and harmony also surfaced as motivations for relational importance. Findings are aligned with African philosophical perspectives as far as the importance of relationships and the value attached to spirituality/religion are concerned, but contributed additionally by showing that different types of relationships vary in importance: close relationships are

Meaning in life and impact of COVID-19 pandemic on African immigrants in the United States

“…Religious faith was the third source of meaning in life for participants and is in line with Wissing et al. (2020) .…”

“…Our finding is in line with previous studies ( Cram, 2018 ; Zhang et al., 2019 ). The importance and significance of specific relationships can vary based on the cultural context and life situations ( Wissing et al., 2020 ). For Africans, relationships are not simply ways in which the individual realizes his/her objectives, but an essential element of the personhood of which the quality of a person depends on the intensity of maintaining these relationships ( Ezenweke and Nwadialor, 2013 ).…”

“…Closing or limiting the capacity of worship places to lower the spread of COVID-19 significantly disrupted participants' ability to interact with others resulting in increased social isolation, emotional loneliness, anger, and decreased sense of belonging. Africans view relationships as part of their value system and a source of personal growth, satisfaction, happiness, joy, pleasure, and inner state of well-being ( Wissing et al., 2020 ). When relationships are severed, feelings of hopelessness, meaninglessness, and defeat ensue.…”

Connection in Youth Development Key to the Mental Health Continuum in Ghana: A Structural Equation Model of Thriving and Flourishing Indicators

“…Given the qualitative cultural model of “moral living” that would support a path for Character to Social Well-being ( Osei-Tutu et al, 2020 ), and the highly spiritual and religious behavior exhibited in Ghanaian communities ( Avogo, 2013 ), the lack of relationships for Character was also unexpected. One explanation for this might be that Confidence , Competence , and Character share a level of self-focus that make them less relevant or available to well-being in the Ghanaian context which is marked by emphasis on relationships and interconnectedness ( Wissing et al, 2020 ). As depicted in Table 5 and Figure 1 , the direction and magnitude of the relationships between factors differed meaningfully between frameworks.…”

“…Interdependence is supported in the case of studies with individuals in Ghana who engaged in social participation ( Amoah, 2018 ), which emerged as a significant predictor of health literacy and positive peer relations ( Avogo, 2013 ; Wilson and Somhlaba, 2016 ). In Afrocentric conceptions of the axis of individualism–collectivism, a dialectic pattern of independent and interdependent orientations has been proposed to explain their relational contributions to finding meaning in life ( Wissing et al, 2020 ). Social engagement has also been tied to the matter of religious behavior as a standout reason for the cultural shaping of the Ghanaian psychological makeup, to the degree that religious variables predicted well-being at the individual level ( Addai et al, 2014 ).…”