62 Who Are Our Friends?
In addition to individual variability in definitions of friendship that one might
expect from laypersons who coconstruct their own friendship realties on a moment-
by- moment basis (Chasin & Radtke, 2013; Rawlins, 2009), scholars employ a num-
ber of different methods for determining the meaning of friendship (Monsour,
1997). To a large degree, the method used to arrive at a definition of friendship
determines important features of that definition (Monsour, 1997). Two of the
more common methods are paradigm case formulations (Davis & Todd, 1985) and
straightforwardly asking research participants what friendship means to them
(Hays, 1988; Rubin, 1985). Allowing participants to define friendships in their own
way is the method preferred by the authors who wrote the chapter on friendships
in old age (see Adams, Blieszner, & Hahmann, chapter 3, this volume). In response
to an e- mail sent out to authors asking if they were providing a formal definition of
friendship in their chapter, Professor Adams replied, “We are not offering a formal
definition of friendship and, in our work, value people defining friendship for them-
selves rather than using pre- determined definitions or categories” (personal e- mail
communication, January 28, 2015).
All 16 of the lead contributors to this book were e- mailed and asked if they were
providing a formal definition of friendship in their chapter. Their responses fell into
three major categories that reflect current strategies for defining friendship. Some
contributors indicated that they would provide a formal definition of friendship.
Others responded that they would not provide a definition. The largest group speci-
fied that rather than providing a formal definition of friendship, they would identify
characteristics of friendship such as its voluntary nature, the provision of social sup-
port, and enjoyment of one another’s company. Identifying typical characteristics
of friendship is similar to using a paradigm case approach to defining friendships
(Davis & Todd, 1985).
Some scholars are hesitant to provide a definition of friendship because in their
theoretical view friendship is not a fixed relational category with identifiable char-
acteristics, but rather a continuous work in progress in which the friends cocon-
struct through communication what friendship jointly means to them. Rawlins put
it this way: “Static definitions of friendship fail to capture the lived actualities of
friendship— their finitude, flexibility and fragility” (2009, p. 13). Similarly, other
scholars take a postmodern perspective (Butler, 1990) on friendship that empha-
sizes the performative and socially constructed nature of self, gender, and friend-
ships (Chasin & Radtke, 2013; Monsour & Rawlins, 2014). From this perspective,
individuals coconstruct and establish through communication what it means to be
a friend. From a postmodern perspective, characteristics of friendship flow naturally
from the unfolding of the relationship in a broad range of interactional encounters.
For example, Chasin and Radtke (2013) argue that friends discursively create their
friendship “moment by moment” during specific interactions with one another.
The problem of arriving at an adequate definition of friendship is compounded
when one adds the additional burden of trying to distinguish same- sex from