Relationships Flashcards
Outline sexual selection.
- Sexual selection refers to the evolution of characteristics that confer a reproductive advantage, a theory developed by Charles Darwin.
- Not individuals survival at stake, but rather their ability to leave more descendants.
What is anisogamy?
- Refers to the differences between male and female gametes (sex cells).
- Male gametes (sperm) are extremely small, highly mobile and created continuously from puberty to old age and do not require much energy to produce.
- Female gametes (egg/ova) are relatively large, limited for number of fertile years, require huge investment of energy + produced at intervals.
- Consequence = fertile women are rare resources, but not fertile men.
Outline inter-sexual selection.
- Preferred mating strategy for females.
- Between sexes.
- ’ Quality over quantity’.
- Females make greater investment to reproduce, choose genetically fit partner who can provide resources. Males fight for opportunity to mate with fertile women.
- ‘Runaway process’ leads to ‘sexy sons hypothesis’.
Outline intra-sexual selection.
- Preferred strategy for men, ‘quantity over quality’.
- Between males.
- Given rise to dimorphism.
- Males carry little post-coital responsibility.
- Has some psychological + behavioural consequences such as males benefiting from acting aggressively or distinct preference for youth and sensitivity to indicators of youth as well as fertility (certain body shape).
Evaluate the theory of sexual selection.
- Clark and Hatfield study - campus survey, results supported inter-sexual sexual selection.
- Singh study of waist to hip ratio preferences - results support intra-sexual selection as it shows males sensitivity of fertility indicators.
- Lonely heart research of people advertising their qualities, supports intra-sexual and inter-sexual selection.
- Lonely hearts research could be considered culturally biased.
- Ignores social and cultural influences.
- Reductionist and determinist.
Importance of physical attraction.
- Associate attractiveness with indicators of good health, so choosing attractive partners is best way of ensuring healthy partner and child.
- Baby-face hypothesis: baby face triggers protective or caring instinct, valuable resource for females wanting to reproduce.
- Halo effect: physical attractiveness stereotype, attractive people consistently rated with good qualities/attributes.
- Matching hypothesis: own assessment of own attractiveness plays a role in our choice of romantic partner - make realistic judgment and choose partner of similar attractiveness to avoid being rejected by someone ‘out of our league’.
Evaluate the theories of physical attraction.
- Palmer and Peterson found physical attractive people rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people, supports theory of halo effect.
- Ethical implications of this, may lead to corrupt leaders taking advantage of this.
- Feingold meta-analysis of 17 studies and found significant correlation in ratings of attractiveness between romantic partners, supports matching hypothesis.
- Wheeler and Kim found Korean and American students judged physically attractive people as more trustworthy, mature and friendly. Supports theory of halo effect and also strength because these are two completely different cultures.
- Taylor et al. found online daters sought meetings with potential partners more physically attractive than them, challenges matching hypothesis.
Outline self-disclosure.
Revealing personal information about yourself. Reveal more about their true selves as relationship develops. Self-disclosures about deepest thoughts and feelings strengthen romantic bond (used appropriately).
Outline the social penetration theory.
- Relationships are gradual process of revealing self to someone.
- Reciprocal exchange, leads to deeper understanding.
- Revealing personal info insinuates trust. To go further, other must also reveal sensitive info.
What is the breadth and depth of self-disclosure?
- As both breadth and depth increases, romantic partners become more committed to each other.
- Low risk (superficial) info revealed early on, high risk revealed as relationship progresses, removing more and more layers.
- Reveal too much too soon = possibly threatens relationship.
Outline reciprocity of self-disclosure.
- In relationship development, as well as breadth and depth increase, reciprocal element must be there.
- After disclosing something that reveals true self, hopefully partner will respond in way that is rewarding e.g. understanding.
- Must be a balance of self-disclosure for successful romantic relationship which increases feelings of intimacy and deepens the relationship.
Evaluate self-disclosure theory.
- Hetero dating couples were studied and strong positive correlations between measures of relationship satisfaction and self-disclosure found.
- But, did not study homo couples and correlation does not equal causation.
- Laurenceau used method involving daily diary entries, self disclosure in a partner linked to higher levels of intimacy in long-term married couples, reverse also true.
- Cultural differences: Tang et al. reviewed research concerning sexual self-disclosure and concluded that men/women in USA disclose significantly more than men/women in China, but level of satisfaction high in both cultures.
Issues and debates in self-disclosure theory.
- Reductionist: does not consider other factors such as attractiveness and filter theory which influence decision making in determining whether a relationship goes on.
What is the main idea of the filter theory?
We choose romantic partners by using a series of filters that narrows down the ‘field of availables’ from which we may eventually make our choice. Suggests we use diff. methods at diff. stages of partner selection.
What is the 1st level of the filter?
Social demography: wide range of factors which influence the chances of potential partners meeting each other in the first place e.g. social class, ethnic group, proximity.
What is a key benefit of proximity?
Accessibility: does not require much effort to meet people who are in the same area and to maintain that relationship.
Define homogamy.
Outcome of filtering, we are more likely to form a relationship with someone who is socially or culturally similar due to having more in common, and anyone ‘too different’ discounted as potential partner.
What is the 2nd level of the filter?
Similarity of attitudes: important to the development of romantic relationships, only for couples who had been together for less than 18 months.
- Need for partners in early stages to agree over basic values, encourages self-disclosure.
What is the 3rd level of the filter?
Complementarity: ability of romantic partners to meet each other’s needs, having traits that the other lacks.
- Kerckhoff and Davis found need for complementarity more important for long-term couples.
- Complementarity seen as attractive because it gives partners feeling that they form a whole together, adding depth to relationship and more likely to flourish.
Evaluate the filter theory.
- Kerckhoff and Davis based filter theory on study using students in relationship for less than 18 months and those in a relationship for over. Used self-report questionnaires, found attitude similarity most important for short term and complementing each other’s needs for long term.
- Levinger: showed many studies failed to replicate findings above, down to social changes and defining relationship in terms of its length.
What did Anderson find that contradicts the filter theory?
- Anderson found that cohabitating partners became more similar in emotional responses overtime (emotional convergence) - so similarity is not what first attracts us.
Why does the filter theory lack temporal validity?
- Rise of online dating recently - easy to meet people outside of usual demographic limits.
Issues and debates of the filter theory.
- Cultural bias and imposed etic: studied indivdaulist culture. In collectivist cultures, there are many arranged marriages (successful) where partners are not free to apply the filters.
- Reductionist: why do people stay in long term abusive relationships even with the lack of complementarity?
Outline the main ideas of the social exchange theory as a theory of romantic relationships?
- Focuses on what maintains a romantic relationship.
- Economic theory, suggests relationships are similar to businesses in that there is negotiation to get the best deal.
- ## Based on principles of operant conditioning, we form and maintain relationships because they are rewarding.
What does SET suggest concerning costs and rewards?
- Rewards obtained in a relationship must outweigh the costs incurred (profitable) in order for the relationship to be maintained and for satisfaction.
- If relationship stops being profitable, dissatisfaction occurs and relationship will end.
What did Thibault and Kelly contend about rewards and costs?
- That these are subjective, e.g. what one person may consider a significant reward might be viewed as less valuable by someone else.
- Also the value of rewards and costs might well change over the course of a relationship, what is seen as costly in the early stages, might become less so as time goes on.
What are the levels of comparison to assess how profitable their relationships are?
Comparison level and comparison level for alternatives.
What is the comparison level (CL)?
- Measuring profit by the amount of reward we believe we deserve to get.
- Develops from our experiences of previous relationships or social norms which feed into our expectations of our current relationship.
- CL closely linked with self-esteem.
- Relationship worth pursuing if CL equal to, or better than what was experienced in previous relationship.
What is the comparison level for alternatives (CLalt)?
- Provides wider context for current relationship.
- Can greater rewards and fewer costs be gained from a different relationship (or being on our own)?
- SET suggests we will stay in relationship if we believe it is more rewarding than alternatives.
- If costs of current relationship outweighs rewards, alternatives may become more attractive.
- In a satisfying relationship, alternatives being available may not even be noticed.
