Factors affecting attraction: Filter Theory

Question 1

who proposed filter theory

Answer 1

Kerckhoff & Davis (1962)

Question 2

outline filter theory as a FAA
- filter theory

Answer 2

‘filter theory’ considers a number of FAA

Kerckhoff & Davis (1962) proposed 3 factors that act as filters to ‘narrow down’ the range of available romantic partners (‘field of availables’) to a smaller
pool of possibilities (‘field of desirables’)

Question 3

three factors

Answer 3

• social demography
• similarity in attitudes
• complementarity

Question 4

outline filter theory as a FAA
- social demography

Answer 4

social demography = variables which determine the likelihood of meeting in the first place.

first level of filter:
Individuals limited to those who live near to us, work with us, socialise with us, who are of a similar age, geographical location, social class and religion.

Appear attractive as their similarity will make communication easier,
aiding the development of a relationship.

Anyone who is too ‘different’ is discounted as a potential partner.

Question 5

outline filter theory as a FAA
- similarity in attutudes

Answer 5

at second level of filter, the ‘field of availables’ has been narrowed by the first filter.

Here, best predictor of relationship becoming stable is ‘similarity of attitudes’.

SoA= need for new romantic partners to agree over basic values/ beliefs -> makes communication easier, enabling the relationship to progress.

Partners with different values are considered unsuitable and filtered out.

Question 6

outline filter theory as a FAA
- complementarity

Answer 6

third level of filter

‘complementarity’ = how well two people fit together as a couple and meet each other’s needs.

Two partners complement each other when they have traits which the other lacks.

eg. need to be caring and need to be cared for.

Provide one another with mutual satisfaction.

Opposites attract in long term relationships, couples have a sense that together they form a whole -> adds depth to their RS, more likely to flourish and last in the long term.

Question 7

evaluate filter theory as a FAA
STRENGTHS

Answer 7

P) support from Clark (1952)
E) 50% of citizens of Columbus, Ohio, USA married partners who initially lived within walking distance of their house.
L) similarity of social demographic -> affecting choice of possible partners one could be attracted to

P) support from Kerckhoff and Davis (1962)
E) studied couples in uni: dating less than 18 months -> similarity of attitudes most important factor in how close they felt, WHEREAS longer than 18 months reported complementarity of needs was more important.
L) importance of similarity and complementarity in relationships, AND changing importance of factors (or filters) over time as relationships become deeper
E) BUT criticised for 18 month cut-off point - does not represent longer term relationships. ALSO, defining the depth of a relationship in terms of its length is problematic (false assumption they are more committed)

Question 8

evaluate filter theory as a FAA
LIMITATIONS

Answer 8

P) research into FAA largely based on correlational data
E) only establishes a link but cannot say that one co-variable ‘caused’ the change in the other.
E) eg. assumes that similarity of social demography/attitudes etc causes more satisfaction - may not be the case
L) misleading

P) research into FAA lacks temporal validity.
E) rise of online dating (e.g. dating apps like Tinder) in recent years dramatically changed the process of beginning a romantic relationship, compared to 30 years ago.
E) eg. issues w social demography changed in nature as due to ability to form relationships online as opposed to face-to-face (eg doesn’t matter as much if long distance)
L) less likely to be limited when looking for a romantic relationship online, new theories required

P) research into FAA suffer from cultural bias
E) most theories have been proposed by Western researchers in individualist cultures eg US (needs of individual) rather than collectivist cultures eg India or China (needs of gc) -> only explain romantic relationships in this type of culture.
E) eg, how the individual views similarity of attitudes = less important in collectivist cultures (more focused on the needs of others than their own satisfaction) or diff beauty standards
L) explanations of attraction are limited as not universal