Relationships

Question 1

Sexual selection as an evolutionary explanation for partner preferences.

Answer 1

-partner preferences is driven by sexual selection
to maximise reprod success
-physical charac as a sign of genetic fitness are passed on offsprings to ⬆ success
-eg preference of muscular men in women, gene for muscular is passed on

Question 2

Anisogamy as an evolutionary explanation PP.

Answer 2

-diff between F/M gametes causing them to have diff PP
-male gametes are created in large numbers
-females less rarely

Question 3

Males and females differences in demands, reproductive system, choice of mate

Answer 3

MALES: sperm is more available,less energy, more fertile > promiscous > young females
FEMALES: eggs are more expensive> LTM mate> strong resorceful dominant male >

Question 4

Intra sexual vs Inter sexual selection.
(within a sex vs between a sex)

Answer 4

1.Males chose quantity over quality
-compete for fertile W
-mate with as many women as possible to pass their genes
-⬆ RS
-leads to clear diff in characteristics between F/M, larger males have an adv, as they dont compete and why they shorter

2. Females chose the opposite, as ova require more energy
   -use courtship behaviour to select a resourceful partner and genetically fit
   -chose carefully and invests time b/a birth
   -the female preference is what determines the features to an offspring eg height

Question 5

Evaluate sexual selection evolutionary explanation.

RTS
SELF
D

Answer 5

-RTS sex differences in human reproductive behaviour was conducted by a psychologist
-M/F asked questions to opposite sex “will you have sex with me”
-75% of males said yes , 0% said no
-supports SS as an evolutionary expl for differences in m/f as females choose carefully for LTM and males are promiscous.

-research is prone to social desirability
-based on self report, questions, interviews
-may lie to present themselves in best light possible e.g. females are ⬆ to refuse avoid being labelled as promiscous / prejudice/embarassment
- reducing IV of research into SS as an evolutionary expl to PP

• biological determinism
  -PP only driven by internal factors as genes that control the preference such females chose a muscular men to ⬆ Rsuccess
  -neglects role of free will that an individual can make a choice for their partner as due a personality
  -limiting the evolutionare expl in PP

Question 6

Outline self disclosure as a factor affecting attraction, (6)
self disclosure = MP
BP= attraction

Answer 6

1. gradually revealings personal info in layers according to Social penetration theory
   2.partner responds with a rewarding attitude and RECIPROCATE
   3.balance of self disclosure ⬆intimacy,stronger rels and ⬆ attraction
   4.as a rels progresses the depth of MP increases , starting revealing info as preferences to deeper info as secrets and memories, onion theory

Question 7

RTS (Correlation) into self disclosure as a factor affecting BP
Link to reciprocation

limitations

Answer 7

-conducted a correlation research in couples between self disc and satisfaction
-m/f who used self disclosure were more satisfied, more committed/stronger rels
SO MORE ATTRACTION because
RECIPROCATED
-increasing IV of MP as factor of BP
…

-correlation only shows relationship between 2 variables , no cause and effect
-other factors as physical attractiveness may affect BP
- reducing IV of MP to BP

-social desirability, self report, lie
-couples lying how satisfied they were to present themselves in best light possible

Question 8

Outline physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction, (6)

Answer 8

1.based on evolutionary explanation
2.people with symmetrical faces are more attractive , seen as a sign of genetic fitness
3.women with round faces, big eyes ⬆ attractive trigger protective instinct , ⬆ Reproduce
4.halo effect: physically attractive people are considered more sociable, succesful , ahve good personalities ⬆ attraction
5.matching hypothesis > rate ourselves based on own BP, find partners based on our level

Question 9

Evaluate physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction, (6)
RTC
self

Answer 9

-RTC matching hypothesis was conducted by pscyh
on dating sites
-online daters met partners who were more attractive than them
- VS MP as did not consider their own BP level when choosing a partner

-SELF REPORT > social desir > reducing IV
-lie about importance of MP in a romantic rels to present themselves in best light and avoid prejudice

Question 10

Outline filter theory as a factor affecting attraction (2)
Define + example

Answer 10

-there filters set for best rels
-narrow down the choices for a desirable partner
-3 levels, each hold diff level of importance in rels
-increase ATTRACTION

Question 11

1. Outline social demography.

Answer 11

-those who share ethnicity,education, location are more likely to share similar beliefs with us and are potential partners
-feel more attracted
-proximity, more closely available, more likely to form a rels

Question 12

2. Similarity in attitudes as filter theory in ATTRACTION

Answer 12

-checked social and cultural characteristic
-couple rels less than 18 months. STM couples
-partners agree on same values
-deeper rels, more self disclosure
-no similarity between couples, the rels will fall

Question 13

3. Complementarity.

Answer 13

-long term couples , partners need to complement each other
-one laughs, one make laugh
-opposite attracts
-MP couples they form a whole together, deeper rels, long lasting

Question 14

Evaluate filter theory. 3 peels
-RTS similarity + complementarity
-self report
-lack temporal validity

Answer 14

-RTS as a longitudinal study on partners using questionnaires to assess the importance of complementarity and similarity in att, 7 months apart
-short term rels felt more closeness due to similarity
-long term couples gave more importance to complementarity
-supports filter theory as one is more important in early/later stages

-overestimate how complementary they are to each other, closer
- decrease IV

Question 15

Social exchange theory to romantic relationships.INCLUDE comparison levels and alternatives(6)
⬆mutually beneficial
⬆profit
⬆reawards

Answer 15

1.Economic theory considers exchange between costs and rewards in a romantic relationship
2.more attraction/satisfaction to those who offer more rewards
3. a ratio between rewards and cost, aim to ⬆ rewards and reduce costs
4. a profitable rels comes where the rewards exceeds the costs , mutual benefit
5. 2 types of comparison when measuring profit
COMPARISON levels : comparing rewards with old rels to new ones, CL change as ⬆ experience
CL of alternatives : compare rewards pf current to potential alternatives rels

Question 16

Evaluate SET and rewards/cost in romantic rels.
RTS -questionnaire
self report
alternative

Answer 16

-RTS SET as a theory of romantic rels was conducted by psych
-asked gay, lesb, hetero to complete a q to measure rels commitment and rewards/costs
-⬆ committed partners perceive ⬆ rewards and less costs and alternative rels unattractive
-supporting SET and importance of mutually beneficial and profit in rels

-questionnaire , social desirable
-fewer rewards to avoid prejudice and present rels in best light

-an alternative theory of romantic rels is Rusbult’investment model
-rewards.cost and profit are not most important factors in relationships but INVESTMENT
-more investment in a rels , money, house,children, more stronger rels and long lasting
-rather than exceeding rewards with less costs
-NOT SOLE

Question 17

Outline equity(fair) theory to romantic relationship.(6)

Answer 17

1. economic model
   2.based on SET and how in works in real life rels
2. based on FAIRNESS for each partner
   4.balance in profit and between rew/costs
   5.each partner gets the same as they put in and inequity causes ‘dissatisfaction’
   6.rels are maintained on equity
3. if inequity occurs > distressed and dissatisfied >no maintained rel > greater inequity ⬆ ⬆ dissatisfaction
   - they will try to restore with MP to save relationship

Question 18

Evaluate equity theory to romantic rels. (3 peels)
-same as SET

Answer 18

-questionnaire who had been married for 2 years measuring equity
-more equitable more satisfied ⬆ maintain rels ⬆stronger

-social desirability , lie there is more equity and fairness to present their rel in best light possible

-alternative is rusbult’investment model
-equity is not the most important factor but INVESTMENT IS

Question 19

Compare SET with equity theory.

Question 20

Outline Rusbults’ investment model of commitment : satisfaction , Comp ALt, investment size into romantic relationships .(6)

Answer 20

1. importance of commitment in rels and depends on 3 factors
2. SATISFACTION level - based on CL, comparing costs/rewards, profitable , has ⬆ rewards than costs, each partner is satisified as they receive more ⬆ MP
   3.COMP with ALTERNATIVES -needs of currents rels is compared with an alternative possible rels, extent the partner can meet their em/sexual desires, if alt cannot, then ⬆ COMMITMENT
   4.INVESTMENT SIZE : amount of rewards in a rels ,
   intrisic investment (money, effort, time)- directly put in the rel
   extrisic investment (children, house)- were not originally featured

Question 21

Conclusion of RUSBULT MODEL .

Answer 21

HIGH SATISFACTION + NO ALT + ⬆ INVEST SIZE + ⬆ COMMITMENT IN REL

Question 22

Evaluate Rusbult model.
-self report
-alternative
-correlational

Answer 22

-research is correlational between 3 factors and commitment
-no cause and effect
-more commitment more invested rather than opposite
-low control over extr variables.
-individuals may be committed due to cultural values, backgrounds
-not due to rewards and cost to increase satisfaction
reducing IV

-alternative explantion to rusbult model is SET
-suggesting rel is due to profit rather than investment
-that a rel is ⬆ maitained if there are rew/costs and rewards > costs
-SOLE

Question 23

MUST : Outline Duck’s model of breakdown. (2 marks)

Answer 23

1.rels goes through phases in breakdown
-each stage there is a threshold
2.point perception of the rels changes
-.if threshold is met , go to next phase

Question 24

Outline the two stages of Duck model of breakdown. (4)
name + threshold + explain
i do social graves

Answer 24

1. intra-psychic : “i cant stand this anymore” > one problems doesn’t tell> one is dissats > other worries about their dissats >
   -discuss pro cons and alternatives for future
2. dyadic phase> “I would be js withdrawing” > processes between partners > confront, argue about dissats > anxiety, may lack of equity
   -break up or make up

Question 25

Outline the two last stages of Duck model of breakdown. (4)
i do social graves
N
T
E

Answer 25

3. social phase > “I mean it” > break down happens and made public > friends have to pick up sides
   > negotiates how assets are divided
   -no return to rel , breakup driven by social forces
4. grave dressing > “ its now inevitable” > justify our decisions in the breakup
   > leave with low levels of blame to take in next rels
   > create stories > partner in bad light
   > clear memories > traits u used to like become negative

Question 26

Evaluate Duck relationship model .
prac apps
rigid
retrospective data

Answer 26

• a strength of Duck model into breakdown of a relationship has prac apps
  -break happens in phases create a prevention model for relationship
• intervention in the 2 phases , encourage positive traits in 1’ and a calm discussion in 2’
  -bringing stability in the rel and applied psych

-too rigid, MP doesn’t occur in order
- rel breakdown may move from intra to grave dressing due to infedelity immediately
-skipping threshold and linear order of phases
-not effective

-ppts report information long time after the break
-inaccurate info about 1’ 2’ phases as they can’t recall/forget
-prone to social desirability, inaccurate periods of how the partner treated to justify the break up
- low IV

Question 27

Define a parasocial relationship .(2)

Answer 27

-one sided, unreciprocated rel
-one person extends love and energy
-other is completely unaware

Question 28

Outline levels of parasocial relationship. (6)
-intensity of levels
-behaviours

Answer 28

• CAS questionnaire with incresead intensity towards parasocial rel with celeb/ worshipping them
  1. Entertainment Social - least intense
  -celebs are source of entertainment, speak with friends and keeps up with celeb activities just for entartainment

2. intense personal - medium level intensity
   -strong feelings and obsession with celeb as they are in real rels with celeb
   -thinking soulmates/ intense thoughts
3. borderline pathological - highest intensity
   -extreme worship and fantasies about the idol
   -spend lot of time/money to try meeting them
   -sending gifts/break in hotels/ illegals

Question 29

MUST : Outline and evaluate the absorption addiction model.(6)

Answer 29

1. suggest people pursue parasocial rel due to poor psychological health e.g. low self esteem
2. stressful can trigger more intense involvement with celeb as it allow to escape reality
   3.sense of fulfilment and ⬆ personal Id , purpose in life
   4.ABSORPTION : individual has issues with own sense of personality thus absorbed in celeb life to gain worth, id
   -Intense personal
3. ADDICTION : their obsession becomes like an addiction to a substance
   -more extreme behaviour and delusional thinking
   -need more dose
   -stalking behaviour as they think their celeb reciprocate their feelings
   -level 3

Question 30

There is a correlation with poor psych health and strength of parasocial relationships. Evaluate the abs-add model.
correlational
self report
an alternative

Answer 30

-correlation studies between poor psych health and para sol
-diff to establish cause and effect/ low control over extran variables
-other factors as peers /previous rels may influence the formation of this para sol
-low IV

-self report, social desir.
-may lie underestimate the intensity of their level of para sol and obsession towards a celeb
- low IV

-an alt theory for para sol is attachment theory
-insecure avoid/resistant are ⬆ likely to develop a para sol due fear of rejection
-UNLIKE the abs-add model which suggests para sol are due to poor psych health , obsessing with celeb and needing a sense of purpose/worth/identity
-SOLE

Question 31

Outline and evaluate Attachment theory to parasocial relationships. (5)

Answer 31

1.bowlby internal working model
2.mental representation
3.insecure av/res more fear rejection/intimacy ⬆ form a para sol
4. ⬆ abandonment
5.secure a two way loving relationship

-self report
-retrospective
-alternative expl