Relationships Flashcards
(138 cards)
1
Q
Summarise Darwin’s (1859) theory of Natural Selection
A
- Natural selection influences the way that species change over time and become increasingly better adapted to their environment
- Any characteristic that maximise an individual’s ability to survive and reproduce successfully are highly adaptive and likely to be ‘naturally selected’
- Individuals with these genes go on to form successive generations
2
Q
What is sexual selection?
A
- A view that competition for mates between individuals of the same sex affects the evolution of certain traits
- If a characteristic increases the individuals chance of reproduction, this characteristic will be adaptive because the animal will have more offspring
3
Q
What are the two types of sexual selection?
A
Intra-sexual selection
Intersexual selection
3
Q
What is in Intra-Sexual selection?
A
- When members of one sex (usually male) compete with each other for females
- The winners get to mate, and the loser’s genes are not passed on
4
Q
Trivers (1972) -> Intra-Sexual Selection
A
According to Trivers (1972)…
- When females invests considerably more than males, members of the male latter will compete among themselves to mate with members of the former females.
5
Q
What is Intersexual Selection?
A
- The battle of the sexes
- The preference of females for member of the male sex who possess certain qualities (height, aggression, muscular) etc.
- Thus women will be more discriminating than men in their choice of sex partner because the consequences of mating with an unsuitable partner are greater
6
Q
What did Fischer (1930) say about intersexual selection?
A
- The sexy son hypothesis
- Found that we have seen overtime an increase in height of males (a distinguished male quality)
7
Q
What did Noe and Hammerstein (1995) say about intersexual selection?
A
- Genes that show attractive features are more ‘saleable’ according to the biological market place explanation
8
Q
Why sexual selections?
A
- Males reproduce sperm in thousands at relatively little physiological cost (its quick and easy)
- Therefore, their best stratergy is to mate with many females, becuase this should result in the maximum number of offspring
- Women need to be choosey with who they reproduce with as they have a limited supply of eggs and years of fertility, they also undergo a physiological cost of being pregnant
9
Q
Referring to Anisogamy, explain the difference in the level of investment in reproduction
A
- Men are more likely to have a high number of short relationships as it is in their best interest to have sex with as many females as possible to pass their genes on and they also can’t get pregnant so have no physiological costs
- A women is more likely to have a small amount of long relationships, as they have a limited supply of eggs, so want quality of male traits
SUMMARY:
- Male -> Quantity
- Female -> Quality
9
Q
What is the research supporting inter-sexual selection?
A
Clark and Elaine Hatsfield (1989)
9
Q
What is Anisogamy?
A
Refers to the difference between males and females’ different sex/reproductive cells
10
Q
Explain the research on Clark and Elaine Hatsfield (1989)
A
- Clark and Elaine Hatsfield (1989) showed that females choosiness is a reality of heterosexual relationships
- Male and female psychology students were sent out across a university campus
- They approached other students individually with this question, “I have been noticing you around campus. I find you to be very attractive. Would you go to bed with me tonight?”
- Not a single female student agreed to the request, whereas 75% of males did, immediately
- This supports evolutionary theory because it suggests that females are choosier than males when it comes to selecting sexual partners and that males have evolved a different strategy to ensure reproductive success
- However sample is not very representative and western society focused
11
Q
What is the Research support from lonely hearts research?
A
Waynforth and Dunbar (1995)
12
Q
Explain Waynforth and Dunbar (1995)
A
- Waynforth and Dunbar (1995) studied lonely hearts advertisements in American newspapers.
- These slightly quaint historical documents were opportunities for men (usually) and women to describe the qualities they desire in a potential partner, whilst cataloguing what they had to offer.
- The researchers found that women more than men tended to offer physical attractiveness and indicators of youth (’flirty, exciting, curvy, sexy’).
- Men, on the other hand, offered resources more than women did (’successful, fit, mature, ambitious’) and sought relative youth and physical attractiveness.
- However, Lack of temporal validity but can still be applied to dating apps/social media also was western society focused
13
Q
What is the relationship support for preferences related to anisogamy?
A
David Buss (1989)
14
Q
Explain David Buss (1989)
A
- David Buss (1989) carried out a survey of over 10,000 adults in 33 countries
- He asked question relating to age and a variety of attributes that evolutionary theory predicts should be important in partner preferences
- He found that female respondents placed greater value on resource related characteristics, such as good financial prospects, ambition and industriousness, than males did
- Males valued reproductive capacity in terms of good looks and chastity, and preferred younger mates, more than females did
- These findings reflect sex differences in mate strategies due to anisogamy. They support predictions about partner preference derived from sexual selection theory
- Furthermore, the findings can be applied across vastly different cultures, reflecting fundamental human preferences which are not primarily dependent upon cultural influences
15
Q
Outline and briefly discuss the relationships between sexual selection and human reproductive behaviour (8 MARKS)
A
AO1
Sexual selection is a view that competition for mates between individuals of the same sex affects the evolution of certain traits. If a characteristics increases the individuals chances of reproduction, this characteristic will be adaptive because the animal will have more offspring. For example characteristics in males include strength, height, facial hair which highlight the aspects of maturity and protecting. An example in women is wide hips and it shows how the females are fertile. There are two types of sexual selection, intra-sexual and intersexual. Intra-sexual selection is where males compete with each other for female attention, to obtain the desired genetics for their offspring whilst also passing on their own. Intersexual is where females have the choice of males to mate with, wanting to obtain males who possess certain genetic qualities. Anisogamy refers to the differences between males and female have different sex/reproductive cells, because of anisogamy there is a difference in the level of investment in reproduction. This highlights that females look for quality as they only have a limited supply of eggs and fertile years, whereas males look for quantity as they reproduce sperm in thousands at very little physiological cost.
AO3
Clark and Elaine Hatsfield (1989) showed that females choosiness is a reality of heterosexual relationships. Male and female psychology students were sent out across a university campus. They approached other students individually with this question, “I have been noticing you around campus. I find you to be very attractive. Would you go to bed with me tonight?”. Not a single female student agreed to the request, whereas 75% of males did, immediately. This supports evolutionary theory because it suggests that females are choosier than males when it comes to selecting sexual partners and that males have evolved a different strategy to ensure reproductive success. However the sample size is not very representative as it is only university students taken in the United States, this makes the study hard to generalise across the world, which is an example of ethnocentrism.
David Buss (1989) carried out a survey of over 10,000 adults in 33 countries . He asked question relating to age and a variety of attributes that evolutionary theory predicts should be important in partner preferences. He found that female respondents placed greater value on resource related characteristics, such as good financial prospects, ambition and industriousness, than males did. Males valued reproductive capacity in terms of good looks and chastity, and preferred younger mates, more than females did. These findings reflect sex differences in mate strategies due to anisogamy. They support predictions about partner preference derived from sexual selection theory. Furthermore, the findings can be applied across vastly different cultures, reflecting fundamental human preferences which are not primarily dependent upon cultural influences
16
Q
What is self-disclosure?
A
- The idea that relationship formation is built on trust with another person, which is demonstrated by gradually revealing personal information, such as thoughts, feelings and experiences that they might share with anyone else.
- As a result leads to more satisfaction in a relationship
17
Q
Name and describe the metaphor used to describe the social penetration theory
A
- Onion Metaphor
- As breadth and depth increase, romantic partners become more committed to one another. We disclose a lot of information about ourselves at the beginning, but it is mainly ‘low risk information’, the the top layer of an onion
- The breadth of disclosure is narrow as we might threaten the relationship with too much information
- The deeper the relationship goes, the more layers are peeled back, thus revealing more about ourselves
18
Q
What did Reis and Shaver (1988) say about self-disclosure?
A
- For a relationship to develop, there has to be a balance of self-disclosure between partners
- Instead of one sharing and one listening, there needs to be an even exchange in return
- This could to greater intimacy and a deeper understanding of the romantic relationship
19
Q
What did Hass and Hartford (1998) say about self-disclosure?
A
- 57% of gay men and women said that open and honest self-disclosure was the main way they maintained and deepened their committed relationship
- Self-disclosure research allows for individuals to improve on their own personal relationships
20
Q
Who conducted the study of reciprocal self-disclosure in relationships?
A
Sprecher et al (2013)
21
Q
Describe the study done by Sprecher et al (2013)
A
Sprecher et al (2013) investigated the role of reciprocal self-disclosure in relationships. 156 American University students, female-female or male-female dyads in a Skype conversation.
- Condition 1 → Self-disclosure in a reciprocal manner, taking turns to ask questions
- Condition 2 → Self-disclosure was not reciprocal, one disclosed while the other listened
Condition 1 participants reported a greater liking, closeness, similarity and enjoyment to one another compared to condition 2. Reciprocity of self-disclosure has positive outcomes for romantic relationships
22
Limitations of Self-Disclosure
- Prediction of self-disclosure leading to more romantic relationships might not be applicable to all cultures. Men and women in the USA (Individualist) self-disclosure significantly more sexual thoughts/feelings than men and women in china (collectivist). Self-disclosure is based on Western romantic relationships.
- Other theories state that couples discuss and negotiate the sate of their relationship, involving deep self-disclosure conversations. However, this may not be enough to save a relationship and may contribute to a relationship breakdown
- Self-Disclosure research is mainly correlational, but a correlation does not mean there is a valid conclusion to be made - other factors contribute to a relationship
23
Positives of Self-Disclosure
- The concept of self-disclosure is that is it supported by research. For example, Has and Hartford (1998) found that 57% of gay men and women considered open self-disclosure as a main way to maintain close relationships. This demonstrates the importance of self-disclosure in romantic relationships, just as the theory has predicted.
- Cooper and Sportolari (1997) found that anonymity of online interactions gave web-users a sense of security and made them disclose personal information much earlier in relationships than they would face-to-face, making relationships exciting and intense (‘boom’). However, because the necessary trust foundation had not been established, the intensity of the relationship was impossible to sustain, leading to break-up (‘bust’). This shows that breadth of relationships needs to be established first, before proceeding to a deeper self-disclosure, just as Social Penetration Theory suggests.
- Self-disclosure has strong face validity for many young people as a way of improving anxiety and depression outcomes.
24
What did McNulty et al (2008) say about physical attractiveness?
Physical attraction is a huge part of a romantic relationship even years after marriage
25
What did Brown et al (2009) say about physical attractiveness?
- Individuals rate body symmetry highly, as symmetry is a strong indicator of biological fitness, therefore it is viewed as attractive
26
What is the halo effect?
The idea that people who are judged to be attractive are typically perceived in a positive light.
27
What did Dion et al (1972) say about the Halo effect?
- Dion et al. (1972) found that attractive people are consistently rated as successful, kind and sociable when compared with unattractive people.
- This means that we not only believe that good-looking people are more physically attractive, we expect them to have other desirable characteristics as well and tend to behave more positively towards them.
28
What did Palmer and Peterson (2012) say about the Halo effect?
- Palmer and Peterson (2012) asked participants to rate attractive and unattractive people in terms of how politically competent and knowledgeable they believed them to be.
- It was found that attractive people were consistently rated higher on these characteristics compared to unattractive ones.
29
What Research shows us that the reality is that we don't date the best looking person for men and highest earning for women?
Eastwick and Finkel (2008)
30
Discuss Eastwick and Finkel (2008)
- Although men may value physical attractiveness more than women do, these differences may not predict real-life partner choice
- Evidence from speed dating and longitudinal studies 30 days later
- Before speed dating, partners showed traditional sex differences when stating the importance of physical attractiveness (men) and earning prospects (women) in an ideal partner
- These preferences did not predict their behaviour at speed dating
- Their actual preferences were more likely to reflect their evaluation of a specific speed-dating partners characteristics
and their romantic attraction to the other
31
Who came up with the matching hypothesis?
Walster (1966)
32
What is the Matching Hypothesis?
A cognitive mechanism that uses self-rating to assume that people tend to pair up with partners who are of roughly the same level of attractiveness as they themselves are
33
What does the matching hypothesis revolve around (socially)?
- The ideas of self-worth and self-esteem
i.e. if your partner is deemed to be 'ugly' then this will affect your social standing but if your partner is a 'looker' then your social status will rise
- Either outcome will have an effect on how you view yourself (as worthy or not worthy)
34
Why do people choose romantic partners who are of similar attractiveness?
- Individuals need to make a realistic judgement about their own “value”
- Our choice of partner is a compromise
- We balance the need for evolutionary and biological satisfaction with avoiding being rejected by an individual who is
“out of our league”
- There is a difference between what we like and what we will settle for.
35
What were the two studies on matching hypothesis?
- Walster et al (1966)
- Taylor et al (2011)
36
Method of Walster et al (1966)
- Walster advertised a 'computer dance' for freshers in the first week at university of Minnesota
- Around 400 males and females volunteered and were let in for $1
- Four independent judges secretly rated the students in terms of attractiveness whilst they were collecting their tickets.
- Participants filled in a questionnaire and told the data would be used to determine the similarities between males and females, to find a partner for the dance.
- Pairing was however done completely randomly for the dance.
- During intervals at the dance, and 4-6 months later students were asked whether they found their partner attractive and whether they would like to go on a date with them
37
What were the results of Walster et al (1966)?
- Participants were paired in a male and female partnership
- Partners responded more positively to others who had been rated as physically attractive, irrespective of their own level of attractiveness.
- Pattern was echoed in willingness to ask out the paired partner on another date.
- Females who were rated as physically attractive were frequently asked out on a second date by males who were not rated as physically attractive.
38
What was the conclusion of Walster et al (1966)?
- Students expressed higher appreciation of their partner if the partner was attractive, regardless of their own level of attractiveness.
- THIS DOES NOT SUPPORT THE MATCHING HYPOTHESIS
39
Summarise Taylor et al (2011)
- Investigated the activity log on a dating website
- Found that website users were more likely to try and arrange a meeting with a potential partner who was more physically attractive than them.
- This contradicts the Matching Hypothesis
- Website users should seek more dates with a person who is similar in terms of attractiveness because it provides them with a better chance of being accepted by a potential partner.
40
Strengths of the Halo Effect
- There is some predictive validity in the halo effect: Landy & Sigall (1975) found that essays written by attractive schoolchildren were graded higher than those written by unattractive schoolchildren
- There are important real-life, practical applications associated with an increased understanding of
the halo effect and its influence on individual perceptions of others. For example, Palmer and Peterson (2012) found that even when participants were informed that the images of physically attractive people represented those of people with little knowledge of political matters, respondents still judged these images as representative of people who were highly politically-skilled, mature and trustworthy. This has important implications on the state of politics, where the success of some politicians or political parties may be more easily or accurately explained as a result of the halo effect, rather than actual political expertise. Therefore, this knowledge could be used to the
advantage of some parties when selecting candidates!
41
Limitations of the Halo Effect
- Notions of ‘what is attractive?’ are highly subjective and prone to individual differences which means that associated theories lack scientific validity
42
Advantages of the matching hypothesis
- Feingold’s(1998) meta analysis of research on the matching hypothesis using actual couples found that partners tended to be equally attractive: this finding increases the external validity of the theory as it can be seen in operation in real life
43
Disadvantages of the matching hypothesis
- Taylor et al
- Western Culture / Culture Bias
44
What is the filter theory?
The idea that when meeting a person, we engage in the three stages, filtering social demography, similarities in attitudes and complementarity
45
Who came up with the Filter theory?
Kerckhoff and Davis (1962)
46
What did Kerchoff and Davis (1962) conduct and conclude?
- Conducted research with real-life couples, asking them what it was that attracted them to each other in the first place and why the relationship was (up to that point) successful
- Concluded that people apply a set of criteria - filters - which help them to narrow down the field of availables to a field of desirables who represent the best choice in terms of potential partner
47
What are the three stages of the filter theory?
- Social Demographics
- Similarity in Attitudes
- Complementarity
48
Describe Social Demography?
Refers to many factors that influence the chance of potential partners meeting each other, including:
- Proximity
- Social class
- Level of education
- Ethnicity/religion
- Even though there is a vast range of partners, the choice of partner is much narrower due to our social circumstances
49
Describe Similarity in attitudes
- Individuals will look for partners with similar psychological factors and shared beliefs
50
Describe Complementarity
- Refers to the ways in which a couple provides what each other needs in a relationship
- They complement each other
- Complementarity, according to Kerckhoff & Davis (1962), is not so important in the early stages of a relationship but is crucial for long-term happiness
- A successful relationship may well depend on complementarity as each person fulfills the needs of their partner which results in a relationship that does not consist of two separate individuals but is instead a whole
51
What is short-term and long-term according to Kerckhoff and Davis (1962)?
- Short term is bellow 18 months
- Long term is above 18 months
52
Strengths of Filter Theory
- Face Validity, theory assumes that key factors in a relationship change over time
- Winch (1958)
Evidence that similarities of personality, interests and attitudes are typical in the early stages of relationships.
This agrees with the Matching Hypothesis.
Winch said complementarity of needs was more important than
similarity ,in partners happily married for several years.
53
Weaknesses of Filter Theory
- Replications -> Many studies have failed to replicate the original findings that formed Filter Theory
Due to social changes over time and the struggles to define the depth of a relationship – why an 18
month cut-off?
- Sample lacks validity as it was only students, who represent “spontaneity” rather than older couples who are more fixed
- Lack of temporal validity, the study took place in 1962, people may be different in 2024, we have FaceTime etc. so proximity may not be a key factor
- Not for all cultures, different cultures, e.g. arranged marriages
54
What is the Social Exchange Theory?
- A so-called ‘economic’ theory of relationships which describes relationships as a series of exchanges aiming at balancing rewards and costs.
55
Who proposed the SET theory?
Thibault and Kelly (1959)
56
What is the main principle in which SET operates along?
- The minimax principle
57
What is the minimax principle?
- The idea that people in relationships will aim to minimise their losses and maximise their profits as would a business (profits equals rewards minus costs)
58
Notions of rewards and costs are ....
subjective
59
Give some examples of rewards in a relationship
- Companionship
- Praise
- Emotional Support
- Sex
60
Give some examples of costs in a relationship
- Stress
- Arguments
- Compromises
- Time commitment
61
According to the SET theory, what do people use to assess how profitable their relationships are?
Comparison Levels
62
What are Comparison Levels?
- Levels used by each partner in a couple to determine the extent to which they are profiting from the relationship
63
Give an example of an opportunity cost of being in a relationship
- Whilst you spend time with your partner you may miss out spending time with friends or family
64
Comparison Levels are...
Subjective
65
What do comparison levels depend on?
- Previous romantic experiences
- Cultural norms of what is appropriate to expect from relationships
66
According to SET, what are cultural norms reinforced by?
Books
Films
Tv Programmes
67
Explain how Comparison Levels are closely linked to a person's self-esteem?
- A person with a high self-esteem will have a higher expectations of reward in relationships (higher CL)
- A person with a low self-esteem will have lower expectations (satisfied with just gaining a small profit or even a loss)
68
People consider relationships worth pursuing if the Comparison Level is...
Equal to or better than their previous relationship
69
What is Comparison level for alternatives (CLalt)?
- Concerns a person's perception of whether other potential relationships (or staying on their own) would be more rewarding than being in their current relationship.
70
According to SET, People will stick in their current relationship as long as...
they find them more profitable than the alternatives
71
What are the four stages of relationship development according to SET?
- Sampling stage
- Bargaining stage
- Commitment stage
- Institutionalisation stage
72
What is the Sampling stage?
Where people explore potential rewards and costs of relationships, not just romantic ones, either by direct experience or by observing others
73
What is the Bargaining stage?
- The first stage of any romantic relationship
- At this stage, partners exchange rewards and costs, figure out the most profitable exchanges and negotiate the dynamics of the relationship
74
What is the Commitment stage?
- When relationships become more stable, and partners become familiar with sources of rewards and costs, and each other's expectations, so rewards increase and costs lessen
75
What is the institutionalisation stage?
- The partnership is properly established and the 'terms and conditions' around creating profit are in place
76
Advantages Evaluation of SET
- SET is supported by research studies. For example, Sprecher (2001) found that Comparison Levels for alternatives were a strong predictor of commitment in a relationship and that rewards were important as a predictor of satisfaction, especially for women. Based on these findings, it can be concluded that some people appear to base their evaluation of romantic relationships on rewards and costs (in particular, Comparison Level for alternatives), just as SET suggests. Therefore, it would appear that some people do stay in their current relationship while it remains more profitable than the alternatives.
- SET has many useful real-life applications. One example of this is Integrated Behavioural Couples Therapy (IBCT), during which partners are trained to increase the proportion of positive exchanges in their everyday interactions and decrease the proportion of negative ones, by changing negative behaviour patterns. According to Christensen et al. (2004) about two-thirds of couples that were treated using IBCT reported that their relationships have significantly improved and they were feeling much happier as a result of it. This shows that SET can be used to help distressed couples in real life, thus demonstrating its real-world application and benefit for relationships.
77
Weakness Evaluation of SET
- Not only is the research support for Social Exchange Theory limited, but it is also often based on research that lacks mundane realism. The majority of research into SET is based on studying strangers that are involved in some kind of game-based scenario with rewards and costs variably distributed during the game. For example, Emerson and Cook (1978) designed a laboratory experiment where each of 112 participants was bargaining with a partner to maximise personal score in a computer game. The ‘relationships’ between these partners are nothing like real-life romantic relationships, which are based on getting to know another person and establishing trust. As such, these studies lack internal validity, making SET less applicable to real-life romantic relationships.
- Furthermore, SET assumes that from the beginning of a relationship partners keep some kind of tally of profit and loss, and return reward for reward and cost for cost. Clark and Mills (2011) argue that while this may be true of work interactions between colleagues (exchange relationships), it is rarely the case in romantic (communal) relationships, where rewards are distributed freely without necessarily keeping a score. More than that, other research findings suggest that it is not a balance of rewards and costs, but rather perceived fairness of relationships, that keeps partners happy and committed to the relationships. This weakens the validity of SET, as it seems that SET can only explain a limited range of social relationships.
78
What is Equity Theory?
- Suggests that partners are concerned about fairness in relationships.
- One partner’s benefits minus their costs, should equal another partner’s benefits minus their costs.
79
According to an equity theory you can either be...
- Equal
- Over-benefitting
- Under-benefitting
80
People who over-benefit feel..
Guilt and shame
81
People who under-benefit feel...
Angry and resentful
82
The longer the feeling of lack of equity...
the more likely a couple is to break up
83
Why doesn't equity mean equality?
- It is not about the number of rewards and costs
-But rather about the balance between them; if a person puts a lot into a relationship and receives a lot, it will feel fair to them.
84
Explain how the balance of a relationship can change over time in terms of equity
- Couples become complacent and perhaps make less effort to please each other (in the early stages of a relationship people are on their ‘best behaviour’ but, sadly, this rarely lasts)
85
What research supports Equity theory?
Stafford and Canary (2006)
86
Explain Stafford and Canary (2006)
- In their study over 200 married couples completed questionnaires on relationship equity and satisfaction.
- In addition, participants were asked questions about the ways they maintained their relationships, such as by dividing chores, communicating positively and showing affection for one another.
- They found that partners who perceived their relationships as fair and balanced, followed by spouses who over-benefitted from the relationships, experienced the most satisfaction.
- Those who under-benefitted showed lowest levels of satisfaction.
87
Advantages Evaluation Equity theory
- A strength of Equity Theory is that it is supported by research findings. For example, Stafford and Canary (2006) have discovered that partners who perceived their relationships as fair and balanced experienced most satisfaction, thus supporting Equity Theory’s suggestion that perceived fairness is necessary for happy relationships.
88
Disadvantages Evaluation Equity Theory
- There is research that contradicts Equity Theory. For example, Berg and McQuinn (1986), conducted a longitudinal study on 38 dating couples.
- They didn’t find any increase in equity over time, but discovered that a high level of self-disclosure and perceived equity in the beginning of the relationships was a strong predictor that a couple would stay in their relationship, and low equity in the beginning was a reliable predictor of a break-up.
- In other words, it seems that perceived fairness is either present or not in relationships from the start, and does not develop with time, contrary to the prediction of Equity Theory.
- These findings oppose the central claim of the theory, and contradict the idea that equity increases over time, after the initiation of a romantic relationship.
89
Who put forward The Investment model?
Rusbult et al. (2001)
90
What is the rationale of the Investment Model?
- To develop SET further
- As many couples stay together despite the costs outweighing the rewards, so there must be some other factors that keep them together
- The Investment Models investigate these other factors
91
What are the three major factors that maintain commitment in relationships according to the investment model?
- Satisfaction Level
- Comparison with alternatives
- Investment size
92
What is the most important factor that maintains commitment in a relationship?
Investment
93
What is Investment?
- Anything that a person puts into a relationship that will be lost if it ends
- Acts as a deterrent to leaving a relationship
94
What is Intrinsic investment?
- Resources put into the relationship directly
- e.g. emotion, effort etc..
95
What is Extrinsic Investment?
- Resources arising out of the relationship
- e.g. children, mutual friends, possessions bought together
96
What were the maintenance mechanisms partners use to keep relationships going?
- Accommodation
- Willingness to sacrifice
- Forgiveness
- Positive illusions
- Ridiculing alternatives
97
What is commitment?
A romantic partner’s intention or desire to continue a relationship, believing that the relationship has a long-term future
98
What is the research on satisfaction vs commitment?
Agnew (2011)
99
Agnew (2011)
- A meta-analysis using data collected from nearly 38,000 participants in 137 studies over
a 33-year period, has found that commitment is a powerful predictor of relationship breakup
- Commitment is the main psychological factor that causes individuals to stay in a
relationship, not satisfaction
- May explain why dissatisfied partners stay in relationships
- They are committed to the partner as they have made an investment that they do not want to waste
100
2 A03 Paragraphs on Advantages on Investment Model
- Investment Model is supported by numerous research studies. For example, Le and Agnew (2003) found that satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment greatly contributed to commitment. This supports the model’s claims about the factors contributing to commitment and about commitment being the most promising feature in successful long-term relationships, and thereby increases the reliability of the model.
- Provides a plausible explanation for why people stay in abusive relationships. According to the model, if a partner feels that the investment they made into relationships will be lost if they leave, they are more likely to stay in a relationship even when the costs are high (such as physical or emotional abuse) and rewards are few. Research into abusive relationships supports this idea. For example, Rusbult and Martz, in their study of 'battered' women, found that women were more likely to return to an abusive partner if they felt they had invested in the relationship and they didn't have any appealing alternatives. This shows that the Investment Model can be applied to a wide range or relationships experiences that the SET and Equity Theory fail to explain, thus increasing the Investment Model’s application to everyday relationships.
101
Le and Agnew’s (2003) study
- They conducted a meta-analysis of 52 studies
- Featuring 11,000 participants in total, and discovered that satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment greatly contributed to commitment
- And that commitment was a defining feature of long-lasting relationships.
102
A03 Paragraph on Weakness of Investment Model
- The majority of research into the Investment Model is correlational, so psychologists are unable to conclude that investment causes commitment in relationships. This limits the predictive validity of the model, as it would fail to predict which types of investment and how much investment will lead to long-term commitment to a relationship. Lack of predictive validity also makes the Investment Model less scientifically rigorous, as the ability to predict people's behaviour, in this case, whether or not they will stay committed to the relationship, is one of the main goals of psychology as a science.
103
Who developed the phase Model of Relationship Breakdown?
Duck (2007)
104
What is stage one of Duck's Phase model?
Intra-psychic phase
105
What is stage two of Duck's Phase model?
Dyadic Phase
106
What is stage three of Duck's Phase model?
Social Phase
107
What is stage four of Duck's Phase model?
Grave-Dressing Phase
108
Explain the Intra-psychic stage
- When a person admits to themself that they are dissatisfied with their relationship
- They spend a lot of time thinking about the reasons for this dissatisfaction and possible ways forward
- Focuses on a persons internal thought process that occurs before confronting the partner
109
What is the Threshold of thinking for the intra-psychic stage?
"I can't stand this anymore"
110
Explain the dyadic stage
- Occurs when a person confronts their partner and voices their dissatisfaction
- There are a lot of complaints coming from the partner initiating the breakup (usually involving a partner's commitment to relationships)
- Dissatisfied partner also rethinks the alternatives to their current relationship
111
What is the threshold of thinking for the dyadic stage?
"It would make sense to break up"
112
Explain the social phase?
- Breakup is public and then individuals will seek support and gain allies - mutual friends will have to pick a side
- Friends and family will intervene in the couple's relationship and offer advice, which makes reconciliation much more problematic.
113
What is the threshold of thinking at the social phase?
"I'm serious about this"
114
Explain the Grave-digging phase
- Both sides construct their version of why their relationship broke down, usually minimising their faults and maximising their partner's, but at the same time trying to show themselves as trustworthy and loyal in order to attract a new partner.
- This process is called 'grave-dressing', signifying the closure of the previous relationship and readiness to start a new one.
115
What is the threshold of thinking in the grave-digging phase?
"It's time to move on"
116
Advantages A03 Paragraph Ducks
- Duck's model has useful applications, especially in relation to couples’ counselling.
- Couples may be advised to use different strategies depending on the phase they are currently in.
- For example, for a person in the intra-psychic phase it may be more useful to shift their attention to the positive aspects of their partner's personality, while for a couple in the dyadic phase communication about dissatisfaction and ways to balance relationships is crucial.
- This shows that Duck's model of relationship breakdown can be used successfully to help couples contemplating break-up to improve their relationships and stay together.
117
Disadvantages 2 A03 Paragraph Ducks
- Social phase is greatly affected by individual differences, especially in relation to age. Dickson (1995) found that while friends and relatives tend to see teenagers' break-ups as less serious and wouldn't put much effort into reconciling partners, the ending of relationships by older couples is seen as more distressing and those close to the couple put more effort into bringing them back together. This shows that Duck's model won't necessarily apply to all couples, and therefore suggests that the model is unable to accurately predict breakdown in different types of relationship.
- Based on relationships from individualist cultures, where ending the relationships is a voluntary choice, and separation and divorce are easily obtainable and do not carry stigma.
- However, this may not be the case in collectivist cultures, where relationships are sometimes arranged by wider family members, and characterised by greater family involvement.
- This makes the relationship difficult to end, which means that the break-up process will not follow the phases proposed by Duck. As a result, Duck's model is culturally biased as it assumes that break-up process is universal, which is clearly not the case.
118
What are the reasons of why self-disclosure occurs much faster in virtual relationships?
- Anonymity associated with online relationships; people tend to hold off disclosing personal information in real life for fear of ridicule or rejection, unless they are confident that they can trust the person and that information won't be leaked to mutual friends.
- However, there is much less risk of this in virtual relationships, so people can share personal experiences and thoughts without much risk of the intimate information getting to the people they know.
119
Who proposed the Hyperpersonal model in virtual relationships?
Walther (1996, 2011)
120
Explain the hyperpersonal model
- Self-disclosure in online relationships happens earlier than in face-to-face ones, relationships quickly become more intense and feel more intimate and meaningful.
- They can also end more quickly, however, as it is difficult to sustain the same level of intense self-disclosure for a long time.
- Walther also suggests that virtual relationships may feel more intimate because it is easier to manipulate self disclosure online than face-to-face.
- Participants in online conversation have more time to 'edit' their responses to present themselves in a more positive light; Walther calls this 'selective self-presentation'.
- Projecting a positive image will then make an online partner want to disclose more personal information, increasing the intensity of the relationship.
121
Explain the 'Stranger on the train' phenomenon in virtual relationships
- Virtual relationships are very close to the 'stranger on the train' phenomenon, described by Rubin (1975).
- He suggests that we are more likely to share personal information with a stranger because we are likely never to see them again.
122
Who developed the Reduced Cues Theory?
Sproull and Kisler (1986)
123
Explain the reduced cues theory
- Suggests that online relationships might be less open and honest than face-to-face ones, because in real life we are relying on a lot of subtle cues, such as facial expressions and tone of voice, and these cues are absent in virtual communications
- According to this theory, reduction in communication cues leads to de-individuation because it diminishes people's feelings of individual identity and brings on behaviours that people usually restrain themselves from displaying, such as aggression.
- This may make online communications more aggressive, and the consequence of this is less self-disclosure from other people, as they may fear becoming victims of verbal violence.
124
Explain the absence of gating in virtual relationships
- In real life, our attraction to other people is greatly influenced by their appearance, mannerisms and factors such as age and ethnicity, limiting our choice of potential partners.
- In virtual interactions, however, these barriers ('gates') are absent; this creates more opportunities for shy and less attractive people to develop romantic relationships.
- Even when these factors are discovered later, when relationships move from virtual to the face-to-face phase, they rarely decrease an already-developed attraction, as a result of the feeling of intimacy brought by more open self-disclosure.
- The absence of gating also means that people can establish virtual identities they could never create face-to-face. A shy person can become outgoing and extraverted, for example.
125
Explain Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012) Virtual Relationships
- Showed the importance of online communication for developing romantic relationships.
- They investigated whether there was a link between having internet access at home and being involved in a romantic relationship.
- Out of 4,000 participants studied, 71.8% of those with internet access were married or had a romantic partner, compared to only 35.9% of those without internet access.
- These findings suggest that a virtual environment helps people to establish and maintain romantic relationships.
126
Explain Baker and Oswald (2010) Virtual Relationships
- Suggest that the absence of gating in virtual relationships may be particularly useful for shy people.
- They asked 207 male and female participants to complete a questionnaire, scoring their answers in terms of shyness, internet use and perception of quality of their friendships.
- They found that those people who scored highly on shyness and internet use, perceived the quality of their friendships as high; this correlation was absent for people with low shyness scores.
- The findings imply that as online communication helps people to overcome their shyness, so the quality of their face-to-face communication also improves.
127
Explain Zhao et al (2008) Virtual Relationships
- Claim that the absence of gating, and more meaningful self-disclosure online also has positive effects on people's offline relationships.
- As they can create an online identity that is appreciated by others, it enhances their overall self-image and increases the quality of their face-to-face relationships as well.
127
Weakness A03 of Virtual Relationships
- There are also important gender differences in virtual relationships.
- McKenna et al. (2002) found that women tended to rate their relationships formed online as more intimate, and valued self-disclosure, especially in regards to emotion, more highly than men. Men, on the other hand, preferred activities-based (such as common interests in motorsports) disclosure, and rated their online relationships as less close than face-to-face ones.
- This suggests that research into online relationships may show alpha-bias, as it assumes that males' and females' experiences on virtual relationships are different.
- However, it could be that male and female experiences of virtual relationships are similar and there are methodological issues with the research in this area that exaggerate the differences (e.g. the choice of interview/questionnaires as a research tool).
128
What are parasocial relationships?
- One-sided relationships with celebrity, a prominent person in the community or a fictional character, when a fan knows everything about the subject of their adoration and feels very close to them, but there is no chance of reciprocity.
129
How was parasocial relationships developed?
A model by Giles and Maltby (2006) identifying three levels of celebrity worship, using the Celebrity Attitude Scale in a large-scale survey
130
What are the three levels of a parasocial relationship?
- Entertain-Social
- Intense-Personal
- Borderline-Pathological
131
Explain Entertain-Social Stage
- Celebrities are seen as a source of entertainment and as a topic for lighthearted gossips with friends.
- This is the least intense level of celebrity worship.
132
Explain Intense-Personal Stage
- At this level a person has a more intense relationship with a celebrity.
- For example, they may see them as a soulmate and they have an intense interest in the celebrity’s personal life, such as their dress sense, food they like and entertainment in which they take part.
- This type of parasocial relationship is typical for teenagers who seem to be obsessed with every little detail of their favourite celebrity’s lifestyle.
133
Explain Borderline-Pathological stage
- Most intense level of parasocial relationships.
- A person takes celebrity worship to an extreme, has obsessive fantasies about the celebrity, spends large sums of money to obtain memorabilia and may engage in illegal activities such as stalking.
- At this level, it is also usual for people to believe that if only they were given a chance to meet their favourite celebrity in person, their feelings would be reciprocated.
134
Explain the Absorption-Addiction Model
- McCutcheon (2002) suggests that people engage in celebrity worship to compensate for some deficiencies in their life, such as difficulty forming intimate relationships, poor psychological adjustment and lack of identity.
- Forming parasocial relationships with a celebrity allows them to achieve the fulfilment they lack in everyday life and adds a sense of purpose and excitement.
- She explains that looking for satisfaction in celebrity worship makes a person focus intensively on parasocial relationships and achieving a sense of fulfilment motivates them to become even more intensely attached to the celebrity. This is the first stage of the model, absorption.
- This sense of fulfilment then becomes addictive for the person, leading them to engage in more risky behaviour such as stalking, in order to get mentally, and sometimes physically, closer to the celebrity they worship.
