RELATIONSHIPS Flashcards
(102 cards)
1
Q
evolutionary theory
A
- Explains human behaviour in terms of adaptiveness and reproductive success.
- Behaviour genetically inherited between generations must have been beneficial.
Help adapt to environment and survive (natural selection)
Help attract a mate and produce healthy offspring (sexual selection)
2
Q
sexual selection
A
- Characteristics with an advantage for reproductive behaviour / likely to be attractive to potential mates or provide advantage over competitors for mating.
- Differences in partner preferences and reproductive behaviour strategies between males and females.
3
Q
anisogamy
A
- Differences between male and female gametes.
- Males lack parental certainty so most successful reproductive strategy is to have sex with as many women as possible (quantity).
Sperm produced in large quantities over whole lifespan with little energy requirement.
Men focus more on physical characteristics as signs off fertility in prospective partners e.g. youth, hip-waist ratio. - Ova production is more energy intensive with a more limited capacity.
Extends into pregnancy.
More reproductive success to have fewer sexual partners and go for the highest quality mate e.g. provide resources and protection for themselves and offspring.
4
Q
sexual selection strategies
A
inter-sexual selection
intra-sexual selection
5
Q
inter-sexual selection
A
- How chooses a partner from the other sex.
- Female choice – usually choosier over prospective mates due to anisogamy and level of investment in producing and caring for offspring.
Need to be more careful with who they mate with and to ensure most successful outcome – that offspring will inherit good genetics and have greater chance of survival through protection and provision of resources.
Females look for quality – fewer sexual partners of higher standard.
6
Q
intra-sexual selection
A
- Competition for prospective partners.
- Male usually compete with other males to mate and reproduce with females.
- Males forced to compete against each other for prospective partners as females are choosier.
Males adopt quantity approach to ensure their genes get passed on by impregnating as many women as possible.
7
Q
evolutionary theory strengths
research support (Clark and Hatfield)
A
Clark and Hatfield asked participants to approach opposite sex students on a university campus and ask them whether they would go to bed with them. They found that 75% of male students agreed but not a single female said yes.
Supports the idea that men focus on quantitative sex whereas women are choosier and prefer to look for a long-term partner.
Suggests theory has validity.
8
Q
evolutionary theory strengths
research support (lonely hearts)
A
Waynforth and Dunbar researched ‘lonely hearts’ columns in newspapers and found that women tended to describe themselves in terms of physical attractiveness and youth while men advertised their resources and intelligence more.
Suggests that men find youthful physical characteristics more attractive and is what they look for in a partner, as indicative of fertility, whilst women look for resources.
Suggests theory has validity.
9
Q
evolutionary theory weaknesses
does not consider social and cultural influences
A
Gender roles have changed over time as women now also have careers and can provide resources for children.
Logical that change in roles would impact upon partner preferences and sexual behaviour.
o Do not necessarily look for a man to provide.
o Contraceptives mean there is less risk of impregnation, allowing women to engage in casual sex.
Therefore partner preference and reproductive behaviour may be influence not just by evolutionary factors but also current socio-cultural climate. To gain a more comprehensive understanding we need to take a more holistic approach.
10
Q
evolutionary theory weaknesses
assumes heterosexual norms
A
Evolutionary ideas on sexual behaviour assume heterosexual norms.
Motivating influence behind sexual behaviour is reproduction, to ensure survival of genetics. Not relevant for homosexual relationships.
Theory does not consider all relationships.
Theory is reductionist, lacks generalisability and is temporally bound.
11
Q
evolutionary theory weaknesses
socially sensitive
A
Socially sensitive – research causes offence, reinforces stereotypes or discrimination.
Suggests that men like having more sexual partners, condones male promiscuity.
Judge women who are more sexually active.
Excuses male infidelity, but negative and against nature for women.
12
Q
factor affecting attraction
A
self-disclosure
physical attractiveness
filter theory
13
Q
theories of romantic relationships
A
social exchange theory
equity theory
Rusbult’s investment model
14
Q
self-disclosure
A
- Refers to extent to which a person reveals personal information about themselves (including intimate thoughts, feelings and experiences) to another person.
- Important in development of romantic relationships.
- Greater disclosure leads to greater attraction and intimacy.
- Can present risks – making yourself too vulnerable, do not know whether you can trust them, lead to rejection or embarrassment.
15
Q
social penetration theory
A
- Self-disclosure is a gradual process that helps relationships develop through revealing your inner self to someone.
- Should be reciprocal exchange of information.
- Will gradually reveal more intimate details as relationship progresses and trust built.
Less risk of embarrassment or rejection. - Breadth refers to the amount of information willing to share.
- Depth refers to how personal or intimate the information is.
16
Q
onion analogy
A
- Peripheral layer – superficial topics like hobbies, interest, brief overview of family members, factual information, sports, TV shows, age, education, career
- Intermediate layers – opinions, experiences, political and religious views
- Central layers – future plans, aspirations, core values, trauma, fears, self-concept
17
Q
disclosure and attraction
factors
A
- Content – highly intimate information may be seen as inappropriate and violating social norms, especially if relationship in early stages. Can decrease attraction.
- Appropriateness – ‘over the top’ sharing in too much breadth early on can indicate a person is maladjusted and lacking in social skills as are only concerned with themselves. Can decrease attraction.
- Attributions – reasons for self-disclosure important. Less attraction if individual shares personal information to everyone. More attraction if individual sees us as someone they especially want to disclose intimate information to.
18
Q
self-disclosure strengths
evidence to support
A
Correlational evidence to support.
Sprechter and Hendrick studies heterosexual couples and found a strong positive correlation between high measures of satisfaction and high self-disclosure.
Suggests a link between intimacy and self-disclosure, theory has validity.
However, research is correlation so cause and effect is not established.
19
Q
self-disclosure strengths
self-report evidence
A
Self-report evidence to support.
Laurenceau had participants write daily diary entries and found that self-disclosure and perceived self-disclosure in a partner were associated with higher levels of intimacy in long-term married couples. Less intimate couples self-disclosed less frequently.
Suggests that self-disclosure is important in building trust and meaningful relationships.
However, results can be affected by social desirability from self-report.
20
Q
self-disclosure strengths
applicability to many
A
High applicability to varied sexual orientations.
Hass and Stafford found that 57% of homosexuals stated that open and honest self-disclosure was the main way they maintained and deepened committed relationships.
Suggests theory has validity.
High applicability and generalisability.
21
Q
self-disclosure strengths
real world application
A
Real world application
Can help people who are less skilled at relationships as help make a connection through knowing which information to disclose and help achieve levels of intimacy appropriate for each stage of relationship. Can develop intimacy through increased information disclosed.
Useful as helps achieve more successful relationships.
22
Q
self-disclosure weaknesses
culturally relativist
A
Important across many cultures affecting attraction but not universal, culturally relativist.
Tang reviewed research literature into sexual self-disclosure (views on sexual practices). American males and females disclosed more sexual thoughts and feelings than males and females from China. Appropriate level of self-disclosure was linked to relationship satisfaction in both cultures.
Suggests theory is ethnocentric.
23
Q
self-disclosure weaknesses
nomothetic
A
Idea of self-disclosure impacting attraction and success of relationships is nomothetic.
Social penetration theory proposes that all people have the same need to self-disclosure in a relationship for it to be deemed successful and to progress.
Neglects to consider individual differences and the influence that different personality types may have on need for self-disclosure.
More introverted people may feel less comfortable with self-disclosure.
Depth of information may be less attractive and can have a negative effect on success of relationship.
Self-disclosure and its impact on attraction may be more nuanced between individuals that theory suggests.
24
Q
physical attractiveness
A
matching hypothesis
complex matching
characteristics of physical attractiveness
halo effect
25
matching hypothesis
* Individuals seek partners who are similar in terms of physical attractiveness.
* Involves assessing own level of physical attractiveness and looking for potential partners with similar attractiveness.
Less chance of being rejected than if went for most attractive people.
* Individuals feel more secure in a relationship with someone of equal physical attractiveness as less fear that more attractive partner might go elsewhere.
* Suggests people must settle for mating ‘within their league’.
26
complex matching
* Some people in a relationship may not be judged as equally attractive.
Can enter relationships offering many desirable characteristics other than physical attractiveness and can compensate for lack of physical attractiveness.
E.g. personality, humour, intelligence, wealth
27
characteristics of physical attractiveness
* Shackelford and Larson found that people with symmetrical faces are considered more attractive as they may be an indication of good genetic fitness.
* Jones found that neotenous (baby face) faces were considered more attractive across different cultures, particularly in females.
E.g. big eyes, widely separated, delicate chin, small nose, and full lips.
Triggers a caring response and is a symbol of fertility.
28
halo effect
* Physically attractive people tend to be judged as more kind, strong, sociable and successful compared to unattractive people.
* Belief that good-looking people will have positive characteristics makes the more attractive.
Behave more positively, encourages such characteristics.
E.g. pretty privilege – tend to be treated better, makes them a better person.
29
physical attractiveness strengths
supporting research
Supporting research into matching hypothesis.
Silverman conducted a correlation study with couples where they judged the attractiveness level of each partner individually. There was a significant similarity between partners’ levels of attractiveness.
Demonstrates consistency of matching hypothesis.
However, correlational research does not provide cause and effect.
Attractive ratings may be subjective and differ between people due to personal preferences.
30
physical attractiveness strengths
across cultures
Physical attractiveness is an important factor in forming relationships across cultures.
Cunnigham found that white, Asian and Hispanic males all rated females with neotenous facial features as highly attractive.
Universality of findings suggests that attractiveness as a decisive factor in choosing a partner may be a genetically reproduced mechanism, aiding sexual selection.
Supports role of nature as suggests that human behaviour is mainly a result of biological rather than environmental influences. Suggests physical attractiveness is key universal factor in who we are attracted to.
31
physical attractiveness weaknesses
depends on medium
Matching hypothesis depends on the medium being used.
Taylor studied online dating site choices and found that people often sought meetings with potential partners who were physically more attractive than them.
Suggests the theory of matching hypothesis is not applicable to all relationships as this contradicts matching hypothesis when it comes to meeting potential partners online.
32
physical attractiveness weaknesses
individual differences
Theory fails to consider the influence of individual differences.
Asked male and female participants to rate how much they would like a target individual based on a photo and biographical info and they completed a questionnaire to measure sexist attitudes.
Participants who scored high on the questionnaire were more influenced by physical attractiveness.
Attitudes we hold influence how superficial we are in a romantic relationship, suggesting that what is desirable to a partner is subjective.
33
filter theory
* Have filters that prospective partners must pass through that narrow down who we are willing to engage in a relationship with.
* Start with field of availables – everyone you could potentially form a relationship with.
* Use filters to narrow down to a field of desirables – people you’d be willing to form a relationship using filters.
* Different filters are more prominent depending on the stage of relationship.
34
social demography filter
* Factors influencing likelihood of partners meeting in the first place.
* More prominent early in relationship.
* Includes location/proximity, social class, level of education, ethnicity and religion.
* Anyone too different from our own social demography is discarded.
* Leads to homogamy – engaging in relationships with those most similar to us.
35
similarity in attitude filter
* First 18 months of a relationship
* Similarity of attitudes becomes more important
* E.g. views on family, careers
* If partners discover that their differences are too great, the relationship is less likely to continue.
* Byrne found the ‘law of attraction’ where we are more attracted to those who are similar to us.
36
complementarity filter
* More prominent as relationship becomes more firmly established.
* E.g. whether a person’s personality complements own traits and satisfies our emotional needs.
* As relationship progresses it becomes more ‘opposites attract’.
Creates sense of partnership being a whole ‘other half’.
37
filter theory strengths
research support
Gruber-Baldini carried out a longitudinal study of couples aged 21 and found that those who were similar in educational level and stage at the start of the relationship were more likely to stay together and have a successful relationship.
Supports social demographic as age and education similarities led to better relationship. Filter at the beginning of a relationship as affect who attracted to and deterministic of success of long-term relationship.
Suggests theory has validity.
However, limited sample.
Complementarity and similarity of attitudes may not be as important to young couples and may focus more on social demographic. Perhaps not yet looking to settle down.
38
filter theory weaknesses
validity issues
Validity issues with filter theory.
Online data means that social demographic variables do not limit field of availables. Greater potential of meeting people from different ethnic groups and social backgrounds, reducing need for similarities to ourselves.
Technology also reduces importance of proximity – can meet people online and video chat apps and increased ease of travels reduces need for physical proximity.
Technological advances mean that filter theory lacks temporal validity and findings do not apply to relationships in today’s society.
39
filter theory weaknesses
causation
Direction of causation in relation to similarity of attitudes can be questioned.
Anderson argued that the emotional responses of partners in long-term relationships became more alike over time rather than being similar from the start – emotional convergence.
Challenges similarity of attitudes filter as do not need to be similar in the first place and not filtered out because of lack of similarity.
Reduces validity of the theory.
40
filter theory weaknesses
culture bound
Most research supporting filter theory uses participants from individualistic Western cultures.
Individualistic cultures value free choice in relationships and choice of partners due to individual preferences. May apply criteria without influence from others.
Common in collectivist cultures for romantic relationships to be arranged, so partners are not free to apply individual filters.
Suggests filter theory suffers from culture bias, as it assumes that the rules of partner choice in Western cultures applies to relationships universally.
41
social exchange theory
* Uses economic principles of profit and loss.
Judge satisfaction of a relationship in terms of the profit we gain.
Profit = rewards – costs
* Minimax principle – seek to minimise costs and maximise rewards.
Rewards e.g. companionship, emotional support, physical intimacy, shared social groups
Costs e.g. time, energy, stress, emotional investment
* Extent that something is a reward or cost is subjective, leading to variance between relationships.
* Value of rewards and costs can change as relationship progresses.
* Assess level of profit through making comparisons.
42
comparison level
– amount of reward you believe you deserve.
* Based on experience in previous relationships and social norms as what we see as being reasonable.
* As become more experienced in relationships and social norms, expectations change.
43
comparison level for alternative
– are there better options?
* Consider whether other relationships give us more profit or would minimise costs and gain more rewards on our own.
* Stay in an existing relationship only as long as we think it is more rewarding than alternatives.
* Consideration of alternatives depends on whether comparison level has been met.
44
rewards and costs at different relationship stages
sampling
bargaining
commitment
institutionalisation
45
sampling stage
Prior to beginning a relationship, we experiment with ideas of rewards and costs through experience or observation of others.
46
bargaining stage
Relationship just beginning, partners exchange rewards and costs and identifying what is most profitable.
47
commitment stage
As relationship becomes more stable, rewards and costs become more predictable.
Rewards increase and costs decrease.
48
institutionalisation stage
Both partners settled and norms of rewards and costs firmly established.
49
social exchange theory strengths
research evidence
Sprecher found that comparison levels for alternatives were a strong predictor of commitment in relationship and rewards were predictor of satisfaction.
Suggests that people weigh up whether they are happy in a relationship based on rewards and costs and this can influence whether they look for alternatives.
Suggests there is some validity and that people maintain relationships as long as they deem them profitable.
50
social exchange theory
real life applications
Integrated behavioural couples therapy (IBCT) involves training partners to increase positive exchanges and decrease negative ones (enhance rewards and minimise costs).
Shows that theory is useful as principles used to provide effective counselling to improve relationships.
Theory has significant positive impact on improving relationships.
51
social exchange theory weaknesses
nomothetic
Nomothetic approach to explaining relationships.
Applies economic principles to relationships and based on quantifying rewards and costs. Assumes all relationships will be the same as principles can be applied universally to all couples.
Relationships are highly subjective and can only be understood from individuals within them and vary greatly between couples.
May be better to take an idiographic approach when trying to study relationships as provides greater experiences of individuals.
52
social exchange theory weaknesses
deterministic
Proposes that if costs outweigh rewards if individual will see the relationship as unprofitable and look to leave.
In some circumstances people stay in relationships without a sense of satisfaction e.g. if partner is chronically ill.
Does not account for circumstances as doesn’t allow consideration of individuals’ thoughts and feelings and how these can influence whether a person chooses to remain in a relationship.
Suggests that behaviour is predictable based on economic principles is limited as neglects to consider we are conscious beings who have free will to make decisions about relationships.
53
equity theory
* Equity refers to fairness as opposed to equality.
* Economic theory as it focuses on principles of rewards and costs.
Extension of social exchange theory – agrees that maximising rewards and minimising costs is important.
Both partners’ level of profit must be roughly the same.
* Partners are looking to maximise benefits and minimise costs and this should be fair.
* Perceptions of equity are subjective and will differ as relationship progresses.
Putting in more at start of relationship may lead to dissatisfaction as it continues.
* Relationships maintained if there is balance and stability.
54
consequences of inequity
* Partner who perceives inequity will eventually become distressed and dissatisfied.
Greater the perceived inequity, the greater the dissatisfaction.
* One partner under benefits from the relationship – likely to feel most dissatisfaction, in the form of anger, resentment, hostility, humiliation etc.
* One partner over benefits – likely to feel guilt, discomfort and shame.
55
changes in perceived equity
* Most dissatisfaction comes from change in perceived level of equity as time progresses.
* For example, you may contribute more than you receive at the beginning of the relationship (trying to impress partner) but if you continue to put more in and get little out of it, will lead to dissatisfaction and distress.
* Longer the feeling of unfairness goes on, the more likely a couple is to break up.
56
strategies for dealing with inequity
* If percieve inequity, often motivated to restore it.
* Behavioural – one partner works to address inequity and encourages the other to make changes.
* Cognitive – one partner will mentally revise their perception of rewards and costs to try and reduce the sense of inequity. May reduce the amount of cost in their mind to make it feel more acceptable.
* If restoration is not possible then they are likely to leave the relationship, either physically or emotionally.
57
equity theory strengths
research evidence
Utne used self-report to measure equity and satisfaction in 118 recently married couples and found that partners who rated their relationships as more equitable were also more satisfied with them.
Supports the idea that an equitable relationship is important in creating a satisfactory relationship.
Suggests the theory has validity.
58
equity theory weaknesses
nomothetic
Huseman suggests that some people are less sensitive to equity.
Some partners are benevolents, who are prepared to contribute more to the relationship than they get from it.
Others are entitleds, who believe they deserved to be over benefitted and accept it without feeling distressed or guilty.
Theory does not consider individual differences. Equity theory may not necessarily be global of all romantic experiences and is not a universal law of social interaction and should instead take a more idiographic approach.
59
equity theory weaknesses
gender differences
Important gender differences in perception of fairness that the theory ignores.
Sprecher found that women tend to be more disturbed when under benefitting from relationships and feel more guilt when over benefitting.
Theory shows a beta bias – assuming that males and females will respond in the same way when experiencing lack of equity.
60
equity theory weaknesses
causality
Question of causality between inequity and dissatisfaction.
Clarke argues that people do not consciously consider the rewards that they get in a relationship, and if they do, then they are likely already dissatisfied.
Theory proposes that people start to become dissatisfied when they percieve it to be inequitable. We may only question profits if we are already dissatisfied.
May possibly be a link between inequity and dissatisfaction but the cause of either is not explicit.
61
Rusbult's investment model
* Commitment can be strengthened by:
Satisfaction: whether relationship is profitable (rewards > costs)
Investment: what we put in and stand to lose if the relationship ends.
Intrinsic - tangible or intangible resources that we bring to the relationship e.g. money, time, emotions, house.
Extrinsic - tangible or intangible things gained from the relationship e.g. children, house, friendship.
* Commitment can be weakened by comparison to alternatives.
Comparison to past relationships or expectations.
If desired profit levels or are not earning what you think you are worth, satisfaction and commitment decreases, weakens relationship.
62
maintenance mechanisms
* Employed to make relationship more viable.
* More evident in committed relationships.
* Willingness to sacrifice - compromise, accepting of costs, putting partner’s interests first.
* Forgiveness – overcome costs, understanding of mistakes, letting go of transgressions.
* Positive allusions – being overly positive about the other partner. Emphasise rewards to better perception of profit.
* Ridiculing alternatives – being negative about other people’s relationships to make your own seem better.
63
Rusbult's investment model strengths
explains abusive relationships
Explains why people stay in abusive relationships.
Rusbult found that women were more likely to return to an abusive partner if they felt they had invested a lot into the relationship and felt they didn’t have any appealing alternatives.
Supports the importance of investment and not having alternatives in creating a committed relationship.
Provides a complex and comprehensive explanation, helps us explain abusive relationship, so the theory is highly applicable, useful and has good validity.
64
Rusbult's investment model strengths
research to support
Le and Agnew conducted a meta-analysis of 52 studies across individualist and collectivist cultures and discovered that satisfaction, comparison to alternatives and investment greatly contributed to commitment, which was also a defining feature of long-lasting relationships.
Suggests universality across cultures, due to nature rather than nurture.
Lacks culture bias, theory is applicable and generalisable to all, increasing usefulness and validity.
65
Rusbult's investment model strengths
self-report techniques
Evidence depends on self-report techniques.
Appropriate for gathering subjective data of size of investment of beliefs of alternatives from an individual’s perspective.
Can gather subjective beliefs and perspectives through interviews and questionnaires better than other techniques.
Suggests research evidence is internally valid (measure what you want to measure).
Idiographic – more appropriate for understanding reasons behind actions in a relationship.
66
Rusbult's investment model weaknesses
research to refute
Goodfriend and Agnew argued that investment is also a couple’s plan for their future. Partners will be committed to relationships because they want to see these plans realised.
Supports the role of an intangible extrinsic investment, suggesting the model is too simplistic as it is not just what we put in to or get out of a relationship, but the idea of what could have been and aspirations.
Suggests that needs to be detailed when it comes to emotional investment.
67
Rusbult's investment model weaknesses
correlation
Strong correlation found when investigating the investment model, but no cause and effect established.
Direction of causality not established – may be that more committed you are, the more investment you are willing to make.
Research evidence and theory may lack validity.
68
Duck's phase model of relationship breakdown
* Relationships don’t just suddenly cease – stages lead to the break-up.
* At each stage there is a threshold that either partner will reach where their perception of the relationship changes, beginning when one or both become dissatisfied with the current relationship.
69
Duck's phase model of relationship breakdown
stages
intra-psychic
dyadic
social
grave dressing
70
intra-psychic
* ‘I can’t stand this anymore’
* Focus on cognitive processes within individual.
* Dissatisfied partner broods on reasons for dissatisfaction, mostly on partner’s shortcomings, mulls thoughts privately or may share with a friend, weighs up pros and cons of the relationship and evaluate alternatives. Makes plans for the future.
71
dyadic
* ‘I’d be justified in leaving.’
* Focus on interpersonal processes between partners.
* Cannot avoid talking about relationship, confrontation, discussions and dissatisfactions aired. Anxiety, hostility, complaints about lack of equity, resentment over imbalance and rethinking commitment.
* Two possible outcomes: determination to break up relationship or desire to repair it. If rescue attempt fails, next threshold reached.
72
social
* ‘I mean it, I’m done.’
* Focuses on wider processes involving couple’s social networks, break-up made public.
* Partners seek support and forge pacts, mutual friends expected to choose a side, gossip traded and encouraged.
* Some friends provide reinforcement, others judgemental and place blame. Some may hasten end of relationship or help repair.
* Usually point of no return – driven by social forces.
73
grave dressing
* ‘It’s time to move on.’
* Focus on aftermath.
* Create a favourable story about breakup for public consumption so partners maintain a positive reputation, sometimes at expense of partner. Crucial to maintain some social credit by blaming others.
* Create personal story to tidy up memory of relationships, endearing traits reinterpreted negatively. Agree that not compatible and would never have worked out.
Duck and Rollie propose an addition, the resurrection phase, where people move beyond the pain and distress from end of relationship and experience personal growth.
74
Duck's breakdown of relationships strengths
practical applications
Relationship counselling for couples contemplating splitting up can use stages proposed by Duck to reframe how partners view the relationship e.g. focusing on positive communication in expressing dissatisfaction in dyadic phase.
Theory used to create an effective treatment, so theory is useful.
75
Duck's breakdown of relationships weaknesses
self-report methods
Evidence based on retrospective accounts from self-report methods.
Tashiro and Frazier surveyed 92 studies about experiences after breakups. They found that the grave dressing phase was particularly important in helping people grown and feel better after relationship.
Affected by social desirability, likely to change answers. Memory account may be inaccurate or selective.
Theory has limited validity as research based on unreliable memory accounts.
76
Duck's breakdown of relationships weaknesses
nomothetic
Theory assumes that people will respond in the same way to each stage of relationship breakdown – nomothetic approach.
Dickson found that adolescent relationships are viewed as less serious and friends/relatives do not put in much effort in helping partners reconcile. Breakups in older couples are viewed as more significant and more effort is put into helping the couple work things out.
Events of social phase vary depending on age, longevity of relationship and relationship with friends.
Idiographic approach more appropriate when considering individual relationships and influenced by individual differences.
77
Duck's breakdown of relationships weaknesses
cross-cultural
Limitations in using cross-culturally
Moghaddam says that relationships in individualistic cultures are voluntary and tend to end, whereas in collectivist cultures, relationships are more likely to be obligatory, which are less easy to end, involve the wider family and are sometimes arranged.
Suggests that collectivist relationships are less likely to end.
Theory is ethnocentric and not applicable or useful to all cultures.
78
Duck's breakdown of relationships weaknesses
descriptive not explanatory
Model seen as descriptive but not explanatory.
Proposes that breaking up will begin at the intrapsychic phase where one partner admits to themselves that they are dissatisfied.
Theory does not explain where dissatisfaction comes from, not a full explanation.
Theory is reductionist and too simplistic.
79
virtual relationships
reduced cues theory
hyperpersonal model
absence of gating
80
reduced cues theory
* Virtual relationships are of a poorer quality than in real life relationships as they lack cues.
* Absence of non-verbal cues to convey emotion.
Emotions, facial expressions, tone of voice, body language.
Online relationships are of poorer quality as cannot pick up on subtle cues that help us read other people.
* Lack of cues leads to deindividuation – losing personal identity and sense of self.
* This leads to higher levels of disinhibition – removal of usual behaviour restraints.
May display behaviours we wouldn’t normally demonstrate e.g. saying thing online that we wouldn’t in person, leading to more dishonesty.
* Communication is likely to impersonal and less honest with less self-disclosure.
Less personally involved and connected in relationship.
Reduces success of relationship – lacks depth and connection.
Briefer relationship, no intimacy.
81
hyperpersonal model
* Online relationships can be more personal with more self-disclosure than IRL.
* Virtual relationships progress quicker, and depth of self-disclosure occurs earlier, often more intense and intimate.
* Selective self-presentation – provide more time to manipulate online image, greater control over what you disclose and what cues you provide.
Easier to manipulate self-disclosure and present yourself positively.
82
boom and bust
* Boom and bust
Relationship is great online but fails when you meet in real life if not what you are expecting.
Or success and intensity at the start as you present the best version of yourself, but then the mask slips and the relationship may fail.
Virtual relationships can provide a sense of anonymity, so may feel secure to disclose more personal info, making the relationship intense. However, as trust has not been established, it is harder to sustain the relationship.
83
absence of gating theory
* Gates are obstacles that are removed when a relationship is online.
* Gates in face to face interactions when forming relationships:
Filter theory e.g. proximity, attractiveness, age
* Computer mediated communication removes some gates e.g. location, although some, such as physical appearance may remain.
* Reduction in gates may lead to increased self-disclosure, increasing intimacy of the relationship.
84
virtual relationships strengths
positive impact
Technology has a positive impact on relationships.
Rosenfeld and Thomas found that 72% of participants with internet access were married or had a romantic partner, compared to only 36% without internet access.
Suggests that technology helps improve the formation of relationships.
However, online daters reported less satisfying and stable marriages than offline daters.
Suggests that technology helps people form relationships, although we should be wary as these relationships may lack quality.
85
virtual relationships strengths
helpful for some
Virtual relationships may offer a positive medium for certain individuals (idiographic).
McKenna found that lonely and socially anxious people were able to express their ‘true selves’ more than in face to face situations.
Technology can help people who struggle forming relationships.
Suggests virtual relationships are useful, as help some people form relationships they otherwise wouldn’t.
86
virtual relationships weaknesses
impacts irl relationships
The ease of virtual relationships may have a negative impact on real life relationships.
Wysocki found that most people who had an online affair logged on after their partner went to bed or at work.
Promotes and allows internet infidelity – intimacy with another person online with sexual and emotional dimensions.
Technology makes this easier – easy medium to seek outside gratification while being discrete.
Most reported more satisfaction with their online relationship than their face to face one. Neglected everyday tasks, sexual intimacy decreased and lying and deceit decreases trust.
Suggests that virtual relationships can be detrimental and damaging to established face to face relationships.
87
virtual relationships weaknesses
multimodal
Relationships are often multimodal and not just online.
Walther suggested that theories of romantic relationships need to consider that they are not always exclusively online and can also involve real world interactions.
Suggests that virtual relationships may not be too dissimilar from face to face relationships.
Therefore, virtual relationships may not be too dissimilar from face to face relationships.
88
virtual relationships weaknesses
question lack of cues
The idea that virtual relationships lack cues can be questioned.
Walther suggested that in virtual relationships people also use subtle cues, such as time taken to respond, or emojis.
Challenges reduced cue theory, suggesting that it is possible to have the same level of quality.
Therefore, the theory lacks validity.
89
parasocial relationships
* Parasocial relationships are one-sided, where one person extends emotional energy, interest and time, and the other party, the persona is unaware of the other’s existence.
* Appeals to certain individuals as do not have the same risk of rejection as real-life relationships and place fewer demands on the individual.
90
celebrity attitude scale
entertainment social
intense personal
borderline pathological
91
entertainment social
least intense
Celebrities are sources of entertainment and gossip. May be discussed.
Giles found that parasocial relationships were a fruitful source of gossip in offices.
92
intense personal
Greater personal involvement. Includes frequent obsessive thoughts and intense feelings.
E.g. considering a celebrity to be your soulmate.
93
borderline pathological
most intense
Uncontrollable fantasies and extreme behaviours.
E.g. spending lots of money on a celebrity-related object or being willing to perform illegal acts because they said so.
94
absorption-addiction model
* People pursue parasocial relationships due to deficits within their own lives e.g. if they lack fulfilment in everyday life, have a weak sense of self-identity or poor mental health.
* Allow an escape from reality and find fulfilment or develop a sense of identity.
* Progression through celebrity attitude scale can be triggered by personal crisis or stressful life event, making the parasocial relationship increase in intensity.
* Strong negative correlation between mental health and strength of parasocial relationships.
* Absorption – person seeks fulfilment in celebrity, motivating them to focus attention on the celebrity. Become preoccupied in their existence and identify with them.
* Addiction – individual needs to sustain commitment but feeling a stronger and closer involvement. Leads to extreme behaviour and delusional thinking e.g. stalking a celebrity due to a belief or reciprocity but someone e.g. manager stopping them.
95
attachment theory
* Tendency to form parasocial relationships is linked to attachment difficulties in infancy.
Bowlby’s continuity hypothesis - development of internal working model suggests that experiences of attachment in early infancy plays a role in later attachment.
96
attachment theory insecure-resistant
* Insecure-resistant children are more likely to develop parasocial relationships.
Inconsistent level of response to needs from caregiver.
Ambivalent to mother, clingy and dependent but not easily consoled.
Incomplete internal working model, inconsistency of relationship.
Crave intimacy bit anxious whether partner will meet emotional needs. Needy and clingy, potentially controlling.
Needy and clingy – believe they have a consistent relationship with a celebrity.
97
attachment theory insecure-avoidant
* Insecure-avoidant attachments are least likely to engage in parasocial relationships.
Caregiver insensitive and rejecting of needs, often unavailable during times of emotional distress.
Unconcerned by presence of mother or stranger, equally easily comforted by stranger.
Incomplete internal working model, distant in relationships.
Struggle to connect with others, distant and avoid closeness.
Struggle to connect and distant, even to people attracted to, so are unlikely to form a relationship with a celebrity.
98
parasocial relationships strengths
evidence to support
Evidence to support the absorption-addiction explanation.
Maltby found a significant correlation between poor body image and intensive celebrity worship in teenage girls aged 14-16 for female celebrities whose body shape they admired.
Supports the model, girls did not have a strong self-identity or self esteem in own appearance, parasocial relationships form as means of dealing with deficits.
Suggests there is a link between parasocial relationships and poor mental health.
However, research is correlation, so cannot establish cause and effect. Celebrity worship may instead lead to poor body image. Limits validity.
99
parasocial relationships strengths
evidence to support (Eysenck)
Further evidence to support the absorption-addiction explanation.
Maltby drew links between levels of celebrity worship on the celebrity attitude scale and Eysenck’s personality types. Those at entertainment-social level were more likely to be extraverted, those at intense-personal level were neurotic (experience negative emotions such as anxiety), those at borderline-pathological were psychotic (susceptibility to psychosis and psychopathic disorders).
Suggests that there is a link between escalation of parasocial relationships and decline in mental health, leads to greater validity.
100
parasocial relationships strengths
similar across cultures
Evidence to suggest that parasocial relationships may be similar across cultures.
Schmid and Klimmt studied levels of parasocial relationships with characters from the Harry Potter books in different cultures and found similar levels of worship in Germany (individualistic) and Mexico (collectivist).
Suggests occurrence of parasocial relationships is universal.
May serve innate purpose e.g. escapism from stress of everyday life as proposed by absorption-addiction explanation.
101
parasocial relationships weaknesses
research to refute
Research to refute attachment theory.
McCutcheon examined the correlation between attachment type and celebrity worship levels using 229 participants and found no link between insecure-resistant attachment and more intense levels of parasocial relationships.
Theory suggests that those with insecure-resistant attachments are more likely to have a parasocial relationship as desire emotional connection but fear rejection, but this suggests they are no more likely.
Questions validity of theory.
102
parasocial relationships weaknesses
relies on self-report methods
Celebrity Attitude Scale – individuals answer extensive questionnaire to identify level of celebrity worship.
Social desirability reduces honesty and validity of answers as no one would want to admit to an obsession about celebrities.
Cannot be certain of validity.
