Relationships

Question 1

Inter-sexual selection

Answer 1

between sexes
preferred by females
quality over quantity

Question 2

Intra-sexual selection

Answer 2

within sexes
preferred by males
quantity over quality

Question 3

Buss (eval)

Answer 3

surveys 33 countries, 10000 adults on partner preference
female prefer resources
male prefer reproductive capacity

Question 4

Clark and Hatfield (eval)

Answer 4

volunteers approach opposite sex students at uni ‘I find you attractive, will you go to bed with me?’
0% females, 75% males said yes

Question 5

Bereczkei et al

Answer 5

social change changes female preference may no loner be resource oriented
eg women greater role at work so less dependent

Question 6

Penton-Voak et al

Answer 6

females prefer masculine features (strong immunity for offspring) when fertile and feminine features (kindness and parental cooperation) long term

Question 7

Altman and Taylor

Answer 7

Social Penetration Theory
gradual process of revealing inner self
reciprocal exchange
display trust
‘penetrate into each others lives
‘depenetration’ - gradual disclose less

Question 8

Reis and Shaver

Answer 8

Reciprocity
one partner discloses, other responds rewardingly
balance of self-disclosure
deepens relationships

Question 9

Sprecher and Hendrick (eval)

Answer 9

heterosexual couples, correlation between satisfaction and self-disclosure

Question 10

Laurenceau (eval)

Answer 10

asked ppts to write diaries, self-disclosure and perception of self-disclosure led to high intimacy in long-term married couples, reverse also true

Question 11

Tang et al

Answer 11

Men and women USA disclose more sexual thoughts than romantic partners in China
satisfaction high in both

Question 12

Shakelford and Larson

Answer 12

Facial symmetry makes more attractive, honest symbol of genetic fitness
Neotenous baby face, suggests kindness and social releasers

Question 13

Dion et al

Answer 13

Research into Halo Effect physically attractive people consistently rated as kinder and intelligent

Question 14

Walster and Walster

Answer 14

Matching hypothesis
people will choose partners that match them in attractiveness
avoids rejection, making a compromise

Question 15

Palmer and Peterson

Answer 15

physically attractive people rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent even without any expertise

Question 16

Feingold

Answer 16

meta-analysis 17 studies, correlation rating attractiveness between romantic partners

Question 17

Taylor et al

Answer 17

no evidence online daters and driven by attractiveness

Question 18

Sprecher and Hatfield

Answer 18

fails to find evidence as this is only one characteristic, may compensate for attractiveness with other features

Question 19

Kerckoff and Davis

Answer 19

Filter theory
1 Social demography
2 Similarity in attitudes
3 Complimentarity

Question 20

Winch

Answer 20

similarity in attitudes is important in early stages and complimentarity important later on, face validity

Question 21

Levenger

Answer 21

social changes since and difficulty to define depth
filter theory suggests cut off at 18 months for short term relationships, if longer should be greater commitment, some take longer to establish commitment

Question 22

Thibault and Kelley

Answer 22

Social Exchange Theory
economic theory
Comparison level
past experience determines what you deserve
Comparison level for alternatives
more rewards elsewhere?
Stages of relationship development
sample, bargaining, commitment, institutionalisation

Question 23

Sprecher

Answer 23

study 101 couples CLalt predicted commitment
longitudinal study US uni
high CLalt= low commitment and satisfaction

Question 24

Argyle

Answer 24

people rarely assess costs and rewards before being dissatisfied, being unhappy may lead to questioning

Question 25

Walster

Answer 25

Equity theory economic theory level ratio of profit same Consequences of inequity over-benefitted (shame/guilt) under-benefitted (resentment) Dealing with inequity under-benefitted works hard to make equitable, can be cognitive, costs become norm

Question 26

Utne et al

Answer 26

survey 18 recently married couples measuring equity with self-report, age 16-45 together 2+ years before couples with equity more satisfied

Question 27

Aumer-Ryan et al

Answer 27

individualist cultures consider relationship satisfying when equitable, not true for collectivist

Question 28

Huseman et al

Answer 28

some people are less sensitive to equity than others partners as 'benevolents' and 'entitles' believe they deserve to over-benefit

Question 29

Rusbult

Answer 29

satisfaction level + CLalt + investment lead to commitment Investment size - intrinsic/extrinsic Maintenance mechanisms - accommodation, willingness to sacrifice, forgiveness, positive illusions, ridiculing alternatives

Question 30

Le and Agnew

Answer 30

meta-analysis 11000 ppts 5 countries, satisfaction and CLalt and investment predicted commitment, greatest and most stable commitment had longest relationships true for men and women, all cultures, homosexual and heterosexual

Question 31

Rusbult and Martz

Answer 31

studied 'battered women' at shelter, greatest investment and fewest alternatives most likely to return to abusive relationships

Question 32

Goodfriend and Agnew

Answer 32

early stages very few investments extended model to include investment in future plans to motivate commitment

Question 33

Duck

Answer 33

Phases of relationship breakdown Intra-psychic Dyadic Social Grave-dressing

Question 34

Rollie and Duck

Answer 34

fifth stage 'resurrection', turn attention to future

Question 35

Frazier

Answer 35

undergraduates after break up report personal growth

Question 36

Sproull and Kiesler

Answer 36

Reduced cues theory CMC less effective than FTF due to lack normal cues like emotional state lead to de-individuation leads to disinhibition - aggression and less self-disclosure

Question 37

Walther

Answer 37

Hyperpersonal model develop quickly and intensely, high excitement but low trust= boom and bust phenomenon can manipulate image

Question 38

Bargh et al

Answer 38

(hyperpersonal model) anonymity - less accountable so disclose more (stranger on a train)

Question 39

McKenna and Bargh

Answer 39

Absence of gating physical appearance/social anxiety etc allows progress faster as focus on self-disclosure and can be who they want to be

Question 40

Rosenfeld and Thomas

Answer 40

4000 US adults, those with internet more likely to be in relationship =, 72% with internet in relationship 36% without internet in relationship even with other factors eg age/gender/religion etc

Question 41

Walther and Tidwell

Answer 41

other cues exist like style and timing acronyms, emoticons, emojis

Question 42

McKenna and Bargh research

Answer 42

looked at CMC used by anxious + lonely, express true selves 70% stayed more than two years, higher than ftf

Question 43

McCutcheon et al

Answer 43

developed celebrity attitude scale absorption-addiction model absorption lack fulfillment, motivates focus addiction need to sustain commitment, extreme behaviour and delusions

Question 44

Maltby et al

Answer 44

used celebrity attitude scale in large scale survey levels of parasocial relationships Entertainment-social Intense-personal Borderline-pathological

Question 45

Bowlby

Answer 45

internal working model insecure resistant most likely to develop parasocial relationship insecure avoidant least likely

Question 46

Maltby research

Answer 46

linked personality type with levels entertainment-social linked with extraverted, intense-personal linked with neurotic traits, borderline-pathological linked with psychotic measured celebrity worship and teenage body image, girls intense-personal have poor body image and like physical appearance of celebrity, development of eating disorders

Question 47

McCutcheon et al research

Answer 47

examined correlation attachment type and worship level 229 ppts insecure attachment no more likely to form than secure