Relationships

Question 1

Discuss evolutionary explanations of partner preferences (16 marks)

Answer 1

A01

Sexual selection = Some characteristics are successful in aiding reproduction, may not be advantageous but for survival but can help attract a parter, which encourages mating

Anisogamy = Refers to the difference between male and female sex cells (gametes)

Other sex will compete for the sex who invests the most - becomes a limiting resource

Males produce many sperm, small in size, energetically cheap

Females produce few eggs, large in size, energetically expensive

Thus females are more picky in her choice of a mate

Inter sexual selection = Between sexes, strategies that males or females select one another from = competition

Intra sexual selection = Within each sex, strategies ( usually between males) to be the one that is selected

Dimorphism = The obvious differences between males and females

A03

+ Buss
10000 people
37 cultures
Found females look for resources, financial stability, ambition = evolutionary advantage is it supports a better quality of life for child
Found males look for youth and physical attractiveness = evolutionary advantage is that they are more likely to have children

• However, this is overly simplistic = Buss and Schmidt found both men and women look for someone who is loving, loyal and kind when seeking a long-term committed relationship

+ Clark and Hatfield
approached strangers at uni campus
asked 3 questions = would you go on date with me (50% males, 56% females said yes, would you go back to my apartment (69% males, 6% females), would you have sex with me (75% males, 0% females)
Found females were more likely to go on a date, but males were more likely to go back to an apartment or have sex
Supports the idea that males are looking to spread genes, females looking for resources and commitment

• Lawson found this theory does not explain homosexual partner preferences = he looked at ads and saw homosexual men emphasised physical attractiveness and women emphasised resources
  This contradicts the theory as it suggests within same-sex relationships, there are distinct preferences that may not be directly explained by traditional gender-based evolutionary pressures.

+ Singh = males look for hip to waist ratio of 0.7
shows signs of fertility
attractive because it is an honest signal that the women is fertile but not currently pregnant

Question 2

Factors affecting attraction - Discuss self disclosure as an explanation for attraction (16 marks)

Answer 2

A01

Self - disclosure = Revealing personal information about yourself, tends to get deeper and more frequent as relationships develop, can strengthen romantic bond when used appropriately

Social penetration theory:
Altman and Taylor
as each person reveals more personal information about themselves it displays trust to the other person
as each partner reveals more they get deeper and deeper

1. Superficial communication
2. Building trust
3. Strong working relationship

There are two elements to this theory:
Breadth and Depth = low risk info revealed early, and high risk revealed as relationship progresses

Levels = superficial, intimate, personal, core

Reis and Shaver emphasised the need for reciprocity = creates balance

A03

+ Sprecher and Hendrick
studied heterosexual couples
found strong correlation between amount of self disclosure and measures of the quality of the relationship

• research in China and USA by Tang = found SD does not take into account cultural differences - self disclosure may not always lead to more intimate relationships
  not generalisable
• Limitation of Social penetration theory - high self disclosure found in breakdown stage of relationship = does not always mean satisfaction levels are high when self disclosure is high

+ Hass and Stafford = found 57% of gay men and women said that honest self-disclosure was the main way they maintained their relationships - this can be used to hep people improve their relationships

• correlation does not equal causation
  happier relationships may disclose more
  could also be a third variable = ‘time spent together’
• Generally thought females are better communicators = example of alpha bias, exaggerating the differences between men and women

Question 3

Factors affecting attraction -Discuss the role of physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction (16 marks)

Answer 3

A01

Physical attractiveness = associated with good health (healthy partner, healthy child) and both male and female willl be able to physically bear and provide for the child - genes carry and produce healthy offspring

Factors:
1. Symmetrical faces (Shackelford and Larson) = honest signal of genetic fitness
2. Baby faces = trigger protective or caring instinct

Halo effect = the idea that people who are judged to be attractive are typically perceived in a positive light.

Dion = “what is beautiful is good”

Matching hypothesis:
- look for partner on similar level of attractiveness
- avoid pain of rejection by not chasing partners we see as too attractive
- retain partners by not choosing someone who will leave us for someone else
- realistically appraise out attractiveness compared to others

Study: Computer dance
Walster
752 students
- when ticket bought, told that personal information given would be fed to computer to find ‘ideal match’ date
- in fact they were randomly assigned
- observer marked them on attractiveness
- students asked how much they liked partner after date

Found most liked partners were the most attractive ones - not ones that matched own level of attractiveness
Contradicts matching hypothesis as people did not prefer those who were similar to themselves

A03
+ Palmer and Peterson = found physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent = even when people knew they had no particular expertise

• Taylor = found dating apps show people go for others more attractive than themselves
  suggests that people are always looking to do better than how they rate themselves - against matching hypothesis

+ dating sites may not be used to actually select a long term partner = may seek someone more attractive but do not succeed

• individual differences
  Touhey gave males and females a set of photos and biographical info about people and asked them to judge them based on the photo
  participants then completed a questionnaire - the MACHO scale - designed to measure sexist attitudes and behaviour

Found:
high score on macho scale = physical attractiveness more important
low score on macho scale = physical attractiveness less important

• methodological issue = subjective, based off individual preferences

Question 4

Factors affecting attraction -Discuss filter theory as a factor affecting attraction (16 marks)

Answer 4

A01

Filter theory

Kerchkoff and Davis
- how romantic relationships form and develop
- three main factors we use to narrow down our range of partners to a field of desirable

1. Social demography = more likely to come into contact and build relationships with people who live in our geographical area (proximity filter) - those that are far away are discounted
2. Similarity in atitudes = due to social demography, more likely to come into contact with people with similar core values
   (Kerchkoff and davies = only important in first 18 months)
   similarity causes “law of attraction”
3. Complementarity = attracted to people who can meet/fulfil each others needs, partners complement each other when they have the traits that the other lacks
   (Kerchkoff and Davies found this was more important for long term couples - opposites attract)

A03
- dating apps remove the first filter
allows an increased area of people for you to meet

• Markey and Markey
  70 lesbian couples
  4.5 average years together
  valued similarity which goes against complementarity - third stage of filter theory
• However, may lack generalisability to heterosexual couples
• Cause and effect = could be that similarity leads to long term relationships but could also be that partners become more similar over time

+ Kerchkoff and Davies
Used self-report questionnaires using students
Found closeness was associated with similarity in values in less than 18 month couples, complementarity valued in more than 18 month couples

• Counterpoint
  psychologists failed to replicate findings potentially due to the cut off of ‘18 months’ (committed relationship)
  assumes that relationships after 18 months are long term/committed and less than 18 months are superficial
  some cultures commit to marriage before 18 months (long term relationship) = Lacks cultural validity

Question 5

Discuss the social exchange theory of romantic relationships (16 marks)

Answer 5

A01

Thibault and Kelley
Economic theory
involves constant exchange of resources
trying to maximise rewards and limit costs
relationships will fail if not profitable

based on operant conditioning = positive reinforcement

Rewards = anything someone values - subjective
Costs = ‘Blau’ said relationships can be expensive, so costs include time, stress, energy and compromise

Another type of cost = relationships have opportunity costs - investment of resources cannot be invested elsewhere

Comparison level = the amount of reward you believe that you deserve to get = profit

Comparison level for alternatives = where we weigh up a potential increase in rewards from a potential partner, minus any costs involved in ending out current relationship

People stay in a relationship as long as they find it more rewarding than a potential alternative

4 stages a relationship goes through:
1. Sampling = explore rewards and costs by trying and watching others
2. Bargaining = beginning of relationship - exchange rewards and costs
3. Commitment = rewards and costs become more predictable and stable - R increase, C decrease
4. Institutionalisation = partners settled, rewards and costs are firmly established

A03
+ Kurdek
asked gay, lesbian, heterosexual couples to complete questionnaire
found most committed relationships had most perceived rewards and fewest costs and viewed alternatives as unattractive

• Counterpoint = assumes people are selfish and does not consider equity = not the balance of rewards and costs but partners perceptions that this is fair
• Vague concepts
  difficult to quantify
  individual differences for rewards and costs
  SET is challenging to test in a valid way
• assumes all romantic relationships are economic in nature = Clark and Mills argue partners don’t keep score otherwise it would destroy the trust that underlies a close emotional relationship - not applicable
• SET theory suggests dissatisfaction occurs after it stops being ‘proitfable’ = however Argyle argues that we don’t start to analyse costs and rewards or look at alternatives until after we are dissatisfied

Question 6

Discuss equity theory of romantic relationships (16 marks)

Answer 6

A01

Walster
economic theory
Developed after criticisms of SET

both partners value their levels of profit equally
when a partner is over or under benefiting the satisfaction of the relationship may decrease

not the size or amount of rewards or costs but the ratio of the two to each other = fairness

greater the perceived inequality the greater the dissatisfaction = strong correlation between the two

Put in a lot and get little back = underbenefitting
Put in little and get a lot back = overbenefitting

Changes in perceived equity = Equity changes as time goes on = less satisfaction than at the beginning of relationship

How to deal with inequity:
1. Behavioural = try to make relationship more equitable
2. Cognitive = revise perceptions of rewards and costs so the relationship feels more equitable

A03
+ Mary Utne carried out a survey of 118 recently married couples aged between 16 and 45 = found couples that considered their relationships as most equitable were most satisfied = research confirms a central prediction of equity theory, increasing validity as an explanation of romantic relationships

+ evolutionary support = Brosnan and De Waal gave female monkeys a task to do, given cucumber as rewards, happy to continue with task until one got a grape (higher valued treat), they then refused to complete their task for a cucumber and got very angry at the inequity - animals also value the importance of equity, ancient origins

• individual differences (Huseman) = some people are less sensitive to equity than others
  1. Benevolents = contribute more than they get out of it
  2. Entitleds = believe they deserve to over benefit and accept it without feeling distressed or guilty
  Shows equity theory is not universal and equity is not necessarily a global feature
• Cannot apply to all cultures/Culture bias = Aumer-Ryan compared individualistic cultures to collectivist cultures in terms of satisfaction and equity and found individualistic cultures were most satisfied when equitable, however collectivist cultures (Jamaica ) were most satisfied when over benefitting

Question 7

Discuss the investment model of romantic relationships (16 marks)

Answer 7

A01

commitment to a relationship depends on three different factors
1. Satisfaction level
2. Comparison level with alternatives
3. Investment size

These lead to a commitment level which ultimately decides the persons future decision to whether they stay or leave

Satisfaction = Whether rewards outweigh the costs

Comparison level of alternatives = Whether a new partner has a potential increase in rewards/profit - minus costs involved in ending out current relationship

Investment size:
Cl and Clalt are not enough to explain commitment to a relationship

Investments are resources associated with a romantic relationship which partners would lose if their relationship were to end = otherwise as soon as costs outweighed the rewards the relationship would end

Intrinsic = resources we put in, tangible or intangible = house or emotions/time

Extrinsic = things that did not previously feature before the relationship, possessions bought recently or mutual friends, tangible or intangible

Satisfaction vs commitment:
Commitment is more important than satisfaction - dissatisfied partners will stay as they do not want to see their investment go to waste - commitment

Relationship maintenance mechanisms:
1. Accommodation = no tally of C and R but promotes relationship
2. Willingness to sacrifice
3. Forgiveness = for minor and major mistakes
4. Positive illusions = be unrealistically positive about partners qualities
5. Ridiculing alternatives = minimise advantages of potential alternatives and view them negatively

Ali
Will
Fall
Playing
Rugby

A03
+ can explain abusive relationships = Rusbult applied this to women living in refuges and found although satisfaction may be low, investment size was very high and - they may have also lacked alternative potential partners
Strength as it shows that satisfaction on its own cannot explain why people stay in relationships - commitment and investment are also factors

+ Le and Agnew reviewed 52 studies with 11k participants between 1970s and 1999 = found satisfaction, comparison level with alternatives, and investment size all predicted relationship commitment
- also found relationships with the highest commitment levels were more stable and lasted the longest
- consistent across men and women, all cultures, both homosexual and heterosexual relationships
Suggests some validity to Rusbult’s claim that these factors are universally important features of a romantic relationship

• Counterpoint = correlation does not equal causation
  could be that the more commitment someone is, the more investment they are willing to make. Therefore, the direction of causality may be the reverse of that predicted by the model
• Agnew and Goodfriend = highlight that investment is more than resources already invested as in early stages partners will have made few actual investments - they extended his investment model to include the future plans partners are motivated to commit to each other as they want to see the plans for the future come to fruition

Question 8

Discuss Ducks phase model of relationship breakdown (16 marks)

Answer 8

1. Intra-psychic phase = cognitive, dissatisfied partner mulls in private over why they are dissatisfied, weighs up pros and cons and compares with alternatives = “I can’t stand this anymore, something has to change”
2. Dyadic phase = partners confront each other to discuss relationship issues/dissatisfactions and have conversations relating to inequity, intimacy and costs of breakup - two outcomes break up, or desire to repair relationship, self disclosure may become deeper and more frequent = I’d be justified in withdrawing”
3. Social phase = split couple tells social network, mutual friends pick sides and provide support (point of no return) = “the dissatisfied partner concludes, I mean it”
4. Grave - dressing phase = partners create narrative of break-up so they can save face. Blame partner or circumstances out of their control, may twist story - show positive traits as negative, may question decision and consider how the break-up has impacted their social network, finally reach the conclusion to move on = “its not inevitable”

A03
- Rollie and Duck
incomplete/oversimplified model as it does not account for dynamic nature with all the inherent uncertainty and complexity
- modified the model to add a fifth phase called resurrection phase - partners use experience gained from recently ended one ands use it in future relationships

• description rather than explanatory = gives insight into the stage of relationship breakdown but not why or how
• In contrast, felmlee’s model states relationships break down for the same quality that cased you to be attracted to someone in the first place
• Early phases less understood = research is retrospective and participants report experiences some time after it has passed - hence the accuracy may be questionable

+ good real world application
such insights could be used in relationships counselling as different methods are used at different stages
- Intra-psychic = focus on positive aspects of partner
- Dyadic = focus on communication

• Culture bias = assumes break up process is universal
  Moghaddam states relationships in individualistic cultures are generally voluntary and frequently come to an end whereas in collectivist cultures are way less easy to end and involve wider family - Divorce % = USA 39, UK 42, India 0.1, China 0.2

Question 9

Outline and evaluate the research into virtual relationships in social media (16 marks)

Answer 9

A01

internet based not face to face

researchers interested in how important self disclosure is in virtual relationships and how it works

Two contrasting theories:
1. hyperpersonal model = more personal and greater self disclosure due to ability to develop faster as disclosure happens earlier, once established more intense and intimate - can end due to excitement without trust or ‘boom and bust’ phenomenon

Features:
- sender of message has greater control over disclosure and cues - hyper honest/dishonest
- reciever gains positive impression of sender they offer positive reinforcement which encourages that selective self-presentation

2. reduced cues theory (Sproull and Kiesler = less effective as no eye contact, facial expression, tone of voice = no cues

Casuses de-individuation which encourages disinhibition where people feel free from social norms causing them to act differently = may lead to people being ‘blunt’ and not express real thought - lack of self disclosure

John Barg role of anonymity:
“stranger on the train phenomenon”
individuals rapidly reveal personal information with complete strangers in public places

Gate = a barrier to entry - any obstacle that stops someone forming a relationship

there is an absence of gating in virtual relationships therefore relationships are more likely to get off the ground, and quicker

Benefits and drawbacks of absence of gating:
+ Individual is more free to be more like their ‘true selves’

• People can create online identities that they could never manage FTF (Catfish)

A03
- lack of research
cues are available just different
Walther and Tidwell state people use cues such as style and timing of message as well as acronyms or emojis to express emotions - substitute for in person cues

+ Research support = Whitty and Joinson published a paper called “truth, lies and trust on the internet” examining whether the internet is an unsafe space - they found that online discussions tend to be more direct probing and intimate (hyperhonest) than FTF interactions
- However, Ruppel found in a meta analysis of 25 studies that compared self disclosure in FTF and virtual interactions that FTF had greater frequency and breadth and depth of self disclosure

+ Mckenna and Bargh
shy/socially anxious people are able to express their true selves more than in FTF interactions
70% lasted 2 years online compared to 50% lasted in ‘real world’ relationships
Suggests that the absence of gating enables shy people to be their true selves and create long lasting relationships online

• Walther = argues that what we choose to disclose in our online relationships are likely influenced by our offline interactions

Question 10

Describe and evaluate on for more explanations of parasocial relationships (16 marks)

Answer 10

A01

Para = resembling

Parasocial relationships = One sided relationships - usually with celebrity

McCutheon said we can measure attraction to celebrities by using the CAS - Celebrity Attitude Scale = 23 questions

Three sub scales:
1. Entertainment social = celebrities are sources of entertainment

2. Intense personal = a fan may have obsessive thoughts or feelings about the celebrity - thinking they are solvates (commonly teenagers)
3. Borderline - pathological = a person have obsessive fantasies about the celebrity, spends a large amount of money or may commit illegal activities - they think the celebs feelings would be reciprocated

Attracted to celebs due to:
1. Absorption addiction model
2. Attachment theory

Absorption addiction model:
Absorption = looking for satisfaction due to potential personal crisis, helps take their mind off of it

Addiction = person needs to keep increasing dosage to receive same effects as earlier on - can become heavily addicted which can lead to stalking (extreme behaviour/delusional thinking)

Attachment theory:
Insecure resistant (type C) leads to an increased interest in celebrities - seek to have unfulfilled needs met, but has no chance of rejection or break up/disappointment that real life relationships bring

A03
+ good predictive validity
McCutcheon used the CAS to measure levels of parasocial relationships and found participants who scored as intense personal or borderline-pathological tended to experience a high degree of anxiety in their intimate relationships, whereas entertainment social did not

+ good cultural validity
individualistic and collectivist both show insecure attachment types were the most likely to develop intense parasocial relationships with tv personalities and characters
+ not culturally specific = Schmid and Klimmt found similar levels of parasocial attachments to Harry Potter in an individualistic and collectivist culture

• McCutcheon (2006) = measures attachment styles and celebrity rated attitudes in 299 US participants and found that insecure resistant participants were no more likely to form parasocial relationships with celebrities than participant with secure attachments
• Many studies that have found correlations between attachment types and celebrity worship do not show causation or third factors which may affect both variables

+ Support for the absorption addiction model = Maltby investigated the link between celebrity worship and body image in male and females aged 14-16 - especially females reporting an intense-personal parasocial relationship with a female celebrity whose body shape they admired
- found female adolescents had a poor body image and speculated the lead to the development of eating disorders such as ‘anorexia nervosa’

This supports the model as it shows that there is a link between poor psychological functioning and the severity of the type and intensity of parasocial relationships (negative correlation) - correlation or causation