Relationships Flashcards
1
Q
What is evolution?
A
The process whereby humans have adapted to the environment over millions of years
2
Q
What does evolutionary behaviour theory suggest?
A
That if if we accept human evolution it is logical to assume that our behavioural and physical characteristics have also evolved for out survival
3
Q
When is a behaviour adaptive?
A
When it leads to increased survival and reproduction of offspring (continuation of genes)
Thus the same characteristic (behavioural or physical) will be passed on to the next generation
4
Q
What did Buss’s study aim to do?
A
To study evolutionary theory about mate selection and assess preferred characteristics of the opposite gender for men + women (across all cultures)
5
Q
What was the procedure of Buss’s study?
A
10,047 pps (across 33 countries/37 cultures) av. age: 23.05 yrs, pps completed 2 questionarres-
1st: rank on scale 0-3, 18 different characteristics
2nd: rank 13 factors in order of importance when selecting a mate
(factors included target variables of age, looks, money, chastity, ambition)
6
Q
What were the findings of Buss’s study?
A
36/37 cultures women valued good financial prospects,
36/37 women valued industriousness,
All 37 men wanted younger mate
All 37 men valued good looks
23/37 men valued chastity- (This showed most cultural difference)
7
Q
What is sexual selection?
A
Suggests evolution is driven by competition for mates and development of characteristics that ensure better chance of reproductive success
(NOT survival success which is natural selection)
8
Q
What is anisogamy?
A
The difference between the sex cells: namely that sperm 40-600 million released at any one time whereas ova production limited to about 300
9
Q
What is inter-sexual selection?
A
Quality vs quantity (typical “female” strategy) Trivers (1972) suggests female makes more investment in time/resources + stands to lose more so opts for this strategy. Leaves males to compete for the female.
10
Q
What are indicators?
A
When one gender is selecting a mate from the other they use indicators: which reveal good genes and parenting quality (likelihood mate will survive to provide for offspring)
11
Q
What is intra-sexual selection?
A
Quantity over quality (typical “male” strategy) Aim is to mate with as many as possible to ‘spread’ genes widely. This strategy has given rise to dimorphism.
12
Q
What is dimorphism?
A
The obvious differences between males + females: e.g. larger males have advantage in competition so are preferred whereas this is not the case in females
13
Q
What is the vital difference in short term mating strategies of men and women?
A
Men more likely to ‘sleep around’ as they have much less parental responsibility and produce much more sex cells than women
14
Q
What did Buss and Schmitt find?
A
Men have decreased attraction to partner after copulation suggest men are evolved not to spend too long with one person
15
Q
Why is long term mating different to short term mating?
A
Both males and females choosy about long-term mates- long term relationships require time + energy
16
Q
What did Clark and Hatfield (1989) do?
A
Tested intra and inter sexual selection theory:
Confederate walked up to strangers + asked “would you go to bed with me?”
75% males agreed, 0% females agreed, 50% females agreed to go on a date with them
Supports this theory of short-term mating
17
Q
What is the key limitation of Clark and Hatfield’s study?
A
Results may be due to cultural factors- culture suggesting that its socially unacceptable for women to engage in casual mating
18
Q
What are the strengths of the evolutionary theory of human reproductive behaviour?
A
Lonely hearts research
waist-hip ratio research
19
Q
What is the support from the lonely hearts research?
A
Wayneforth + Dunbar: studied lonely hearts ads in US newspapers.
Found women tended to offer physical attractiveness + indicated youth.
Men tended to offer resources more than women.
Men sought relative youth + physical attractiveness
20
Q
What is the support from waist-hip ratio (WHR) research?
A
Evolutionary theory suggests males will prefer female body shape signalling fertility (ratio of waist to hip).
Singh: found up to a point males generally find any size attractive so long as WHR is about 0.7
It signals that the woman is unlikely to be pregnant
21
Q
What are the weaknesses of the evolutionary theory of human reproductive behaviour?
A
Whether culture is more important than evolution
The theory is outdated and ignores role of contraception
Methodological criticisms of Buss’ study
22
Q
Why is cultural importance a limitation for the evolutionary theory?
A
Argues because women have been denied economic/political power, they rely on men more for resources.
Kasser + Sharma: found women valued resources more in cultures where their status/education more limited
Suggests role of social/cultural/economic factors
23
Q
Why is the role of contraception a limitation for the evolutionary theory?
A
Argues that findings of Clark + Hatfield study may now be different due to contraception availability now (more women may agree to casual sex) Thus the study and theory are outdated
24
Q
What are the methodological weaknesses of Buss’ study?
A
Focus on preferences not real choices- people may compromise in reality.
But.. further support from real life research- Buss (1989) studied real marriages and confirmed many of the theories- men do choose younger women and when remarrying remarry younger women.
25
What is the evolutionary explanation of physical attractiveness?
Attractiveness as indications of good health.
26
Why is perceived health important in attractiveness?
Means partner is physically able to bear children or provide for the family
Good chance that their genes will produce healthy offspring
27
What did Rhodes et al study?
Tested prediction of facial symmetry as attractive: manipulated images of faces and found attractiveness increased with symmetry increase and visa versa
28
What are neotenous features?
Baby like features e.g. large eyes, delicate chin, small nose
29
Why are neotenous features thought to be attractive?
As they may trigger a protective or caring instinct
30
What did Little et al study?
Examined human preferences for masculinity/femininity for face and body stimuli including voice
Images manipulated to be more or less masculine using computer graphics
31
What did Little et al find
Found women's preferences for more masculine stimuli were greater for short term than for long term relationships across all stimuli
For men found preferences for more feminine stimuli were greater for short-term than long term across face and voice stimuli but reverse was true for body stimuli
32
What does the halo effect suggest?
That we have pre-concieved ideas about the personality traits attractive people must have
33
What did Dion find about the halo effect?
'what is beautiful is good' : physically attractive people are consistently rated as more sociable + successful than those who aren't
Self-fulfilling as they are then more attractive because of these qualities
34
What did Palmer and Petersen find?
found physically attractive ppl rated as more politically knowledgable + competent than non-attractive
Halo effect so strong it persisted even when pps knew the ppl had no particular expertise
suggests implications for politics process
35
Who suggested the matching hypothesis?
Walster et al
36
What does the matching hypothesis suggest?
ppl choose romantic partners of roughly similar attractiveness.
37
What is the 'compromise' of choosing a partner according to the matching hypothesis?
we want the most physically attractive partner possible (for evolutionary cultural/social, mental reasons etc) but balance this to avoid rejection based on our perceived 'value' of ourselves
38
What was Feingold's study?
meta analysis of 17 studies + found strong correlation in ratings of attractiveness between romantic partners (matching hypothesis)
especially supports the theory as studies looked at real-life partners- a more realistic approach than situations with ppl who haven't met
39
What was the procedure of Walster et al 's study?
(1966)
undergraduates- (Minnesota uni) invited to 'get acquainted' dance. 347 pps, random selection. Covertly rated on attractiveness when they collected their ticket.
Asked to complete long questionnaire on personality/intelligence etc
randomly matched with a date, asked half way through dance + 6 months later
40
what were the results of Walster's study?
findings didn't support the matching hypothesis: once paired regardless of personal attractiveness dates were more likely to try and arrange follow up dates (if date more attractive)
other factors like personality + intelligence didn't affect liking of dates
even when given false info. about how likely date was to enter a relationship with pps physical attractiveness effect dominated over a matching effect/fear of rejection
41
What did Taylor study?
Studied activity logs of a popular online dating site to test in real life the matching hypothesis. (Real date choices not preferences)
42
What were Taylor's results?
Online daters sought meetings with potential partners more attractive than them. It seemed they didn't consider their own attractiveness level when making decisions about who to date
43
What are the cultural influences upon physical attractiveness? (AO3 evaluation of physical attractiveness)
Research support from both Cunningham et al and Wheeler and Kim demonstrates what is considered physically attractive is remarkably consistent across all cultures
44
What did Cunningham et al find? ( AO3- physical attractiveness)
Questioned white, Asian and Hispanic males
| All reported attractive female features as large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small nose and high eyebrows
45
What did Wheeler and Kim find? (AO3- physical attractiveness)
Found that Korean and American students judged physically attractive ppl to be more trustworthy, concerned for other ppl, mature and friendly
Suggests the stereotype is just as strong in collectivist cultures as in individualist
46
What potentially is a more important factor in relationship formation than physical attractiveness? (AO3- physical attractiveness)
Complex matching: Matching hypothesis ignores that ppl may offer many desirable characteristics that compensate for a lack of physical attractiveness (personality, status, money etc)
Termed 'complex matching' by Hatfield & Sprecher
(e.g. older wealthy successful man pairs with younger attractive female)
47
What did Takeuchi find in relation to the idea of complex matching? (AO3 physical attractiveness)
Found gender differences in complex matching: Women valued physical attractiveness as less important than men + so it impacted less on their perception of a partner's social desirability
48
What did Takeuchi's findings in relation to the idea of complex matching suggest? (AO3 physical attractiveness)
That men can compensate for deficit in physical attractiveness with other desirable qualities e.g. personality, status, money, whereas women cannot
49
What is self disclosure?
Revealing personal information about yourself - – thoughts, feelings, experiences.
50
What are the two separate categories of self-disclosure?
Self disclosure 'given' (disclosing own thoughts) and self-disclosure received (hearing info disclosed by someone else)
51
Why is self-disclosure linked to development of romantic relationships?
Jourard (1971) suggested self-disclosure is important in developing romantic relationships. Greater disclosure -> greater feelings of intimacy.
(more you know someone the more you'll disclose)
Ppl reveal more intimate info to ppl they like + tend to like those they reveal info to (Collins and Miller 1994).
52
What did Sprecher et al aim to study? (self-disclosure AO1)
whether reciprocal self-disclosure was more influential in determining attraction than one sided self-disclosure and listening.
53
What was the procedure of Sprecher et al's study? (self-disclosure AO1)
156 undergrads paired. (2/3 were female-female). Each ‘dyad’ (pair) unacquainted & began self-disclosure task over skype.
Reciprocal condition: pair took turns disclosing info & asking questions.
Non-reciprocal condition: one asked questions and the other person disclosed.
After, researchers assessed liking, closeness, perceived similarity + enjoyment of the interaction.
54
What were the results of Sprecher's study?
Found reciprocal condition pps reported more liking, closeness, similarity and enjoyment.
Non-reciprocal pps then swapped roles. Ratings of liking, closeness, similarity and enjoyment still higher in reciprocal group, even after the non-reciprocal group had swapped.
Suggests turn taking self disclosure more effective than extended reciprocity in disclosure.
Level of self-disclosure received was a better predictor of liking and loving than self-disclosure that is given.
Overall disclosure was predictive of whether couple stayed together for longer than 4 years.
55
What are the two parts of Altman and Taylor's self disclosure theory?
Social Penetration Theory
| Breadth and Depth of Self-disclosure
56
What is social penetration theory?
Self-disclosure: the gradual process of revealing your inner self to someone.
Involves the reciprocal exchange of info to display trust in each other.
At each new disclosure partners ‘penetrate’ more deeply into each other’s lives, + gain a greater understanding of each other.
57
What was the order of self-disclosure suggested by social penetration theory?
1. Biographical data like age, name.
2. Preferences for food, clothing etc
3. Goals and aspirations
4. Religion
5. Deep fears and fantasies
6. Concept of inner self
58
What was Altman and Taylor's breadth and depth of self-disclosure?
Suggests Self-disclosure has two elements: breadth and depth: as both increase partners are more committed
(Layers of an onion is a metaphor for this)
To start we reveal lots of ‘low-risk’ info (the bigger outer layers of the onion)
As relationship develops we peel off layers that become more intimate/meaningful to us. E.g. secrets, painful memories etc.
59
What is Reis and Shaver's reciprocity of self disclosure?
Suggested key factor in disclosure strengthening romantic relationships is that it is from both partners (reciprocal.)
Once one reveals something, hopefully partner will respond in with understanding/empathy
& they then reveal their own intimate thoughts and feelings. (A balance.)
60
What did Sprecher and Hendrick find? (AO3 eval. self-diclosure)
Studied heterosexual dating couples to gauge levels of satisfaction with relationship + use of self-disclosure.
Strong correlations between several measures of satisfaction and self-disclosure (both theirs and their partner’s).
Men and women using self-disclosure + believed partners did too were more satisfied +committed to romantic relationship.
61
What are the real life applications? (AO3 eval. self-disclosure)
Relationship counselling: Help people wanting to improve communication in relationships.
Hass & Stafford (1998) 57% of gay men + women in study said open + honest self-disclosure was main way they maintained + deepened relationships.
If less-skilled partners (e.g. those who tend to limit communication to ‘small-talk’) learn to use self-disclosure this could = benefits to their relationships.
62
Why is the basic 'start point' nature of self-disclosure a weakness for its use in explaining attraction? (AO3 eval. self-disclosure)
Can't explain starting point to attraction.
Assumes 2 individuals already talking then begin to self-disclose.
Why talk to that stranger in the first place? (Physical attractiveness explanation?)
63
What is the correlation vs causation weakness for self-disclosure? (AO3 eval. self-disclosure)
Much research looks at correlations with levels of satisfaction within the relationship.
But correlation doesn't = cause.
Levels of satisfaction may increase amount of self-disclosure… or a 3rd factor affecting levels of both self-disclosure + satisfaction. We can't draw conclusions of cause + effect on basis of correlations.
64
What are the evaluation points for self-disclosure?
+real life app. (relationship therapy) +Sprecher & Hendrick research support
- correlation vs causation
- doesn't explain initial attraction
- Cultural differences
- self-disclosure different in online relationships
65
What are the issues of cultural differences for self-disclosure (AO3)?
Not true for all cultures
'Non-western' cultures: less intimate self-disclosure
Tang et al (2013) reviewed research on sexual self-disclosure. Concluded men/women USA disclose more than men/women China (collectivist V individualist cultures)
Therefore theory limited in explaining romantic relationships based on findings from western cultures -not necessarily generalizable to other cultures.
66
How may self disclosure differ in online relationships? (AO3 self disclosure)
Internet relationships have higher self-disclosure than face to face.
More anonymous on internet = greater comfort to reveal more about our-self
‘boom and bust’ phenomenon: reveal more online more quickly (‘boom’) but as trust not there its difficult to sustain, (‘bust’).
...But Knop et al (2016) suggest ppl disclose more FtF than online.
Suggest in FtF relationships we disclose more due to the eye contact & attentive silence of partner, both absent online
67
What is the filter theory suggested by Kerckhoff and Davies?
Suggests: we start with all ppl available to us that we could form relationship with.
But not everyone available is desirable
So we filter out who is not desirable
68
What are the three levels of filter?
Social demography, similarity in attitudes, complementarity
| each stage has more importance at particular stages of relationship
69
What is the social demography stage?
Refers to factors which influence chances of potential partners meeting each other. You're more likely to meet (in a meaningful way) ppl physically close + who share some demographic characteristics
(Factors such as: geographical location, social class, religion, ethnic group, education level)
70
How are partners discounted by the social demography filter?
Effectively theory suggests anyone 'too different' discounted. Suggests homogeny: more likely to form relationship with socially/culturally similar. And also that we find ppl similar to ourselves more attractive.
71
What is the similarity in attitudes filter/stage?
Kerckhoff + Davis: found similarity of attitudes important to rship development- best predictor of stable relationship. Need for partners to share important beliefs + basic values particularly in early stages, encourages deeper communication + promotes self-disclosure
72
What is the complementarity stage/filter?
Ability of romantic partners to meet each-other's needs, when they have traits the other lacks. Attractive as it gives feeling of completion.
Winer: suggests social needs should be complementary not similar in long term rships
But is not saying opposites attract
73
What is a key study in the filter theory? (AO1)
Kerckhoff + Davies: longitudinal study 94 couples @ Duke uni USA. Each partner completed 2 questionnaires assessing degree of shared values/attitudes with partner & complimentarity.
7 months later completed questionnaire on closeness with partner compared to start of study
74
What were the findings of Kerckhoff + Davies' study into complimentarity?
When divided into those dating longer + less than 18 months found:
less than: most important predictor in closeness was similarity in attitudes
more than 18 months: only predictor was complimentarity of needs
(suggests these are the most important factors at their respective stages)
75
What evidence is there as support for the first filter? (AO3 filter theory)
Festinger et al: observed friendships formed in blocks of apartments for married students. (across 17 buildings) Students 10x more likely to form friendships with those in own building
Most popular ppl lived close to stairs or post-box (most likely to be 'bumped into') Called functional distance
Supports importance of proximity
76
What evidence is there as support for the 2nd filter? (AO3 filter theory)
Byrne et al: found ppl more attracted to someone with many shared attitudes/values than someone with fewer
But perceived similarity may be more important than actual similarity
Tidwell et al: tested with speed dating, measured perceived + actual similarity with questionnaire
Found 'perceived' predicted romantic liking more than actual similarity
77
What is the issue of validity for the filter theory? (AO3)
Ecological validity: filter theory is supported by anecdotal evidence
Lacks temporal validity: online dating = reduction in many social demographic filters. Ppl more likely to interact/form relationships with those far away, different religion + different cultures than when theory created.
78
What issues did Levinger suggest with the filter theory? (AO3)
Pointed out that many studies fail to replicate original findings that theory was based on. Argues this due to:
Theory not accounting for social change, defining relationship depth by length, as its from individualist culture it can't account for collectivist cultures
79
What are the issues of cause and effect for filter theory? (AO3)
Further research found: Anderson: emotional convergence- cohabiting partners form more similar emotional responses over time. Effect also found by Davis + Rusbult (attitude alignment over time)
Suggests attitude similarity a cause of attraction not effect
80
What is the basis of social exchange theory?
'economic theory' of relationships: social relationships as a transaction - minimise losses & maximise gains. We judge relationships based on profit
Based on principles of operant conditioning which suggest we form + maintain relationships because they're rewarding
81
What are the two ways we measure the profit of our current relationships? (according to social exchange theory)
Comparison levels
| Comparison levels for alternatives
82
What is a comparison level?
Comparison level is the amount of reward you believe you deserve. A standard which we compare all our relationships against
83
How is our comparison level formed?
Based on previous experiences, views on what we might gain from rships. Also based on social norms (what's considered a reasonable level of reward). Therefore someone with poor quality past rships or low self esteem will have low CL + more likely to be satisfied with less 'profit' or even a 'loss'
84
What are comparison levels for alternatives? (AO1 social exchange theory/SET)
Where we weigh up potential increase in rewards from alternatives ("could I do better?") SET predicts we only stay in our relationship if we think its more profitable than other alternatives.
Duck: suggests comparison level we adopt is based on current rship- if costs are high alternatives become more attractive (the more rewarding the alternatives the less likely they are to stay in current rship)
85
What is Thiabaut and Kelley's four stage model? (AO1 social exchange theory)
Sampling
Bargaining
Commitment
Institutionalisation
86
What are sampling and bargaining? (four stage model SET AO1)
Sampling: explore rewards by experimenting with different relationships + observing others
Bargaining: beginning of rship when romantic partners exchange rewards + costs & negotiate/identify if it might be possible
87
What are commitment and institutionalisation? (four stage model SET AO1)
Commitment: courses of costs/rewards more predictable & rship is more stable as rewards increase
Institutionalisation: partners are now settled & norms of rewards + costs are firmly established
88
What was Kurdek and Schmitt's study into social exchange theory? (SET AO1)
investigated importance of SET factors in rship quality in 185 couples (44 hetero married, 35 hetero cohabiting, 50 same sex male, 56 same sex female)
Each individual completed a questionnaire without discussing answers
89
What were the results of Kurdek and Schmitt's study into social exchange theory? (SET AO1)
For each of the four types of couple, greater rship satisfaction associated with :
perception of many benefits in current rship, alternatives seen as less attractive (weak CLAlt)
Shows CL and CLAlt are key factors in both same sex and heterosexual rships
90
What supporting research is there for social exchange theory? (AO3 SET)
Support from key study Kurdek + Schmitt,
Further support- Sprecher:
Longitudinal study 101 couples dating @ US uni. Exchange variable most associated with commitment was CL for Alternatives (CLAlt)
In rships where CLAlt was high the rship was viewed more negatively + partner more likely to leave
(correlation between low commitment & belief that alternatives are better)
91
How does social exchange theory have real world applications? (AO3 SET)
knowledge of how cost/reward works in rships has fed into rship therapy. Ppl in unsuccessful marriages report lack of positive behaviour by partner.
Christainsen et al: showed Integrated Behavioural Couples Therapy (aim to increase positive exchanges/decrease negative ones) led to improvement in rship of 60 distressed couples
92
How does Social Exchange Theory ignore equity? (AO3 SET)
Central concern of SET is maximising profit. Ignores that ppl may desire fairness of rewards/equity
Hatfield: questioned newlyweds about contentment in marriage. Found happiest felt rship was equal in cost/benefit not partners over-benefiting as SET implies
93
Why is the measurement of SET concepts a limitation for socail exchange heory? (AO3 SET)
Concepts e.g. benefit/reward difficult to operationalise.
Psychological rewards difficult to define & vary personally.
Theory also doesn't quantify what value of CL must there be before dissatisfaction? or how good CLAlt must be? or how much cost should outweigh benefit?
94
Why is the idea of dissatisfaction in issue for SET? (AO3 SET)
SET suggests dissatisfaction a result of better alternatives or cost outweighing rewards. Argyle suggests we consider alternatives once already dissatisfied.
Miller: found ppl who rated themselves as highly committed spent less time looking at images of attractive ppl. less time looking correlated with continuation of rship 2 months later. Suggests in happy rships ppl ignore alternatives even if more attractive.
95
Why is artificial research an issue for social exchange theory? (SET AO3)
Majority of supporting research for SET uses artificial tasks + conditions. Often uses 2 strangers placed in 'game-playing' scenario. More realistic studies using real rships are less supportive of SET. Perhaps as properties of real rships e.g. trust are not found in artificial rships
96
What is equity theory?
Walster: suggests what matters most is equity/fairness
Both partners should profit about the same.
Where there's a lack of equity it causes dissatisfaction/unhappiness
Person who under-benefits may feel anger/resentment
Person who over-benefits may feel guilt/discomfort
97
Why is the difference between equity and equality important in equity theory?
Size/amount of rewards does not need to be exactly the same (equity=fairness, equality= the same)
Partners don't need to contribute exactly the same but do both give and gain in relationship e.g. stay at home parent and working parent
98
What are the consequences of inequity according to the equity theory?
Dissatisfaction- caused by changes in level of perceived inequity over time, at the start it may be natural to give more than get but if this continues the individuals will soon be dissatisfied/maybe end rship totally
99
How may inequity be dealt with in relationships? (3 ways)
Hatfield + Rapson: restore equity: under-benefited partner may work to change partner's behaviour if they feel rship is salvageable
Restore psychological equality: person may adapt thoughts to perceive rship as more equitable- cost is now seen as the norm
Rship end: either physically or through emotional withdrawal
100
What is the key study for equity theory (AO1)?
Schafer and Keith: Hundreds of married couples (all ages) surveyed to analyse equity of rships and satisfaction level.
Found during child rearing yrs wives often felt under-benefited + husbands over-benefited and satisfaction dipped. But during honeymoon period + empty nest stage both partners felt more equity + more satisfaction
(demonstrates equity change over life stages)
101
Why is Duck's original model referred to as the 'phase model'?
Shows rship breakdown as a process rather than single event. At each phase there's a threshold (point where perception changes) - once breached process moves onto next phase
102
What are the phases of Duck's original model?
1. Intrapsychic phase
2. Dyadic phase
3. Social phase
4. Grave-dressing phase
103
What is the intrapsychic phase?
In the mind of individual: begin to resent partner, focus on their faults begin to question rship and consider possible alternatives.
Dissatisfaction not expressed to partner yet, weigh up pros + cons.
104
What is the dyadic phase?
Discussion: can't avoid talking about rship. Confrontations over time. Characterised by anxiety/hostility. May result in reconciliation, some partners seek therapy. But if not moves onto next phase
105
What is the social phase?
Involvement of others: wider social processes involved Breakup public to family/friends- harder to deny problem/reconcile. Friends 'pick sides'.
Social networks can slow/stop breakup if supportive or may speed it up. If not reconciled implications e.g. childcare negotiated as breakup becomes inevitable.
106
What is the grave-dressing phase?
Justification of actions: Focus on the aftermath. rship dies + partners create an account of how/why it ended- partners try to depict themselves in good light so as not to deter future partners. (stories may differ dependent on audience) & creating a story 'you can live with'
107
What are the therapeutic applications of Duck's original phase model? (AO3)
Suggests ways of repairing breakdown. Recognises importance of different strategies at different points. Intra-psychic: refocus on positives not negatives
Dyadic: improve communications
Can be used in rship counselling
108
How may the original phase model be incomplete? (AO3)
Rollie + Duck state that original model is over-simplistic
5th stage added: resurrection phase
Also emphasis that processes may occur in different orders, may return to earlier points, progression is not inevitable
Changes overcome weaknesses of original that it doesn't 'account for dynamic nature of break ups'
109
What is the resurrection phase?
Ex-partners turn their attention to future relationships + use experience gained from the ended one
110
What are the methodological issues of Duck's phase model? (AO3)
Most research retrospective (after rship ends)- recall may be inaccurate/tainted. Early stages tend to be distorted- almost impossible to test this phase & researchers reluctant as involvement could worsen break-up. Means model is based on incomplete research- so incomplete description of how rships end
111
How is Duck's phase model subject to cultural bias? (AO3)
Research + model based on western rships (mainly USA)
Moghaddam: states rships in individualist cultures generally voluntary + frequently end (e.g. divorce). But in collectivist rships tend to be obligatory, less easy to end + involve wider family. Therefore unlikely that rship breakdown process is identical cross-culturally
112
How may type of relationship also affect the model? (AO3)
In groups practising polygamy or polyandry grave dressing phase may be very different.
Also teenage rships seen as 'testing ground' so are likely to receive less effort to reconcile. (Long term adult rship more likely to receive social support to continue)
113
How is Duck's phase model descriptive rather than explanatory? (AO3)
Focus on breakdown process not how or why. Other theories such as equity or social exchange may offer more reasoning rather than just description. Flemlee hypothesis
114
What is Flemlee's hypothesis? (AO3 Duck's phase model)
Fatal attraction hypothesis: argued phase model is description not explanation and that cause of rship breakdown found in qualities that initially brought couple together. "he's so funny" becomes "he never takes anything seriously"
115
What are parasocial relationships?
Horton & Wohl: define parasocial rships as lacking element of interaction & attachment. One-sided, un-reciprocated rship on which the 'fan' expends much emotional energy, commitment, resources + time
Can also be directed to a team, brand or fictional character
116
What are the three levels of parasocial relationship?
McCutcheon et al: developed celebrity attitude scale:
entertainment social
intense-personal
borderline pathological
117
What is the entertainment social stage?
Celebrities seen as sources of entertainment & fuel for social interaction
118
What is the intense-personal stage?
Frequent obsessive thoughts + intense feelings about 'their' celebrity- even considering them to be their soulmate
119
What is the borderline pathological stage?
Uncontrollable fantasies, extreme behaviours e.g. spending extreme amounts of money on celebrity meet-ups, even prepared to perform some illegal acts
120
What does the absorption-addiction model explain as the basis of parasocial rships?
Explains tendency to form parasocial rships due to deficiencies ppl have in their own lives
e.g. psychologically mal-adjusted or weak self-identity
121
What is the absorption component of the absorption-addiction model?
Absorption: Individual focuses attention as much as possible on celebrity- become preoccupied with their existence seeking fulfilment in this worship
122
What is the addiction component of the absorption-addiction model?
Addiction: Individual needs to sustain commitment to rship- may lead to increasingly extreme behaviours to feel 'closer'. Delusional thinking also develops.
123
What is the attachment explanation of parasocial rships?
Ainsworth + Bowlby both argued attachment formation difficulties lead to problems with adult rships. Suggest insecure-resistant most likely to form parasocial rships as they need to meet unfulfilled needs. parasocial rships don't carry threat of rejection, break-up or disappointment. (Cole + Leets)
(whereas insecure-avoidant tend to avoid pain of rships completely)
124
How do parasocial relationships function similarly to real-life relationships?
(key properties- Weiss) Proximity seeking, secure base behaviour, protest at disruption
125
How is proximity seeking demonstrated in parasocial rships?
Fans attempt to reduce distance between themselves and celebrity e.g. seeing them at appearances
126
How is secure base demonstrated in parasocial rships?
Presence of attachment figure provide safe base to explore from. Parasocial rship carries no risk of rejection so acts as a base to explore other rships safely
127
How is protest at disruption demonstrated i parasocial rships?
Intense distress when separated from attachment figure. When show is cancelled or actor leaves, fans will express raw emotions: crying/demanding they return
128
What is the support for the attachment theory of parasocial rships (+ procedure of study)? (AO3)
Seems to correctly predict negative responses to deprivation of parasocial rship. Cohen: studied 381 adults with questionnaire on attachment style + how they'd react if character taken off air.
129
What were the results of Cohen's study into parasocial attachment? (AO3)
Pps experienced sadness, anger, loneliness (similar to losing a real life attachment) Reactions related to intensity of parasocial rship. Resistant attachment pps reported more severe reactions
130
What is the support for the Absorption- addiction model? (AO3) (personality types)
Maltby et al: used Eysenck personality questionnaire to assess link between parasocial rships + personality
Found entertainment social commonly extroverted, and intense-personal associated with neuroticism (explains why higher levels of parasocial link to poorer mental health- as neuroticism associated with anxiety + depression)
Also slight link between boderline-pathological and psychoticism
131
What is the support for the Absorption- addiction model? (AO3) (body image)
Maltby: explored link between celebrity worship & body image in 14-16 yr olds. Females who reported intense parasocial rship with celeb who's body shape they admired tended o have poorer body image.
Speculation- this could be a pre-cursor to eating disorders.
Both studies support idea of correlation between intensity of parasocial rship & psychological functioning
132
Why are cultural influences a strength for the evaluation of parasocial rships? (AO3)
Research identified tendency for ppl to form parasocial rship with Harry Potter. Schmid +Klimont report that this is not culture specific.
Using online questionnaire, found similar levels of parasocial attachment to HP in both individualist culture (Germany) and collectivist (Mexico). Pps in both cultures reported commonalities between own lives and books/films- universal influence of mainstream media characters
133
What are issues with the absorption-addiction model? (AO3)
criticised as a description not an explanation of parasocial rships. Unlike attachment theory it doesn't suggest how/why, only describes characteristics
134
What is a problem with attachment theory of parasocial rships? (AO3)
McCutcheon: measured attachment styles + celebrity related attitudes in 299 pps. Found insecure resistant no more likely to form parasocial rships than secure.
Undermines central prediction of attachment theory - raising doubts of its validity
135
What is a weakness of Maltby's study (body image) into parasocial rships? (AO3)
Correlational: strong correlations between celebrity worship + body image but doesn't prove cause and effect. It may be that young women with poor body image are drawn to intense personal worship of celebrities. (Could be addressed with longitudinal research)
136
What is FtF?
Face to face: traditional offline human contact
137
What is CMC?
Computer mediated communication: covers any electrical communication email, text, messaging, social media etc
138
What are SNSs?
Social Networking Sites/ social media
139
What are the two key 'differences' of virtual rships?
Higher levels of self-disclosure online
| Absence of gating
140
What is reduced cues theory?
Sproull and Kiesler: CMCs less effective/lower quality rship as they lack cues we depend on in FtF e.g. facial expression/tone of voice. This leads to deidinviduation/reduces personal identity. Ppl less likely to be blunt/aggressive but also reluctant to self-disclose- less easy to relate to others. Stops CMCs being meaningful/emotionally as deep as FtF.
141
What is the Hyperpersonal model?
Walther: Argues CMC more personal + greater self disclosure than FtF as CMC rships can develop quicker
But can also end quicker as high excitement level often doesn't match trust level (boom and bust phenomenon)
Selective self-presentation also a feature. Anonymity also aids self-disclosure as you feel less 'accountable'
142
What is Selective self presentation?
With self-disclosure in virtual rships a person can curate their image. Means its easier to manipulate self disclosure to increase intimacy by presenting an idealised self.
143
What are 'gates'?
Anything that blocks the formation of a relationship
144
What is the 'absence of gating' in virtual rships?
FtF 'gated' by factors that can interfere with rship formation e.g. unattractiveness, shyness etc
CMC had an absence of these, meaning rships can develop to a deeper point of self-disclosure
145
What are the dangers of the absence of gating?
Absence of gating means pl can create online identities they could never manage FtF: introvert can be extrovert, an adult can become a child, a person can make up a non-existent identity
146
What is McKenna and Bargh's support for the absence of gating? (AO3)
Looked at CMC use by lonely/anxious ppl. Found those ppl were able to express 'true selves' more than in FtF.
Of the romantic rships formed online 70% lasted more than 2 yrs - higher than rships formed in offline world.
147
What is Baker and Oswald's support for the absence of gating? (AO3)
suggest SNSs allow shy ppl to overcome gates faced in real life. Surveyed 207 students about shyness, Facebook use and friendship quality.
Shy student's greater use of Facebook correlated with higher friendship quality.
Shows shy ppl in particular find value in virtual rships
148
What is the research support for the hyper personal model? (AO3)
Whitty + Joinson: researched discussions online. Found questions typically very direct/probing + often intimate. Suggested these would be deemed as 'too far' for FtF which tends towards 'small talk'. Also found ppl had no issue answering these online questions directly.
Supports idea of hyperhonesty/increased self-disclosure + that we present ourselves in an overly positive way
149
What is the challenge to reduced cues? (AO3)
Walther + Tidwell: argue that non-verbal cues aren't absent in CMCs but are different. e.g. acrostics (e.g. LOL) and emojis used as substitutes for facial expressions + tone of voice
150
Why is the multi-modal nature of relationships important to consider? (AO3)
Walther: argued any theory looking at CMC roles in rships should realise its rare to have 100% virtual rship
Ppl on SNSs tend to know eachother in 'real life'
Ppl on dating sites anticipate eventually meeting 'for real' and what we disclose online will inevitably be influenced by offline interactions & visa versa
