Duck phase model Flashcards
Duck (2001) states there are three broad categories as to why relationships break down. What are they
- pre existing doom- incompatibility predestined
- mechanical failure- 2 people find they grow apart e.g. different jobs
- sudden death- descovery of a betrayal leads to immediate termination
What other factors contribute to relationship dissolution
Predisposing factors precipitating factors Lack of skills lack of motivation lack of maintenance
Duck (1982) developed a four phase model of the ending of a relationship. What are the different phases
- intra psychic phase
- dyadic phase
- social phase
- grave dressing phase
Duck (1982) developed a four phase model of the ending of a relationship. What is the intra psychic phase
- thinking about, but not discussing, negative aspects of partner/relationship
- one partner becomes dissastisfied with the relationship
- Before a person moves to the next stage, they reach a threshold of thinking ‘I can’t stand this anymore’
Duck (1982) developed a four phase model of the ending of a relationship. What is the dyadic phase
- confronting the partner with negative thoughts, trying to sort out problems
- between two people
- The threshold that is reached at this stage is: ‘I would be justified in withdrawing’
Duck (1982) developed a four phase model of the ending of a relationship. What is the social phase
- deciding what to do now the relationship is over
- break up made public to friends and family
- implications are discussed
- The threshold at this stage is ‘I mean it’
Duck (1982) developed a four phase model of the ending of a relationship. What is the grave dressing phase
- communicating a socially acceptable account of break up
- the ex partners organise their lives post relationship
- they tell their own version of the break up and of their current relationship with their ex
- The threshold here is, unsurprisingly, ‘It’s time to start a new life’
What is a threshold
- the starting point for a new state or experience
- one phase clearly leads onto the next as a threshold point is reached
2006- Duck and Rollie
Duck and his colleague Rollie proposed an addition to the model: the resurrection phase. They suggested that at this stage people move beyond the pain and distress associated with ending the relationship, and experience personal growth
Research for resurrection stage- Tashiro and Frazier’s (2003)- existence of resurrent stage
- pps (undergraduates who had recently experienced a break-up) reported experiencing personal growth as a result of it, as well as emotional distress
- if ex-partners viewed the situation, rather than their own faults, as being responsible for the break-up, they often saw the ending relationships in a more positive light
- this strengthens the claims made by the model and highlights the application of the theory to everyday relationships.
AO3- questionnaires and interview
- research based on retrospective data-questionnaires or interviews to ask pps about the break-up after it happened
- memories of the event may not be accurate, and may also be coloured by their current situation- not reliable answers
- phase model does not necessarily describe how break-up happens in real life, weakening the model’s ability to present an accurate picture of relationship breakdown
AO3- ethics
- ethical issues involved in investigating relationship breakdown, such as privacy, especially if the research involves victims of domestic abuse
- confidentiality and protection from psychological harm, as pps may experience distress in the process of the research
- difficult to investigate, as researchers may find it tricky to conduct a study where the benefits of research outweigh a possible negative impact on pps
AO3- individual differenes and Dickson
- social phase affected by individual differences, especially in relation to age
- Dickson (1995) found that while friends and relatives tend to see teenagers’ break-ups as less serious, the ending of relationships by older couples is seen as more distressing and those close to the couple put more effort into bringing them back together
- Duck’s model won’t apply to all couples, and so model is unable to accurately predict breakdown in different types of relationship
AO3 issues and debates- culture
- model based on relationships from individualist cultures, where ending the relationships is a voluntary choice, and separation and divorce are easily obtainable
- but may not be the case in collectivist cultures, where relationships are sometimes arranged by wider family members, and characterised by greater family involvement. This makes relationship difficult to end, which means that the break-up process will not follow the phases proposed by Duck
- Duck’s model is culturally biased as it assumes that break-up process is universal, which is clearly not the case
AO3 issues and debates- idiographic/nomothetic
- Duck’s model successfully describes how relationships break down, but not why
- focuses on establishing universal principles of behaviour that would be true for all people (nomothetic approach)
- but break-up process is greatly affected by partners’ individual differences, and cultural norms and values, so a more detailed idiographic approach may reveal individual reasons for break-up and the experiences different couples go through, giving psychologists a better understanding of the issue
