duck's model of relationship breakdown

Question 1

model of relationship breakdown

Answer 1

duck (2007) argued that the ending of a relationship is a process that goes through four distinct stages. each phase is marked by one partner (or both) reaching a ‘threshold’, a point where their perception of the relationship changes. process begins once one partner realises they are dissatisfied.

Question 2

intrapsychic phase

‘i can’t stand this anymore’

Answer 2

• focused on private cognitive processes in the form of personal unhappiness and dissatisfaction.
• focused on the partners failings.
• weighing up pros and cons and comparing with alts.

Question 3

dyadic phase

‘i would be justified in withdrawing’

Answer 3

• focuses on interpresonal processes between two partners. the partner is made aware through a series of confrontations and discussions about a lack of equity.
• efforts may be made to address the issues or continue breaking up.
• self-disclosure (negative) becomes deeper and more frequent.

Question 4

social phase

‘i mean it’

Answer 4

• focused on wider processes involving couple’s social networks
• gossip has a strong role.
• issues made public, friends and family become involved, factions formed, blaming and secret information shared.
• breakup becomes almost inevitable. takes on momentum driven by social forces.

Question 5

grave-dressing phase

‘it’s now inevitable’

Answer 5

• focuses on the aftermath
• each party expresses a favourable view of their side of the story in order to show they were not to blame and retain some ‘social credit’ (la gaipa 1982)
• in addition to creating an acceptable personal story you can live with and tidying up memories. may interpret partners endearing traitd as negative. e.g. wild to irresponsible.

Question 6

strength

real-world application

Answer 6

suggests ways to reverse relationship breakdown
duck (1994)- intra-psychic phase focus on positive aspects of partner. dyadic phase- improve communication and wider social skills to gain stability.

inishgts useful for relationship counselling

Question 7

counterpoint

cultural differences

Answer 7

model based research on individualist cultures, especially us.
moghaddam (1993)- relationships in individualist cultures usually voluntarily and frequently come to an end, e.g. higher divorce rates.
collectivist cultures- relationships less easy to end and usually involve wider family (arranged marriage). whole concept of romantic relationship differs between cultures.

model’s application not useful in all cultures

Question 8

limitation

incomplete explanation

Answer 8

duck and rollie (2006) added 5th phase, resurrection phase. exes apply experiences gained from recently-ended relationships to future ones.
also argued progression from one phase to next not inevitable. possible to return to earlier point in any phase.
processes that occur in relationship breakdown (e.g. gossip in social phase) more important than linear movement from one phase to next.

original model doesn’t account for complexity of breakdown and its dynamic nature.

Question 9

issue

description not explanation

Answer 9

descriptive model (what happens) rather than explaining factors causing breakdown.

felmlee (1995)- fatal attraction hypothesis focuses on why. trait that led to initial attraction may later be seen as undesirable. one partner may become dissatisfied because partners ‘great sense of humour’ later becomes ‘he cant take anything seriously’. this is why breakdown processes begins.

limited model. felmlee’s hypothesis could be included, e.g. in intra-psychic stage, to explain why process begins.