Ducks Phase Model + Self Disxlosurem Flashcards
What is ducks phase model
Relationship breakdown occurs when one or both people feel that the relationship is not working, and therefore wish the relationship to end
There are 4 process what are they (no explain?)
Intra psychic processes
Dyadic processes
Social processes
Grave dressing processes
What are the intra psychic processes
Characterised by the dissatisfied partner privately thinking about their relationship and brooding about the problems they have identified. The dissatisfied partner focuses on their partners’ fault and the fact they are under benefitting from the relationship. They might feel depressed and withdraw from social interactions with their partner.
What are dyadic process
The dissatisfied partner communicates with their partner privately about the fact they are dissatisfied. Both partners may think carefully about investments they have in the relationship, I.e. house, possessions… There could be reconciliation if partner accepts the validity of the dissatisfied partners views and promises to change their behaviour or make agreements to sort out isssues. Marital therapy may be useful at this point. The dissatisfied partner may still believe that they are justified in withdrawing from the relationship so breakup will occur
Wht are social process
If there is a breakup it is made public to friends and family which means that the problem is harder to deny or ignore. Advice is given from outside the relationship and alliances are made. This involves criticism of former partners msuch as I never liked him anyway and scapegoating like it was your fault. This is common in youngers. Older couples may experience this breakdown less frequently
What is grave dressing process
As the relationship dies and breaks down, there is a need to mourn and justify our actions, we need to create an account of what the relationship was and why it broke down. Post relationship lives start and begin to publicise how the relationship broke down ensuring social credit remains high 就算不. Stories might be told about betrayal or how they both struggled to make it work. Different variations are given to different people. Views of their partners may be reinterpreted, I.e. at first they were seen as rebellious now they are irresponsible
Strnfhts ducks pahse model
The existence and role of the break-up phases described in Duck’s model are supported by scientific research. For example, Tashiro and Frasier (2003) showed that viewing the situation, rather than own faults, as being responsible for ending the relationships, helps people to see the break-up in a more positive light and move on, just as Duck’s model predicts. This strengthens the claims made by the model and highlights the application of the theory to everyday relationships.
However, Duck’s model has useful applications, especially in relation to couples’ counselling. Couples may be advised to use different strategies depending on the phase they are currently in. For example, for a person in the intra-psychic phase it may be more useful to shift their attention to the positive aspects of their partner’s personality, while for a couple in the dyadic phase communication about dissatisfaction and ways to balance relationships is crucial. This shows that Duck’s model of relationship breakdown can be used successfully to help couples contemplating break-up to improve their relationships and stay together.
Weakness ducks phase model
Most of the research examining relationship breakdown is based on retrospective data, using questionnaires or interviews to ask participants about the break-up some time after it happened. People’s memories of the event may not be accurate, and may also be coloured by their current situation, which means that their answers are not reliable. This means Duck’s phase model, even though it seems to be supported by research, does not necessarily describe how break-up happens in real life, weakening the model’s ability to present an accurate picture of relationship breakdown.
The model is based on relationships from individualist cultures, where ending the relationships is a voluntary choice, and separation and divorce are easily obtainable and do not carry stigma. However, this 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 the relationship difficult to end, which means that the break-up process will not follow the phases proposed by Duck. As a result, Duck’s model is culturally biased as it assumes that break-up process is universal, which is clearly not the case.
Self disclosure in virtual relationships
One prominent difference between face-to-face and virtual relationships is the fact that self disclosure tends to occur much faster in virtual relationships. One reason for this is the anonymity associated with virtual relationships; people tend to hold off disclosing personal information in real life for fear of ridicule or rejection, unless they are confident that they can trust the person and that information won’t be leaked to mutual friends. However, there is much less risk of this in virtual relationships.
What is the hyper personal modeL
Walther (2011) proposed the hyper personal model of virtual relationships, suggesting that, as self-disclosure in virtual relationships happens faster than in face-to-face ones, virtual relationships quickly become more intense and feel more intimate and meaningful. They can also end more quickly, however, as it is difficult to sustain the same level of intense self disclosure for a long time.
Walther (2011) also suggests that virtual relationships may feel more intimate because it is easier to manipulate self-disclosure online than face-to-face. Participants in online conversations have more time to edit their responses to present themselves in a more positive light; Walther (2011) calls this selective self-presentation. Projecting a positive image will make a virtual partner want to disclose more personal information, increasing the intensity of the relationship.
Advantages online self disclosure
Whitty and Joinson (2009) conducted research which clearly demonstrates the effect of being online on self-disclosure. They discovered that in online discussion forums both questions and answers tend to be more direct, probing and intimate than in everyday face-to-face interactions, as the hyperpersonal model would predict.
Weakness online self disclosure
Research has found that relationships which begin online are more durable than other relationships, rather than ending more quickly as the hyperpersonal model suggests. This is because of more open self-disclosure early on in the relationship (McKenna and Bargh, 2000).
Self-disclosure varies depending on the online context. People disclose more on gaming sites than they do on dating websites because the latter is more likely to lead to face-to-face encounters in the future.
What is reduced cue theory
Spoull and Kiesler (1986) suggested that online relationships may be LESS open and honest than face-to-face ones. In real life we rely on a lot of subtle cues, such as facial expressions and tone of voice, which are absent in virtual relationships. According to reduced cue theory, reduction in non- verbal communication leads to deindividuation because it diminishes people’s feelings of individual identity and brings on behaviours that people usually restrain themselves from displaying, such as aggression. This may make online communications more aggressive, and the consequence of this is less self- disclosure from other people, as they fear verbal aggression.
Eval reduced cue
Reduced cue theory was developed when social media lacked face-to-face interaction, meaning they were much less rich in non-verbal communication than real life interactions. However, advanced technology allows for live interaction, which is much more similar to real life interactions.
- Non-verbal communication is not absent from virtual relationships, the cues are just different, e.g. emoticons are used as substitutes for facial expression and intonation. The timing of responses is also an important form of non-verbal communication (Walther and Tidwell 1995).
