Exam 3 Flashcards
Causes of stresses/strain
political climate, family issues, monetary issues, etc
What fuels relationship stressors
Our need to belong. May suggest we are not as well-liked as we assume
Consequences of relationship stresses
poorer mental health and well- being, worse relationship satisfaction, more dissolution.
Perceived relational value
The degree to which others consider their relationships with a person to be valuable, important, or close.
When is perceived relational value detrimental? Beneficial?
When perceived relational value is lower than expectations. Beneficial if perceived value is higher than expectations.
7 degrees of relational evaluation
1) Maximal inclusion
2) Active inclusion
3) passive inclusion
4) ambivalence
5) passive exclusion
6)active exclusion
7) maximal exclusion
Emotional reactions are dependent on…
How much a person wants to be accepted by certain others. individual acceptance/rejection value is important.
exclusion due to positive regard vs exclusion due to negative regard:
pos regard: excluding someone because they’re too smart, strong, etc. often not particularly harmful.
neg regard: excluding because someone is disliked, hated, etc. Particularly harmful- often causes relationship stress/strain
What happens when we are rejected?
Self worth plummets. No differences for when someone dislikes us a lot vs a little. We are sensitive to acceptance- more liked: better we feel
Pattern of increasing rejection:
particularly detrimental. More negative emotional reactions. Worse than constant rejection. difficult to break pattern.
Pattern of decreasing acceptance:
particularly detrimental. relational devaluation-drops in perceived relational value. Decrease in other’s regard for us. Results in feeling sad, angry, frustrated, and hurt. difficult to break pattern.
Experiences of hurt:
often similar to physical pain. distinct emotional experience. pain meds can relieve emotional pain
Differences in experiences of hurt based on attachment style
anxious- experience more hurt from drops in relational value
avoidant- experience less hurt from drops in relational value. i.e- exclusion is less impactful if goal isn’t to be close.
Ostracism
intentional ignorance of a person. 67% people have been ostracized.
how is ostracism justified?
Justified as a way to calm down (beneficial) or to punish partner/avoid confrontation (detrimental). People often perceive it will help them achieve a goal.
How is ostracism more detrimental than beneficial?
threatens basic social needs, damages self-worth and feelings, increases cortisol. Detrimental even from strangers, and even if the ostracism is only perceived.
Jealousy
Thoughts or feelings of insecurity, fear, or concern over a perceived loss of a social connection or relationship. Common human experience, even young children display jealousy.
Jealousy in romantic relationships
romantic rivals may threaten to lure a partner away. Anger based on feeling unloved, unwanted, or cast aside.
Reactive jealousy
Becoming aware of a threat to a valued relationship. May have happened in the past, present, or be anticipated. Eg: flirting with another person.
Suspicious jealousy
When there is no actual break of relationship standards. Suspicious do not align with reality. Common for those who are anxiously attached. Can be extreme, like paranoia. May lead to spying behavior- trying to find evidence of cheating.
People are more likely to be jealous if:
more dependent on relationship. Feelings of inadequacy-low self esteem. Higher in neuroticism, and overly anxious. Preoccupied/anxious attachment and fearful/disorganized attachment.
Causes of jealousy
any perceived rival who surpasses us in accomplishments we care about or who has achieved things we wish we had. based on expectations and comparison levels.
Mate poaching
behavior intended to attract someone who is already in a romantic relationship. relatively common. Both men and women disapprove of sexual and emotional infidelity.
Deception
intentional behavior that creates an impression in the recipient that the deceiver knows to be untrue. occurs more frequently in romantic relationships.
Lying
fabricating information and making statements that contradict the truth. May conceal info, divert attention, be half-truths. Can be relatively effective based on individual skill, but detrimental if individual learns truth.
Lying and relationships
When lying, we often perceive recipient as less honest and trustworthy. Often can get away with lying in close relationships. We assume we’re better at lying than our partner is.
Fewer lies=
More satisfying relationship. Betrayal if lie is detected
Lying likelihood
More likely to lie if outgoing and sociable and insecurely attached
Lying skill is dependent on what?
Social skills and motivation
Common lies for men/women
men-finances and height
Women- physical attractiveness and weight
Detecting lies
often shorter and less detailed (although too much detail can backfire). More difficult to tell with people we don’t know.
Detecting lies & nonverbal behaviors
speaking in a higher pitch, grammatical errors, slips of the tongue, dilated pupils, blinking frequently, usually cannot tell by facial expression alone.
When might betrayal be unavoidable?
If there are overlapping obligations
Betrayal
hurtful actions by people we trusted and from whom we did not expect such misbehavior. Lasting impacts on relationship-may result in dissolution.
Coping with betrayal
owning up to it, reinterpreting in a positive manner, relying on friends/seeking social support.
Detrimental ways of coping
seeking revenge- can increase rumination which leads to less relationship and less life satisfaction
forgiveness
decision to give up perceive or actual right to get even with, or hold in debt, someone who has wronged you
when is forgiveness beneficial?
when people are worthy of forgiveness
when is forgiveness detrimental?
When it is happening regularly, and when one person is aways seeking/receiving forgiveness
Who is more likely to forgive?
People who are securely attached, close to their partner, and highly agreeable
Conflict
When one person’s motives, goals, beliefs, opinions, or behaviors interferes with or are incompatible with those of another
Conflict is _____
-inevitable-regardless of care, concern, or love.
-influential- may enhance, erode, love, and positive regard
-born from dissimilarity.
intermittent incompatibilities
moods or preferences of any two people will inevitably differ. Certain tensions will always cause some strain
Dialects
opposing motivations that encourage you to engage or not engage in a behavior. inherently contradict each other and account for 1/3rd of fights. Need to be balanced for optimal stability
Autonomy and connection
Wanting to be free and do as you wish or wanting to be warm/close to others. Preferences may change over time. Better to be near the middle
Openness and closedness
openly sharing thoughts/feelings/beliefs or keeping this information personal. Intimacy inherently involves self-disclosure. Should not be expected to share everything. Balance of transparency and discretion.
Stability and change
urge to keep situation stable or to change current station. Humans want to maintain and protect relationships. prefer stability but also prefer novelty/excitement. Too much predictability-boring, too much change-potential conflict.
Integration and separation
Urge to integrate with outside people or to not integrate. Eg: staying at home or going out with friends. Often difficult to balance or choose.
conflict frequency of dating couples vs spouses
dating- 2.3 conflicts per week
Spouses- 7 conflicts every 2 weeks
Unresolved conflict
Occurs more than most realize- leads to poorer relationship satisfaction
Individual causes of conflict
1)Personality- high neuroticism: more unhappy disagreements
2) attachment style- anxious: more conflict, manage worse
3) Stage of life- young adults: many life changes/external factors
4) Similarity- less similar=more conflict
Topics of conflict that account for more than 20% each
money (19%), kids (38%), household (25%), Leisure (20%), communication (22%).
Instigating events:
1) Criticism- verbal/nonverbal acts judged as demeaning regardless of intent
2) illegitimate demands- seemingly unjust requests that exceed normal expectation held by partner
3) Rebuffs- when a partner is looking for a response and does not receive it (i.e. sex)
4) cumulative annoyances- small, recurring annoyances that build up over time
attributional conflict
fighting over which partner’s explanation is right or wrong. difficult to resolve because of perceived bias. More perceived bias-more frustration. nothing to do with intelligence and not usually one “correct” explanation
venting:
usually hurtful- our brains are emotionally flooded making it hard to process. Going off about everything that makes you made. Both venting person and target are stressed and angry. More harmful than good
How to avoid venting
calm down first, then express reasons for anger. Time out and deep breaths, reframe situation, look for humor, etc. This avoids rumination.
Engagement and Escalation
Avoidance- both partners want to avoid issue
negotiation- seeking to resolve conflict through problem solving
escalation- conflict heating up
Two tactics when fighting
Direct- explicitly challenging your partner (accusations, hostile demands, etc)
Indirect- challenging your partner in a veiled manner (condensation, whining, changing subject, etc)
Demand/withdrawal patterns
One partner demands, criticizes or nags (direct) and other partner withdraws, avoids, or is defensive (indirect). Demand often women, withdrawal often men. The demander is typically the one raising the issue.
consequence of demand/withdrawal pattern
over time, it undermines relationship satisfaction. Dysfunctional way to manage conflict
Negotiation
Partners announce positions and work toward solution in a sensible manner. Direct- showing willingness by accepting responsibility. Indirect- friendly, non-sarcastic humor that lightens the mood.
Accommodation
ability to remain constructive in the face of a person’s temporary disregard. Constructive- changing behavior or waiting for conditions to improve. Destructive- threatening to end relationship or avoid discussion altogether.
Volatile couples
Frequent and passionate arguments; negative affect and temper. Exchange negative info, balance with affection and humor. Highly emotional
Validators
polite fights, collaborate, don’t antagonize. More positive than negative conflicts. Not ignoring conflict
Avoiders
Rarely argue, conflict is tentative and mild. Not amiable, little negativity to overcome. May be repressing issues.
hostiles
hostile and caustic arguments. criticism, contempt, defensiveness, and withdrawal. Inherently meaner to one another. These couples are more likely to fail
What do volatiles, validators, and avoiders have in common?
if they abide by the 5:1 ratio, they will often last, whereas this doesn’t work for hostiles.
Outcomes of conflict
1) separation- occurs when both partners withdraw before resolution (stonewalling)
2) domination- one partner gives in
3) compromise- both partners settle for lesser, but acceptable outcome
4) integrative agreements- creative manner of giving both partners what they want (not easy to reach)
5) structural improvements- results in an overall change in relationship to reduce stressors. infrequently happens.
Power
ability to influence behaviors of others and to resist their influence on us
what is power based on?
Control of valuable resources. Don’t have to own/possess resource, having access or perception of access is enough. Greater need desire of one person, greater power of the other.
Power historically
in the U.S, 90% couples want equal power, but historically, heterosexual couples didn’t have equal power.
When is power more equal?
In low SES relationships and in same-gender relationships.
Power in heterosexual couples
face disparity in relative resources (money, income) because men are more likely to be paid more. Social norms support/maintain male dominance (patriarchy). Cultural traditions suggest it’s natural for men to have power.
Principle of lesser interest
person with less interest in continuing relationship has more power. Depends on what and who is available- if what you want is readily available, less power over you. If fewer alternatives, you have less. If many alternatives, you have more power.
Fate control
When one partner controls what happens to other partner no matter what. no alternatives and forces reliance. (isolating).
Universalistic vs particularistic resources
Universalistic- can be exchanged with anyone
Particularistic- limited, unclear value. (These hold power because they’re unique to relationships).
Behavior control
When a change in own behavior encourages partner to change their actions. Done with a manipulative intent instead of collaborative. Based on controllable resources (universalistic vs particularistic)
Types of resources
1) Reward power
2) coercive power
3) Legitimate power
4) Referent power
5) Expert power
6) Informational power
Reward power
you can give something to a person that they like and have power over them. Resource: any outcome that is rewarding
coercive power
you can take away something or do something a person dislikes and have power over them. Resource: any outcome that is detrimental
legitimate power
individual recognizes your authority over them. Resource: authority and/or norms of equity.
Referent power
Individual feels attracted to you or wants to identify with you. role model. Resource: respect and/or love
Expert Power
Person with power has broad understanding of your desire. Resource: expertise.
Informational power
Person with power possesses specific knowledge you desire. Resource: information
Why does power feel good?
Gives us control
Powerful people
Used to getting what they want. Initiate negotiations instead of waiting. Less likely to compromise. Cheat more frequently and are more sexually desired.
Powerlessness
Feels bad for most people and is related to negative mental health outcomes (depression, anxiety, fear, cautiousness).
Verbals in process of power
Determined by power balance between two people
Women speaking to men
women tend to not speak to men with same implicit strength and power they display toward other women. More tentative and less forceful.
Men speaking to women
Men interrupt women more. Men used more assertive language and are less polite. Use fewer qualifiers and hedges, and use more vulgarities and directives.
Nonverbals process of power
Powerful people use larger interpersonal distances, display more intense facial expressions, and assume postures that take us space.
What power strategies to men/women use
men- direct and bilateral
women- indirect and unilateral
Implementing power
1)direct strategies- explicitly asking for what you want
2)indirect strategies- hinting, manipulating, or pouting for what you want
3) bilateral- trying to involve the partner in getting what you want
4) unilateral- going out and getting it on your own
violence
intention to do physical, psychological, and/or emotional harm to others. Can be minor or severe. Relatively common
percent of men/women assaulted in 1950s
52% women and 66% men (by anyone). 22% women and 7% men by an intimate partner.
Recent stats on violence
24% women and 14% men experience violence from a partner. Some form of violence occurs in 1 out of 4 couples. Some type of violence occurs in most relationships (emotional, physical, intentional, unintentional).
gender in a couple and violence
more men -> more violence. Same-gender women: half as much violence. Same gender men: twice as much violence
Cost of violence
In US, violence costs about 9 billion in medical care, psychological services, and lost time at work. Detrimental to life and relationship satisfaction.
Situational couple violence
any violent act that happens as a direct result of situational circumstances (stressors). Most familiar to people, happens occasionally. E.g- heated argument gets out of hand. Arguments are mild, may escalate into violence.
Intimate partner terrorism
One partner uses violence as a tool to control and oppress the other. Almost always perpetrated by men. Mutual violent control-fighting back against domestic abuse.
Instigating triggers
cause partners to be frustrated. (jealousy, evoking events, betrayal, rejection)
Impelling influences
events that create higher likelihood partner will experience violent outbursts. Ex- playing violent video games, childhood violence, bad communication. Mismatched attachment styles-more violence.
Inhibiting influences
discouraging partners from acting on impulses. ex- cultural, disposition, good problem-solving skills
what is the worst combination of attachment styles
avoidant with anxious
Men who terrorize partners often:
feel clumsy and threats to keep partners from leaving. More antisocial and or narcissistic. Dark triad.
Perpetrators of violence may:
witnessed violence at home, traditional gender role beliefs, hostile attitudes about women, more aggressive, low self-esteem, may also abuse pets or children.
Facets of intimate terrorism:
1)isolation- control where partner goes, who they see, what they do
2) intimidation- threaten/harm something intrinsic to person
3) economic abuse- taking/controlling money, preventing employment
4) emotional abuse- humiliating, disregarding, blaming
5) minimizing-denying any abuse
women and violence
more likely to engage in physical violence against partners. Will throw, bite, kick, or punch. More likely to use indirect aggression (emotional abuse).
men and violence
more likely to do more damage. choke, strangle, bite. Most injuries suffered by women. More likely to rape/murder partner.
barriers to leaving violence
inherently tied to interdependency. Low potential alternatives, many investments in relationship, lack of resources, threat of violence, some may perceive violence as normal (learned helplessness), expecting violence can become routine.
Cycle of violence (will only stop with therapy or if victim leaves)
1) violence occurs
2) honeymoon phase (remorse, apologies, excuses, “it won’t happen again”)
3) rising tension (old feelings/thoughts come back, fighting increases, being critical/disrespectful towards partner, judgmental, personal anger incr).
Divorce in the US
about 50% marriages end in divorce, but this stat includes multiple marriages. As # goes up, likelihood of divorce incr too. About 30% first marriages end in divorce. Exception: grey divorce
Reasons for divorce decline
Fewer people marrying, more single parents and cohabitation, more women in workforce
Avg marital length
18 years. Less than 50% reach 21 years.
Length of overall marriages
50% marriages overall will last until death. 7/10 new marriages will last. 2/3rds couples married 10+ years
Current marriage percent
only 50% population is currently married. lowest in U.S. history. 1/4 children live in single-parent homes.
Grey divorce
adults 50 and up are increasingly getting divorced. In 1990, 1/10 older adults divorced. In 2008, 1/4 older adults divorced
Casual cohabitation leads to:
less respect for marriage institution, less favorable marriage expectations, increased willingness to divorce
What causes divorce?
higher expectations of partner, western culture is more individualistic, changing gender roles (economic independence of women, less stigma, no fault divorce), increased casual cohabitation, past experiences with divorce
Causes for older divorce
Higher order marriages, being in shorter marriages, societal acceptance of divorce, being disabled (in individualistic cultures this is more stressful)
Cohabitation and divorce
people who cohabit before engagement- more likely to divorce. Increases if had more cohabitation partners. 60% first marriages preceded by cohabitation. Changes beliefs and marriage expectations
Levinger’s Barrier Model
Attraction is enhanced by rewards and diminished by costs.
Rewards- companionship, security, social status.
Costs- Incompatibility, time, investment, money.
Alternatives- Being with someone else or being single.
Barriers- Can be legal, social or moral. Psychological-guilt or embarrassment.
Other barriers- lose contact with children, against religious beliefs.
Vulnerability-stress-adaptation model
Enduring vulnerabilities- adverse experiences in family of origin, poor education, poor social skills etc. More vulnerabilities- higher likelihood of divorce.
Adaptive process- ways people respond to stress
Stressful events- every relationship will experience some stressors. Even minor stressors can be detrimental if regularly occur. Copes must cope and adapt to stress. Failure to cope- higher likelihood of divorce
Pair Project
168 couples followed for 13 years to measure marital adjustment. 35% divorced, 20% unhappy, 45% happily married.
Enduring dynamics (pair project)
spouses bring problems and vulnerabilities into marriage. must adapt and cope; issues may be unresolvable.
Emergent distress (pair project)
no noticeable problems at beginning, but occur over time. Issues may become insurmountable (may be cumulative annoyances, or turn into abuse)
Disillusionment (pair project)
Couples begin relationship with too positive illusions. Loss of illusions- can be detrimental.
Causesof divorce
(highest percent to least)
Infidelity, incompatibility, drinking/substance use, grew apart, personality problems, communication difficulties, physical/mental abuse, love was lost, don’t know.
Socioeconomic status and divorce
people with low status occupations, less education, lower incomes will be more likely to divorce than higher SES. Women with “good” education less likely to divorce than women with poor education.
Sex ratios and divorce
Around the world, divorce rates are higher when women outnumber men. More options for men.
Working women and divorce
divorce rates increase when higher proportion of women enter the workforce. Women aren’t financially dependent on men.
How do breakups/divorce happen?
Usually numerous complaints and mixed feelings. Long periods of dissatisfaction precedes dissolution. Initiated when people believe they’ll be better off without partner.
Direct vs indirect strategies for breaking up
Direct- state that you want to end relationship
Indirect- start ignoring other person, don’t discuss issues. may “act out” to make relationship end/force partner to end it
Selfish vs other-oriented initiating breakups
Selfish- announce relationship end, no negotiation
Other oriented- Allowed negotiation, talk things out.
Combination of selfish and indirect methods
Negative outcomes
Various pathways to dissolution
gradual vs sudden, one partner vs both, multiple times finally succeeds, no attempts to save relationship
Churning
cyclical process in which two partners dissolve or reinstate a romantic relationship more than once. Usually detrimental to relationship due to uncertainty and stress in relationship disruption. Long term-unlikely to stay together.
Steps to divorce
Personal phase- a partner grows dissatisfied, feeling frustrated
Dyadic phase- unhappy partner reveals his or her discontent… feelings of hurt
Social phase- tells other people their side of the story and seeks support/advice/validation
Grave dressing phase- as relationship ends, mourning decreases, memories revised
resurrection phase- Ex partners re-enter social life as singles and feel smarter
Aftermath of premarital breakups
Commitment fades entirely for 60% people. 21% more committed after breakup. Couple rarely rekindle romance. May reconcile differences. Many make a clean break with 12% experiencing churning.
Emotional state after breakup
Usually angry, sad, distressed within first few weeks. Majority return to normal emotional state within a month.
Physical health problems associated with divorce
chronic medical conditions, metastatic cancer, cardiovascular disease, risk for early death. Life satisfaction is worse even in long-term (except for situations of abuse and amicable splits)
Dealing with loss
Validate feelings, talk and listen to others, write down thoughts, accept help from others, allow yourself to cry, identify unfinished business, join a bereavement group
When to seek help
If feelings are persisting in uncomfortable ways, disturbing images are intruding into life, use of substances increased, reactions are hindering daily life, significant feelings of depression or hopelessness
Relationship maintenance
Strategic actions people take to sustain their partnerships. Follow from people’s commitment to a relationship. Use diff strategies if expect relationship to continue.
Outcomes of maintenance mechanisms
may be difficult to use but extremely beneficial to relationship. May act more thoughtful to strangers- prevent bad impressions. Active decision to use maintenance mechanisms
Cognitive interdependence
Greater reported relationship centrality to personal identity. More “we” terms , more positive problem solving, lower divorce rates
positive illusions
idealizing both partners, always discussing in positive light. Think relationship is better than most. Partner is special
Perceived superiority
Believing both partners are better than others. Makes relationship more likely to last.
Inattention to alternatives
makes partnership seems stronger.
Derogation of tempting alternatives
Judging others to be less and putting them down. Relatively good for relationships.
Willingness to sacrifice
doing something you don’t want to or giving up something that you like for your partner. importance of balanced sacrifices.
Michelangelo phenomenon
when your partner encourages you to be all that you can be. Supporting the development of new skills. Endorsing new roles and responsibilities. One sided is detrimental
Accommodation
Tolerating minor mistreatments w/o fighting/arguing back. Requires self-control of impulses. Not recommended to tolerate major mistreatments
Play
Doing novel activities with a partner. Best if pleasant and challenging.
Forgiveness
forgiving partner’s betrayal. better outcomes than rumination.
Relationship maintenance strategies
positivity- trying to act nice/cheerful towards partner. Goal to make interactions enjoyable.
Assurances- stressing commitment to the relationship, faithfulness and implying shared future.
Sharing tasks- helping equally with tasks
Continued relationship maintenance strategies
openness, sharing a social network, support, conflict, humor
DIYadvice for Repairing relationships
Many issues with DIY advice- backgrounds of professionals are somewhat bogus. Imply change is easy and simple. Advice is tailored to general audiences. Advice may simply be wrong.
Preventative maintenance
Taking care of/resolving issues before major problems arise
common components of premarital counseling
encouraged to take long-range view of future they’re creating together, stress importance of having fun together, value open communication about sex, consequences of inappropriate expectations.
Common core features of couples therapy
Must trust clinicians and enter with positive expectations to benefit.
Behavioral couples therapy
Focused on couple’s actions/interactions and seeks to replace negative and punishing behavior. Encourage and reward partners. Teaches communication skills. Schedule deliberate love days. Quid pro quo contract (behavior change between partners is linked) vs good faith contractions (parallel agreements- rewarded with special privileges)
Cognitive behavioral therapy
Focusing on partner’s cognition and relationship judgements. Addresses partner’s selective attention (hyperfixation on one bad thing). Instills more reasonable expectations, willingness to forgive, adaptive relationship beliefs. Goal is to change maladaptive thinking patterns.
Integrative Behavioral Couple Therapy
Encourages desirable behavior and teaches tolerance about incompatibilities. Communication and behavioral modification. Acknowledges that some incompatibilities may always remain.
How IBCT teaches acceptance
Empathic joining- expressing vulnerabilities w/o blame or resentment
Unified detachment- intellectual and practical view of problems
tolerance building- decrease sensitivity and intense reactions
Emotionally focused couple therapy
Attachment-based couple’s therapy. Focused on increasing attachment security (regardless of attachment). Reestablishes desirable interaction patterns. Need emotional security.
Three stages of therapy
1)assessment of the problem- step back and find what underlies argument. Recognize new styles of interaction the foster bonding.
2) promoting new styles of interaction that foster bonding: identify/admit feelings. Acknowledge/accept other’s feelings and start new patterns of interaction
3)rehearsal and maintenance of desirable new styles of interaction. Invent new solutions to old problems, rehearse and consolidate new behavior
Insight-oriented therapy(3 tenants)
Understanding how personal habits and assumptions create difficulties with partners. Need understanding of self.
3 basic tenants
- people are influenced by hidden tensions and unresolved need
-unconscious conflicts- family of origin or prior relationships
- Goal-gain insights into unconscious conflicts.
Affective reconstructions- revisiting past to identify themes and coping styles that promote past conflict. Goal- construct new patterns
Common features of couples therapy
Works for most people. I.e., relationship improvements, better satisfaction, less conflict, etc.
Importance of picking therapy, therapist
Most appealing. Can be beneficial if only one partner goes, but best if both partners attend and work to improve relationship.
Despite media overrepresentation…
Highly underutilized. Most divorced couples-did not consult couples therapist. Due to westernized stigmatization of therapy
