Identity, Courtship, & Couple Dynamics (US) Flashcards
Moris’ Twelve Steps to the US courtship ritual
eye to body
eye to eye
voice to voice
hand to hand
arm to shoulder
arm to waist
mouth to mouth
hand to head
hand to body
mouth to breast
hand to genitals
genitals to genitals
Courtship v. Quasicourtship
Phases of Quasicourtship
Albert Scheflen
Key Focus: Scheflen focused on non-verbal communication in social and therapeutic contexts, with particular attention to quasicourtship cues—non-verbal behaviors that signal attraction, readiness for interaction, or openness, but not necessarily romantic intent. He explored how men and women unconsciously use body language to communicate interest, affiliation, or dominance, particularly in everyday interactions.
Gender Differences: Scheflen’s analysis of male and female behavior was grounded in how they exhibit non-verbal signals of readiness and openness in various social settings. He highlighted how women may use affiliative behaviors like preening and smiling to signal openness and friendliness, while men may display dominance cues through posture and body positioning to assert authority or attract attention.
Unique Contribution: Scheflen emphasized the ritualistic and subconscious nature of non-verbal behaviors, including how both genders use body language to navigate complex social and power dynamics, even in non-romantic contexts. His analysis of quasicourtship behavior focuses on how both genders use signals that resemble courtship behaviors but are used for broader social purposes, including bonding and affiliation.
Key Work: Scheflen, A. E. (1972). Body Language and the Social Order: Communication as Behavioral Control.
Ray Birdwhistell
Key Focus: Birdwhistell is credited with founding kinesics, the study of body movement and gestures as a form of communication. His research looked at how people use body language within specific social and cultural contexts. Birdwhistell argued that body language, like spoken language, is learned and culturally specific rather than universal.
Gender Differences: Birdwhistell’s work on male and female behavior emphasized the cultural shaping of gendered body language. He explored how societal expectations influence the way men and women gesture, stand, sit, or use facial expressions. For example, he noted that men might be socialized to take up more space or use more expansive gestures to signal dominance, while women might be taught to take up less space and use more restrained gestures.
Unique Contribution: Birdwhistell was particularly interested in how non-verbal communication is influenced by culture and social learning, rather than being purely instinctual. His work suggests that differences in male and female behavior are largely shaped by societal norms and vary significantly across different cultures.
Key Work: Birdwhistell, R. L. (1970). Kinesics and Context: Essays on Body Motion Communication
Desmond Morris
Key Focus: Desmond Morris approached male and female behavior from an ethological and evolutionary perspective. He studied human behavior by comparing it to the behavior of animals, particularly primates, and explored how human non-verbal communication evolved to fulfill biological and social needs. Morris was particularly interested in how body language reflects underlying evolutionary drives related to reproduction, dominance, and survival.
Gender Differences: Morris highlighted biologically rooted differences in male and female behavior, emphasizing that much of what we consider non-verbal communication is rooted in innate, evolutionary behaviors. He suggested that men and women have evolved different body language behaviors based on reproductive strategies, with men more likely to display dominance through expansive postures and assertive gestures, while women may use body language to display attractiveness and signal reproductive fitness (e.g., grooming behaviors or submissive gestures).
Unique Contribution: Morris’ work is grounded in ethology, drawing direct parallels between human non-verbal communication and the behavior of animals. He argued that many gender differences in behavior stem from evolutionary pressures, which shape how men and women signal dominance, attraction, or submission in social and mating contexts.
Key Work: Morris, D. (1967). The Naked Ape: A Zoologist’s Study of the Human Animal.
Comparison of Morris, Birdwhistell, and Scheflen
Scheflen: Focuses on the subconscious and ritualistic nature of body language, with an emphasis on how men and women signal readiness for social interaction and how these behaviors mimic courtship rituals.
Birdwhistell: Takes a cultural and social lens, arguing that gendered body language is largely shaped by societal norms and learned behaviors, which vary across cultures.
Morris: Emphasizes the biological and evolutionary basis of gendered non-verbal behavior, suggesting that these behaviors are deeply rooted in human evolutionary history and tied to reproduction and survival strategies.
Advantages of Immediacy
1) Increased Perceived Attractiveness: Immediacy behaviors often enhance how attractive someone appears to others. Behaviors like eye contact, smiling, and positive body language can create an inviting atmosphere, which makes the individual seem more appealing and approachable.
Research Example: Studies have shown that people rate individuals who use more immediacy behaviors (e.g., smiling, leaning forward) as more attractive and likable during social interactions .
2) Facilitates Emotional Connection: Immediacy helps build an emotional bond by signaling that the person is interested and engaged. In courtship, this can create a sense of mutual interest and deepen feelings of intimacy, as it makes both parties feel more connected.
3) Signals Openness and Availability: By reducing physical and psychological distance, immediacy signals that a person is open to interaction and possibly to further romantic or emotional engagement. This can accelerate the progression of relationships and increase the likelihood of reciprocal attraction.
4) Increases Perceived Confidence: Immediacy behaviors, such as open posture and direct eye contact, are often interpreted as signs of confidence and self-assurance, which are attractive traits in a courtship context.
5) Encourages Reciprocal Interest: When one person uses immediacy behaviors, it often prompts the other person to reciprocate, creating a feedback loop that enhances mutual attraction. It sets a positive tone for further interaction and relationship development.
Disadvantages of Immediacy
1) Overuse Can Be Perceived as Aggressive or Overbearing: Excessive use of immediacy behaviors, especially in the early stages of courtship, can come across as too intense or invasive. For example, standing too close or maintaining excessive eye contact can make the other person feel uncomfortable or pressured.
Research Example: Studies suggest that too much immediacy, especially in a first encounter, can be interpreted as a violation of personal space or overly assertive behavior .
2) Cultural Differences in Immediacy: Immediacy behaviors vary greatly across cultures. What might be seen as warm and engaging in one culture (e.g., close proximity and direct eye contact) could be seen as intrusive or inappropriate in another. This can lead to misunderstandings in intercultural courtship settings.
Example: In some East Asian cultures, direct eye contact can be seen as confrontational or inappropriate in certain contexts, while in Western cultures, it is often seen as a sign of confidence and engagement.
3) Potential for Misinterpretation:
THIS IS A BIG ONE
Immediacy can sometimes be misunderstood as romantic interest when none is intended. For example, friendly gestures like smiling or leaning in might be interpreted as flirtation, which can lead to confusion in social interactions where the intentions are not clear.
4) Imbalance in Immediacy Behaviors: If one person in a courtship situation displays high immediacy (e.g., leaning in, smiling) and the other does not reciprocate, it can create an awkward imbalance. The person using immediacy may appear over-invested or too eager, while the other may seem uninterested or distant, leading to a mismatch in perceptions of attraction.
5) Risk of Invading Personal Space: Some immediacy behaviors, such as moving physically closer or using touch, can cross personal boundaries if not done carefully. This can lead to discomfort or rejection if the other person is not ready for that level of closeness.
Attachment Theory
Key Idea: Developed by John Bowlby and later expanded by Mary Ainsworth, attachment theory explains how early childhood relationships with caregivers shape our expectations and behaviors in romantic relationships. Attachment styles are typically categorized as secure, anxious, avoidant, or disorganized.
Application to Couples: In adult romantic relationships, individuals with a secure attachment style tend to form healthy, trusting relationships. Those with anxious or avoidant attachment styles may struggle with intimacy, leading to patterns of clinginess, insecurity, or emotional distancing. Couples with mismatched attachment styles may experience difficulties in maintaining a stable relationship.
Source: Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic Love Conceptualized as an Attachment Process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Social Exchange Theory
Key Idea: Social Exchange Theory, developed by George Homans and expanded by Thibaut and Kelley, posits that relationships are based on a cost-benefit analysis. People seek to maximize rewards (such as companionship, affection, and support) while minimizing costs (such as conflict, stress, or time commitment). The stability of a relationship depends on the balance between the costs and rewards.
Application to Couples: Couples are likely to stay together if both partners feel that the relationship provides more benefits than costs. However, if the perceived costs begin to outweigh the rewards, the relationship may face challenges or dissolve.
Source: Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The Social Psychology of Groups. John Wiley & Sons.
Equity Theory
Key Idea: Equity Theory, developed by J. Stacy Adams, suggests that satisfaction in a relationship is determined by how fair or equitable each partner perceives the relationship to be. Individuals feel content when their inputs (e.g., effort, time, resources) are proportional to the outcomes they receive (e.g., love, support, shared resources). Perceived inequity can lead to dissatisfaction.
Application to Couples: When one partner feels they are putting more into the relationship than they are receiving, resentment may build. Similarly, over-benefited partners may feel guilt. For a relationship to be successful, both partners need to feel that the relationship is fair and balanced.
Source: Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in Social Exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.
Triangular Theory of Love
Key Idea: Proposed by Robert Sternberg, the Triangular Theory of Love suggests that love has three components: intimacy, passion, and commitment. Different combinations of these components produce different types of love, such as romantic love (intimacy + passion), companionate love (intimacy + commitment), or consummate love (intimacy + passion + commitment).
Application to Couples: The theory explains how relationships evolve over time. For example, passion may be intense at the beginning of a relationship but may wane over time, while commitment and intimacy can strengthen. Understanding these components helps couples navigate changes in their relationship dynamics.
Source: Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A Triangular Theory of Love. Psychological Review.
Investment Model
Key Idea: Developed by Caryl Rusbult, the Investment Model focuses on the factors that contribute to relationship commitment and stability. The model suggests that three factors predict relationship commitment: satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size (i.e., the resources a partner has put into the relationship, such as time, emotional energy, or shared property).
Application to Couples: Couples who are highly satisfied, have few appealing alternatives, and have made significant investments in the relationship are more likely to remain committed. Even when satisfaction decreases, the size of the investments can keep partners together.
Source: Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and Satisfaction in Romantic Associations: A Test of the Investment Model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
Interdependence Theory
Key Idea: Interdependence Theory, developed by Thibaut and Kelley, looks at how partners in a relationship affect each other’s outcomes. It focuses on the mutual dependence of partners, where each person’s decisions, actions, and satisfaction are influenced by the other. The theory introduces concepts like comparison levels (CL) and comparison level for alternatives (CLalt), which describe how partners evaluate the relationship against their expectations and potential alternatives.
Application to Couples: Couples stay together when both partners feel that their outcomes in the relationship are better than they would be alone or with someone else. Higher levels of interdependence lead to greater commitment.
Source: Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The Social Psychology of Groups. John Wiley & Sons.
Gottman Method and the “Four Horsemen”
Key Idea: John Gottman’s research on couples focuses on predicting relationship success or failure based on communication patterns. Gottman identified the “Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse”—criticism, contempt, defensiveness, and stonewalling—as behaviors that predict relationship breakdown.
Application to Couples: Couples who consistently engage in these negative communication patterns are more likely to experience dissatisfaction and divorce. However, Gottman also emphasizes the importance of repair attempts and positive interactions to maintain a healthy relationship.
Source: Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1992). Marital Processes Predictive of Later Dissolution: Behavior, Physiology, and Health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
The Dual Process Model of Relationship Maintenance
Key Idea: The Dual Process Model suggests that relationship maintenance behaviors can be proactive (actions taken to strengthen the relationship before problems arise) or reactive (actions taken to address problems once they occur). These processes help partners sustain the relationship through changes and challenges.
Application to Couples: Successful couples engage in both proactive behaviors, such as expressing appreciation and making time for each other, and reactive behaviors, such as resolving conflicts and managing stress, to maintain a healthy and stable relationship.
Source: Dindia, K., & Canary, D. J. (1993). Definitions and Theoretical Perspectives on Maintaining Relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships.
Self-Expansion Theory
Key Idea: Self-Expansion Theory, developed by Arthur Aron and colleagues, suggests that individuals are motivated to grow and expand their sense of self. Romantic relationships provide opportunities for this self-expansion by introducing new experiences, ideas, and perspectives. Partners contribute to each other’s personal growth, which can strengthen the relationship.
Application to Couples: Couples who continue to grow together by engaging in novel and exciting activities are more likely to maintain strong, fulfilling relationships. Stagnation, where one or both partners feel that they are no longer growing or benefiting from the relationship, can lead to dissatisfaction.
Source: Aron, A., & Aron, E. N. (1986). Love and the Expansion of Self: Understanding Attraction and Satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Matching Hypothesis
Key Idea: The Matching Hypothesis, proposed by Elaine Hatfield and colleagues, suggests that people are more likely to form and maintain romantic relationships with individuals who are similar to them in terms of physical attractiveness. The theory posits that, while individuals may desire highly attractive partners, they tend to choose partners whose attractiveness is comparable to their own to avoid rejection and maintain relationship stability.
Application to Couples: Couples who are similar in physical attractiveness may experience greater satisfaction and stability, as they may feel more equal in the relationship. This similarity can reduce insecurity and jealousy, leading to a more balanced and harmonious partnership. The hypothesis also implies that mismatched couples (in terms of attractiveness) may experience greater relational strain due to perceived inequalities.
Source: Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottmann, L. (1966). Importance of Physical Attractiveness in Dating Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
John Bowlby
Significant Contribution: Bowlby’s most influential contribution is Attachment Theory, which posits that early relationships with caregivers shape emotional development and behavior in later relationships. He introduced the idea that secure, anxious, and avoidant attachment styles emerge from these early interactions and impact interpersonal relationships throughout life.
Influence: Attachment Theory profoundly influenced not only developmental psychology but also social psychology, as it explains adult romantic attachment patterns. It laid the groundwork for research on how childhood experiences affect emotional bonds in adulthood.
Key Publication: Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss, Vol. 1: Attachment. Basic Books.
Mary Ainsworth
Significant Contribution: Ainsworth expanded Bowlby’s work with the Strange Situation experiment, identifying the three major attachment styles: secure, anxious, and avoidant. Her empirical research provided concrete evidence for Bowlby’s theoretical framework.
Influence: Ainsworth’s identification of specific attachment styles was foundational for understanding adult romantic relationships and interpersonal dynamics. It became a central theory in relationship psychology, influencing research on parent-child interactions and romantic bonds.
Key Publication: Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1978). Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
George Homans
Significant Contribution: Homans developed Social Exchange Theory, which suggests that human relationships are based on the exchange of rewards and costs. People seek to maximize rewards (like affection or approval) and minimize costs (like conflict or time commitment).
Influence: Social Exchange Theory laid the foundation for numerous theories in relationship and group dynamics, including interpersonal relationships, organizational behavior, and social networks. It revolutionized the understanding of human interaction as a form of economic exchange.
Key Publication: Homans, G. C. (1958). Social Behavior as Exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6), 597-606.
John Thibaut & Harold Kelley
Significant Contribution: Thibaut and Kelley are best known for developing Interdependence Theory, which examines how the mutual dependence of partners affects relationship stability. They introduced concepts such as comparison levels (CL) and comparison level for alternatives (CLalt) to explain how people evaluate their relationships.
Influence: This theory became a cornerstone for understanding relationship satisfaction and commitment. It also led to the development of models that explain decision-making processes in relationships and how partners balance personal needs with mutual dependence.
Key Publication: Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The Social Psychology of Groups. John Wiley & Sons.
J. Stacy Adams
Significant Contribution: Adams developed Equity Theory, which posits that individuals seek fairness and equity in relationships. Satisfaction arises when their inputs (effort, resources) are balanced with their outcomes (rewards, recognition). Inequity leads to dissatisfaction.
Influence: Equity Theory has had a profound impact on understanding both interpersonal relationships and workplace dynamics, emphasizing the importance of perceived fairness in maintaining satisfaction and reducing conflict.
Key Publication: Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in Social Exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 267-299.