L8 - Theories Of Romantic Relationships: Duck’s Phase Modek Of Relationship Breakdown Flashcards
What’s relationship breakdown/termination
- when one or both people in a relationship feel it’s not working & therefore wish the relationship to end
Ducks phase model of relationship breakdown
- developed in 1982
- breakdown process might start when 1 partner becomes increasingly dissatisfied with the way the relationship has been conducted
4 stages: - intrapsychic phase
- dyadic phase
- social phase
- grave dressing phase
Intrapsychic phase
This is characterized by the dissatisfied person privately thinking about their
relationship and brooding about the problems they have identified. The dissatisfied
partner focuses on their partner’s faults and the fact that they are “under-benefitting”
and they will re-evaluate their relationship. They might feel very depressed and then
withdraw from social interactions with their partner and others. They do not say
anything to their partner at this stage, but they might feel that they are better off
leaving the relationship.
Dyadic phase
This involves a private confrontation/discussion whereby partners communicate with
each other about their problems or the perceived inequities. They might think carefully
about investments they have in the relationships e.g. house, children, joint possessions
etc. There could be reconciliation if the other partner accepts the validity of the
dissatisfied partner’s views and promises to change their behaviour or make agreements
to sort out issues. Marital therapy might be useful at this point if the process becomes
difficult. The person might believe that, “I would be justified in withdrawing from the
relationship” and the breakdown process might continue
Social phase
If there is a break up, it is made public to friends and family which means that people
become informed and the problem is harder to deny or ignore. Advice and support are
given from people outside the relationship and alliances are made. This can involve
criticizing former partners e.g. “I never really liked him anyway” and scape-goating, “It
was all her fault.” Younger adults might experience breakdown very frequently in this
period of their life, as they are striving to meet their ideal partner and are testing the
market. Older couples experience breakdown less frequently, and some might be
resigned to not finding a new partner in the future if the relationship breaks down.
Grave dressing phase
As the relationship dies and breaks down, there is the need to mourn and justify our
actions. We need to create an account of what the relationship was like and why it
broke down. Ex partners begin their post relationship lives and begin to publicise
accounts of how the relationship broke down, making sure their social credit remains high. Stories might be told about betrayal, or how they both struggled to make it work
and different versions of the relationship are given to different people. Partners might
reinterpret their point of view of their ex partners e.g. “they were rebellious” become
“they were irresponsible.”
Evaluation
strengths
- development over time
- SET support
weaknesses
- role of people
- gender differences
- ethical issues
- reductionist
Development over time
This model of breakdown was devised in 1982 therefore it is an old model and may lack temporal validity. However, improvements have been made to the model as time has passed. Duck teamed up with a psychologist called Rollie in 2006 and introduced a fifth phase to this model called, “The Resurrection stage.” This is where the person engages in personal growth and gets prepared for new romantic relationships that they can start. The psychologist Frazier (2003) studied 92 undergraduates who had just broken up with their partner, and it was found that they did experience emotional distress but there was evidence of personal growth which links to the fifth stage of the new model (resurrection) – therefore this model of breakdown is a good model as it includes how a person can ‘get over’ their relationship and prepare for a new one. Thus it is not all ‘gloom and doom’.
Support from SET
Research support for Duck model comes from the Social exchange theory by Kelley.” Kelley
would support Duck’s model and would state that if a relationship has high costs and minimal
rewards then the relationship is not worth continuing, but instead would probably breakdown and
end. Therefore Duck’s model of breakdown can be analysed from the perspective of rewards and
costs which links to the social exchange theory
Role of people
Akert (1998) has criticized the model proposed by Duck. Akert found that the role that people had in deciding if the relationship should breakdown, was the most important prediction of the breakdown experience. Akert found that those who did not initiate the end of the relationship were the most miserable, lonely, depressed and angry in the weeks after the relationship ended. Those who initiate the break down were the least stressed and least upset, but did feel guilty. Duck’s model does not take into consideration the role that people played in the relationship breakdown, and according to Akert, this is important.
Gender differences
Duck’s model ignores gender differences that exist when analysing the breakdown of
relationships. Kassin (1996) found research evidence to suggest that females emphasise
unhappiness, lack of emotional support and incompatibility as reasons for relationship
breakdown, whereas males state lack of sex/fun. Females often wish to stay friends with an ex partner, but males would rather have a clean break and not stay friends. Duck’s model needs to acknowledge that there are gender differences that must be considered when looking at his breakdown phase model
Ethical issues
There are many ethical issues that need to be considered when examining the model proposed
by Duck. Relationship breakdown is a socially sensitive topic and there are many ethical issues
that might arise from research. For example, psychological harm might be an issue when people
are recalling why their relationship broke down and the impact of this. Invasion of privacy is also
an issue that Duck would have to address when investigating relationship breakdown, as he must
be careful not to ask too many probing questions that could cause upset. All results gained from
participants should ensure confidentiality and anonymity in order to protect participants
Reductionist
The model proposed by Duck could be viewed as reductionist and not very accurate. It is
reducing the complex phenomenon of relationship breakdown into 4 simple stages that must
follow a specific order. In the real world it would seem unlikely that relationship breakdown can
be compartmentalized or reduced into 4 basic stages. Relationship breakdown is very
unpredictable, and it could be the case that breakdown does not happen in this chronological order. Some couples break up, make up, break up etc
