Paper 3 - Relationships

Question 1

Define sexual selection in the evolutionary explanations for partner preferences

Answer 1

Sexual selection is a special form of natural selection in which the exes acquire distinct forms either because the members of one sex chose mates with particular features or because int he competition for mates among the members of on sex only those with certain traits succeed. These genes which code for these characteristics will be selected and passed through generations

Question 2

Outline the human reproductive behaviour in the evolutionary explanations for partner preferences

Answer 2

Sexual selection therefore explains why some characteristics that may appear disadvantageous to survival are passed on through generations, and this is because they confer an advantage in human reproductive behaviour , ie. selecting in partner

Question 3

Give an example of the human reproductive behaviour in the evolutionary explanations for partner preferences

Answer 3

For example, Darwin was fascinated by the flamboyant tail to the peacock as it appears to serve no purpose in terms of survival, and may actually be a handicap as it makes it more difficult for the bird to escape from predators. The sexual selection explanation is that, peahens are attracted to it, possibly because it signals the male’s ability to survive despite the large cost imposed by his fancy plumage. As a result, males with longer, more brightly coloured tails would then pass this characteristic on to the next generation. Over many generations, peacock’s tails would become more and more flamboyant because of this female preference. Thus the peacock’s tails gives an advantage in terms of mating despite beign a disadvantage in terms of survial

Question 4

Define anisogamy

Answer 4

It refers to the differences between male and female sex cells, also known as gametes. In humans, male gametes, sperm, are very small, highly mobile, created continuously in vast numbers from puberty to old age , and do not require a great expenditure of energy to produce

Question 5

Outline the consequences of anisogamy

Answer 5

The consequences of anisogamy is that there is no shortage of fertile makes but a fertile female is a rare ‘resources’. This has led to there being different types of sexual selection, as well as there being clear differences between men and women’s mating strategies

Question 6

Outline the two types of sexual selection

Answer 6

There are TWO types of sexual selection:
* INTRA-SEXUAL selection which is the evolution of traits which allows males and females to gain an advantage over members of the same sex during mate competition
* INTER-SEXUAL selection which is the evolution of traits which are valued as attractive by members of the opposite sex

Question 7

Explain how the types of sexual selection links to the evolutionary explanations for partner preferences

Answer 7

Although we see characteristics and strategies which are a result of both intra and inter sexual selection in BOTH males and females, anisogamy has largely led to females being the more choosy sex, whereas males tend to compete over mates.

Therefore we tend to see that males’ preferred mating strategy is a result of INTRA-SEXUAL
selection, referring to the competition between (intra) males to be able to mate with a female,
and females’ preferred strategy is INTER-SEXUAL SELECTION as they can be choosey when it
comes to selecting a mate.

Question 8

Explain why males favour intra-sexual selection as a mating strategy and how this influences their reproductive behaviours

Answer 8

It provides an advantage in same sex competition for mates. For a male to ‘win’ the competition his goal is to mate with as many females as possible in the hope that they all be able to carry their offspring.

Males show preferences for youthful and attractive physical traits in a female partner because they are signs of fertility so will increase their chance of reproductive such as:
- Hip to waist ration = 0.8
- Looking for facial symmetry
- Neo-natural eyes

They show a preference for short term relationships to increase the chances of reproduction this leads to sexual dimorphism

Question 9

How do males benefit from behaving aggressively

Answer 9

As noted, males may sometimes benefit from behaving aggressively, in order to compete with same-sex rivals and
show a woman that they can take care of her and protect her. It was also mentioned though that men may ‘think’ in
a certain way, this could be linked with JEALOUSY – as a result of these evolved behaviours, men tend to become
more jealous of SEXUAL INFIDELITY, because with little investment into a child, they fear CUCKOLDRY – which is
the fear of investing parental effort into offspring which is not genetically their own (Buss, 1992).

Question 10

Explain why women favour inter-sexual selection as a mating strategy

Answer 10

As females have much fewer opportunities to reproduce, due to the laws of anisogamy, her investment in offspring is substantial in comparison to males.

Therefore a females optimum mating strategy is QUALITY over QUANTITY, and she will be attracted
to traits which indicate GENETIC SUITABILITY, as well a partner who is willing and able to provide RESOURCES.

Question 11

How does inter-sexual selection affects women’s reproductive behaviours

Answer 11

Signs of Fecundity (ability to reproduce)) and genetic fitness
Women look for the physical features in a partner such as : good resources like economic and financial security, good genes like height, weight, good health, etc.
This is because they need a partner that will take care of them and their offspring because of the physical investment that women put into that offspring

A preference for partner who can provide resources and protection. This is because they need a partner who can provide and protect and care for them and their offspring when they have deeply invested in the child

Question 12

Outline the Female preference for an evolutionary explanations for partner preferences

Answer 12

Females’ preference for a fit male has led to what Ronald Fisher (1930) proposed as the RUNAWAY PROCESS in his sexy sons hypothesis. This means these traits can be passed onto the child/ offspring which will increase the health of the offspring. This leads to the runaway process which the exaggeration of the physical traits in a male in a specifies as a result of female drive

Therefore sexual selection has heavily influenced REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOUR and led to clear differences between males and females partner preferences. Other than specific mate preferences though, males and females also differ in terms of RELATIONSHIP PREFERENCES and indeed what causes JEALOUSY.

Question 12

Evaluate the Evolutionary explanations for partner preferences

Answer 12

There is a range of evidence which offers a degree of support for sexual selection and how it has influence on reproductive behaviour and mate preferences. For example Buss (1989) provided cross-cultural research related to anisogamy which supports sex differences in partner preferences and mating strategies. He carried out a survey of over 10,000 adults in 33 countries. He asked questions relating to a variety of attributes that evolutionary theory price predicts are important in partner preferences. He found that females placed greater value on resource related characteristics than males did, such as good financial prospects and ambition. Males valued physical attractiveness and youth more than females did. This is a strength to the research as the findings reflect consistent sex differences in partner prefers and supports the prediction for the sexual selection theory

However, a theoretical weakness with the evolutionary explanation is that it provides a reductionist account of sexual selection and could be accused of being undervaluing the impact of contemporary social and cultural factors. Despite offering a relatively parsimonious explanation, evolutionary theory reduces reproductive behaviour to a simple, evolved biological mechanism and thus overlooks social and psychological factors that can equally account for differences in sexual selection. Additionally, it does not take into account that contemporary factors can influence reproductive behaviour. For example Contemporary Lad culture may explain why young males are more interested in short term one night stands as this may reflect a possible desirable position within society. In addition, the reinforcement received from this behaviour through admiration from peers will only serve to maintain this behaviour in the future, so operant conditioning can also offer an explanation. Therefore, a more holistic theory would recognise the complexities of human reproductive behaviour, in particular the social and cultural purposes they serve

In addition, sexual selection is incomplete as it cannot explain all human reproductive behaviours. For example, sexual selection struggles to explain homosexual relationships and behaviours as these are not underpinned by reproduction, There must therefore be other factors which influence human reproductive behaviour. However, there have been some notable similarities found between partner preferences in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Such as in heterosexual relationships, personal advertisements in newspapers can be a revealing source of information about what men and women offer to potential same sex partners and what they seek in return. Gay men appear to desire specific physical attributes in a partner such as attractive face and athletic body and may value many of the status symbols such as well paid or masculine careers, that go with the male role in Western Culture (Davidson, 1991). So one might conclude that even though theories where original tested and looked on heterosexual couples, the same theories apply and partner preferences apply in heterosexual relationships

Question 12

Define self disclosure in the factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships

Answer 12

Self disclosure was first used by clinical psychologist Sidney Jourad (1971). It refers to the extent to which a person reveals personal information about themselves- their intimate thoughts, feelings and experiences to another person. It is an important process in the development of a romantic relationship. With greater discourse leading to greater feelings of intimacy

Question 13

Outline the norms of self disclosure in the factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships

Answer 13

With self disclosure their are expected norms, for example, there is a norm that people should engage in only a moderately personal level of self-disclosure in the early stages of a relationship Derlega & Grzelak (1979) suggests that these should be neither so personal that the disclosure appears indiscriminate for disclosing them to a relative stranger. The norm of reciprocity governs much of our social behaviour.. As Reis and Shaver point out, for a relationship to develop, as well as an increase in depth and breath there needs to be a reciprocal element to disclose

Question 14

Outline the role of reciprocity of self-disclosure and it link to social penetration theory

Answer 14

As Hamy Reis and Phillip Shaver point out, for a relationships to develop, as well as an increase in depth and breath there needs ton be a reciprocal element to disclose

Question 15

Outline the different types of self disclosure

Answer 15

There are different types of self disclosure as Sperecher (1987) found that disclosure of experiences of personal disappointments and information about previous sexual relationships, have a greater influence on relationships satisfaction than more ‘neutral’ types of self-disclosure. This is because once you have decided to disclose something that reveals your true self, hopefully your partner will respond in a way that is respectful, with empathy and also their own intimate thoughts and feelings.

Question 16

Evaluate the self disclosure as a factor affecting attraction in romantic relationships

Answer 16

A strength is that there is a wealth of support from research studies. The previous research provides supportive findings of the importance of self-disclosure as a factor affecting attraction in romantic relationships. Such supportive findings increase our confidence in the validity of the theory that self-disclosure leads to more satisfying relationships. Collins and Miller (1994) provided further evidence with their meta-analysis. They concluded that self-disclosure plays a central role in the development and maintenance of romantic relationships. They found that people who engaged in intimate disclosures tended to be liked more than people who disclose at lower levels, and people like others as a result of having disclosed to them. Collins and Miller also found that the relationship between disclosure and liking was stronger if the recipient believed that the disclosure was only shared with them rather than being shared indiscriminately with others. Therefore demonstrating that self-disclosure is a factor which affects attraction in the early stages of a relationship

However, the role of self-disclosure is different across cultures. Culture differs in the extent to which various topics are considered appropriate for conversation. In the West, people typically generally engage in more intimate self-disclosure than do non-Westerners. Cultural norms also shape how comfortable men and women are in self-disclosing. For example Nakanisi (1986) found that Japanese women prefer a lower level of personal conversation than do Japanese men. This is opposite to the self-disclosure patterns typically found in the West, where women prefer more disclosure than men. Self-disclosure theory is therefore a limited explanation of romantic based relationships, based on findings from Western cultures which are not necessarily generalizable to other cultures.

Another strength of the study is the real-life application of the self-disclosure theory. The theory can be applied to couples who want to improve communication in their relationships and thus can use self-disclosure to strengthen their bond. It was found by Hass and Stafford that 57% of gay men and women in their study said that honest self-disclosure was the most vital way they deepened their relationships. This could be vital for partners who struggle to communicate in aiding their relationship. Having said this, the study used homosexual relationships, not heterosexual ones, displaying that there may be differences between certain relationships and comfort levels felt in both. Therefore, a strength of the study is its applicability to real life, although it does not look at both homosexual and heterosexual relationships.

Question 17

Define physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction in romantic relationships

Answer 17

Physical attractiveness refers to what people find appealing about a person’s face and body. Despite individual differences, there is a general consensus on what is physically attractive. This could be explained through evolution.

Question 18

Give some examples of the physical features that affect physical attractiveness

Answer 18

Physical features considered attractive are often signs of fertility or genetic fitness, for example facial symmetry, waist-to-hip ratio, etc. This would be expected to be an important factor in the formation of relationships.

Question 19

Outline the ‘halo effect’ in physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attractiveness

Answer 19

The halo effect believes that physical attractiveness may also play an important role in forming relationships with people because of the preconceived ideas we have about the personality traits that attractive people must have and how positive these are.

The halo effect: Dion et al (1972) found that physically attractive people were rated highly on characteristics such as kindness, strength, sociability and other positive traits. Therefore, people who are attractive physically are more likely to be treated more positively, as others tend to think positively of them. This is referred to as the halo effect- one characteristic (physical attractiveness) has a disproportionate effect on other judgements about a person.

Question 20

Outline what is meant by the matching hypothesis in physical attractiveness

Answer 20

The matching hypothesis is a theory of interpersonal attraction which argues that relationships are formed between two people who are equal or very similar in terms of social desirability.

Question 21

Give a piece of research into physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction

Answer 21

Walster et al (1966) suggested that people choose romantic partners of a roughly equivalent level of attractiveness to themselves. This involves being able to make an accurate judgement about their own attractiveness level. There may be a difference between what a person would like, and what they would ‘settle for’ in a relationship. He conducted research based on the Computer Dance study In 1966. The procedure is that male and female students were invited to dance and were rated for physical attractiveness by objective observers at the start and also completed a questionnaire about their personality self-esteem and this information would be used by a computer to decide their partner for the evening. They found that the hypothesis was not supported and that most liked partners were alps the most physically attractive rather than taking their own level of attractiveness into account. In conclusion we tend to seek and choose partners whose attractiveiness matches our own. Therefore choice of partner is a compromise however it does not show the importance of physical attractiveness as a factor

Question 22

Evaluate physical attractiveness as a factor of affecting attraction

Answer 22

A strength is the amount of research support for the different aspects of physical attractiveness and their impact on romantic support. There is research supporting the halo effect such as Dion et al (1972). He found that attractive people are consistently rated as successful, kind and sociable when compared with unattractive people. This means that we not only believe that good-looking people are more physically attractive, we expect them to have other desirable characteristics as well and tend to behave more positively toward them. These findings have an implication for the support for the halo effect.

Yet, cultural influences could actually support the importance of physical attractiveness’ importance. This is due to the fact that research into what is deemed physically attractive is remarkably consistent across cultures. Cunningham et al. (1995) found that female features of large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small nose and high eyebrows were rated as highly attractive by white, Hispanic and Asian males. The halo effect also seems to be a universal behaviour, Wheeler & Kim (1997) found that Korean and American students judged physically attractive people to be more trustworthy, concerned for other people, mature and friendly. So it seems that the physical attractiveness stereotype is just as strong in collectivist cultures as it is in individualistic cultures.

A further limitation of physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction is complex matching. Sprecher & Hatfield (2009) suggest a reason why research often fails to find evidence of matching in terms of physical attractiveness – people come to a relationship offering many desirable characteristics, of which physical attractiveness is only one. A person may compensate for a lack of physical attractiveness with other desirable qualities such as a charming personality, kindness, status, money and so on. Sprecher & Hatfield refer to this tendency to compensate for a lack of physical attractiveness by offering other desirable traits as ‘complex matching’. In this way people are able to attract partners far x more physically attractive than themselves by offering compensatory assets, for example, an older, wealthy man may pair with a younger, attractive woman.

Question 23

Define the filter theory as a factor affecting attraction in romantic relationships

Answer 23

When choosing a partner, people start by looking at the options that are available. However, not everyone who is available will be equally attractive, so people usually apply some criteria to narrow down the ‘pool of availabilities’ to make sure they choose the right person

Question 24

Discuss Kerchhoff and Davis role in the factor affecting attraction in romantic relationships

Answer 24

Based upon a longitudinal study of the experiences of dating couples Alan Kerckhoff and Keith Davis discovered that various filtering factors were prominent at different stages of the partner selection process as potential partners tried to find the ‘best fit’ between themselves and a future romantic partner. Rather unsurprisingly, this theory became known as the filter theory of relationships.

Kerckhoff & Davis’ filter theory of attraction suggests that we choose romantic partners by using a series of filters that narrow down the ‘field of available’ into a ‘field of desirables’. According to Kerckhoff & Davis there are three main factors that act as the filters in this process, and each are prominent at different stages of partner selection.

Question 25

Outline the Stages of the Filter Theory

Answer 25

According to this theory, there are several levels of filters that people apply. The first level is that of sociodemographic characteristics, such as physical proximity, level of education, social class, religion and other important factors people are likely to pay attention to when we are meeting a person for the first time. These factors are important, because people are more likely to build relationships with people who are geographically close, and whom they are meeting frequently, as this gives them a greater chance to find out more about one another. People also find similarities in education, social class and religious beliefs attractive, as this gives them assurance that relationships are more likely to move forward.

This then leads to the second level of filters that relates to similarity of attitudes. People tend to view others as more attractive if they share the same core beliefs and values, such as views on career and importance of family. Byrne (1997) noted that similarity of attitudes is especially important in earlier stages of relationships, for couples who have been together fewer than 18 months. Presence or absence of similarities is discovered through self-disclosure, which leads to greater feelings of intimacy in a couple. If partners have very little in common, however, relationships rarely develop beyond the first few dates.

If similarities are crucial at the early stages of relationships, it seems that for long-term couples the third filter, complementarity, plays a much more important role. Complementarity refers to each of the partners having some traits that the other partner lacks, and helping each other to fulfil their needs. For example, one partner may enjoy meeting new people and being socially proactive, and the other may enjoy being introduced to people rather than initiating social encounters themselves, and thus these two people would complement one other.

Question 26

Evaluate the filter theory as a factor affecting attraction

Answer 26

Filter theory is supported by a wealth of evidence. Kerchoff and Davis conducted a longitudinal study of 94 dating couples at a US university. Each partner completed two questionnaires which assessed the level of similarity in attitudes and complementarity. Seven months later they completed another questionnaire looking at how close they now felt to their partner, compared to how they felt at the beginning of the study. They found that couples who had dated for less than 18 months had used a similarity in attitudes as the most significant predictor of how close they felt to their partner. Those who had been dating for longer used complementarity only. This study shows the importance of filters in many romantic relationships, implying the theory has high face validity. However, social demographic factors may not play such an important role in modern relationships due to the development of social media. People are now more likely to develop relationships with people who do not live as nearby, showing geographical proximity and culture do not impact romantic relationships in the same way. Thus, this theory may not have aged well, resulting in a lack of temporal validity.

A limitation of the filter theory and the importance of social demographic may lack temporal validity. George Levinger (1974) pointed out that many studies have failed to replicate the original findings of Kerchkoff and Davis. He put this down to social changes over time and also to problems in defining the depth of a relationship in terms of its length. Kerchoff and Davis chose an 18 month cut off point to distinguish between short and long term relationships. They assumed that partiers who had been together longer were more committed and had dapper relationships. This is a questionable assumption which means that filter theory is undetermined by the lack of validity of its evidence

However, further research poses problems for filter theory as a model for explaining attraction. There is evidence that the direction of causality may be inaccurate. Anderson et al. (2003) provided evidence which contradicts the idea that partners are initially attracted to each other because they are similar, as he found that cohabiting partners became more similar in their emotional responses over time, a phenomenon they termed emotional convergence. This idea of emotional convergence was further supported by Davis & Rusbult (2001), who discovered an attitude alignment in longer-term relationships - suggesting that romantic partners bring their attitudes more in line with each other over time. This therefore suggests that similarity is an effect of initial attraction, not a cause, as suggested by filter theory.

Question 27

Define the Social Exchange Theory as a theory of romantic relationships

Answer 27

Thibaut and Kelley 1959 proposed the idea of the social exchange theory of memory. It is based on economic theories and views relationships as having both rewards and costs. It is also based on the idea that relationships revolve around the Exchange of resources.

Question 28

Outline the Minimax strategy in the Social Exchange Theory

Answer 28

The minimax strategy is key to understanding SLT. The Minimax strategy is a principle that outlines that in relationships we try to maximise the costs and maximise the benefits. We then judge our relationship by the profit it yields. They proposed an equation to describe relationships which is Outcome (of the relationship)= rewards- costs. It believes that if the outcome of this equation is positive, this will mean we are satisfied with the relationship and it is more likely to form or maintain

Question 29

Outline the Comparison Level in the Social Exchange Theory

Answer 29

Thibuat and Keely proposed that one way in which we measure the profit in a romantic relationship is through the development of our comparison level which is a standard against which all our relationships are judged. Our comparison level (CL) is a product of our experiences in other relationships together with our general views of what we might experience from this particular exchange. Comparison Levels are closely linked to a person’s self-esteem – a person with high self-esteem will have higher expectations of rewards in relationships, whereas a person with low self-esteem will have lower expectations. People consider relationships worth pursuing if the Comparison Level is equal to, or better than, what they experienced in their previous relationships.

The second level, called Comparison Level for alternatives (CLalt), concerns a person’s perception of whether other potential relationships would be more rewarding than being in their current relationship. According to Social Exchange Theory, people will stick to their current relationships as long as they find them more profitable than the alternative

Question 30

Outline the comparison level for alternatives in the Social Exchange theory

Answer 30

Although an individual’s satisfaction with a relationship with a relationship depends on the assessed profit received from that relationship relative to their comparison level, this is not the only factor that determines the likelihood of them staying in that relationship. A related concept is the comparison level for alternatives (CLalt), where the person weighs up a potential increase in rewards from a different partner, minus any costs associated with ending the current relationship. A new relationship can take the place of the current one if its anticipated profit level if significantly higher.

Therefore, SET predicts that we will stay in our current relationship only so long as we believe it is more rewarding than the alternatives. According the relationships researcher Steve Duck (1994), the CLalt we adopt will depend on the state of our current relationship. There are usually ‘plenty more fish in the sea’, so if the costs of our current relationship outweigh the benefits then alternatives become more attractive. Being in a satisfying relationship means that you may not even notice that alternatives could be available.

Question 31

Outline the stages of relationships development in the Social Exchange Theory

Answer 31

According to Thibault and Kelly, all relationships proceed through a series of stages. They are: Sampling stage, where people explore potential rewards and costs of relationships, not just romantic ones, either by direct experience or by observing others, Bargaining stage, which is the first stage of any romantic relationship. At this stage, partners exchange rewards and costs, figure out the most profitable exchanges and negotiate the dynamics of the relationship, Commitment stage: when relationships become more stable, and partners become familiar with sources of rewards and costs, and each other’s expectations, so rewards increase and costs lessen and the Institutionalization stage which are the norms and expectations are timing established

Question 32

Evaluation of the Social Exchange Theory as a theory of attraction

Answer 32

There is research from same-sex and heterosexual relationships which suggest CL and CLalt predict relationship satisfaction. Kurdek and Schmitt (1986) investigated the importance of social exchange factors in determining relationship quality in 185 couples. They asked gay, lesbian and heterosexual couples to complete questionnaires measuring relationships commitment and SET variables. He found that those patterns who were most committed also perceived the most rewards and fewest costs and viewed alternatives as relatively unattractive. More Importantly this was the first study that demonstrates that the main SET concepts that predict commitment are independent of each other. These findings match predictions from SET, strongly confirming the validity of the theory in gay and lesbian couples as well as in heterosexual patterns

Another strength of Social Exchange Theory as a theory of relationships, is that it is non-deterministic and therefore allows for individual differences. The key features of social exchange theory: rewards and costs, comparison level and comparison level of alternatives, are all subjective and based upon individual judgements. Therefore they allow for individual opinions about, for example, what constitutes a reward or a cost, so what one person considers a significant reward, might be viewed by someone else as a lost ,less valuable, which is a realistic account for the nature of relationships. Therefore that theory has face validity and outlines that we have our own opinion and how satisfied we are in turn have the ability to control the outcome of a relationships

Yet, SET is an incomplete and somewhat negative explanation of the maintenance of relationships. This is because it struggles to explain why some relationships are maintained, when the costs significantly outweigh the benefits for a person (e.g. in the case of abusive relationships). In addition, SET takes a negative view of relationships, suggesting that they only maintain the personal rewards they provide outright. An alternative theory, equity theory may offer a more complete account of this as it suggests that relationships maintain if the relationship is fair. The notion of equity

Question 33

Define the Equity theory as theory of attraction

Answer 33

Equity theory is an extension of that underlying belief, however, it accommodates the fact that this is a rather selfish way of looking at relationships and doesn’t really match experiences in real life; where people tend to report greater satisfaction if what they get out of a relationship is broadly equivalent to what they put in.

Question 34

Outline the Equity theory based on Hatfield and Colleagues (1970) in the equity theory

Answer 34

Elaine Hatfield and colleagues (1970) developed equity theory based on this finding, with its central
assumption that people are most comfortable with a relationship when they perceive that they are getting roughly what they deserve from any given relationship. An equitable relationship should, according to the theory, be one where one partner’s benefits minus their costs, equals their partner’s benefits less their costs. I.e. It’s not the size or amount of the rewards and costs that matters; it’s the ratio of the two to each other. So if one partner puts a lot into the relationship but at the same time gets a lot out of it, then that will seem fair enough.

Question 35

Outline the consequences of inequity in the equity theory

Answer 35

Relationships that lack equity are associated with distinct types of dissatisfaction. If people feel over-benefitted, they may experience pity, guilt and shame. If under-benefited, they may experience anger, sadness and resentment. The greater the inequity, the greater the dissatisfaction (normally for the partner who is losing out!) and stress, and the more they are motivated to do something about it.

Question 36

Outline the equity and inequity in marriages in the equity theory

Answer 36

Schafer & Keith (1980) surveyed hundreds of married couples of all ages, noting those who felt their marriages were inequitable because of an unfair division of domestic responsibilities. During the child-rearing years, wives reported feeling under-benefited and husbands over-benefited.

As a result, marital satisfaction tended to dip. In contrast, during the honeymoon (when newly married) and empty-nest stages (after children have left home), both husbands and wives were more likely to perceive equity and feel satisfaction with their marriages.

Question 37

Outline how dealing with inequity in the equity theory

Answer 37

People perceive inequity in their relationships, then they are motivated to restore it. Hatfield & Rapson (2011) suggest that this can achieved in three different ways.

1. Restoration of actual equity
   Individuals can restore equity by voluntarily setting thins right or by urging their partners to do so.
2. Restoration of psychological equity
   Couples in inequitable relationships can distort reality and convince themselves that things are
   perfectly fair just the way they are.
3. If couples are unable to restore equity in their relationship, they can leave it
   This can be physically (i.e. divorce) or emotionally (i.e. no longer have feelings for their partner).

Question 38

Evaluate the equity theory in the theories of relationships

Answer 38

A strength of Equity Theory is that it is supported by research findings. For example, Stafford and Canary (2006) have discovered that partners who perceived their relationships as fair and balanced experienced the most satisfaction, thus supporting Equity Theory suggested that perceived fairness is necessary for happy relationships. However, there is research that contradicts Equity Theory. For example, Berg and McQuinn (1986), conducted a longitudinal study on 38 dating couples. They didn’t find any increase in equity over time, but discovered that a high level of self-disclosure and perceived equity in the beginning of the relationships was a strong predictor that a couple would stay in their relationship, and low equity in the beginning was a reliable predictor of a break-up. In other words, it seems that perceived fairness is either present or not in relationships from the start, and does not develop with time, contrary to the prediction of Equity Theory. These findings oppose the central claim of the theory, and contradict the idea that equity increases over time, after the initiation of a romantic relationship.

There are important cultural differences not accounted for by the Equity theory. Studies such as Aumer-Ryan et al. (2006) show that the concept of equity is more important in Western cultures than non-Western cultures. They found that both men and women from non-Western (collectivist) cultures claimed to be most satisfied with their relationships when they were over-benefitting from it, not when the relationships were fair. These results highlight a culture bias in this area of research and suggest that Equity Theory does not explain the development of romantic relationships in all cultures.

Moreover, individual differences and more specifically gender differences in equity sensitivity and the importance of equity need to be considered. Equity theory is based on the ‘norm of equity’, which assumes that everyone is equally sensitive to equity and inequity. This also means that each individual experiences the same level of tension when perceiving inequity. However, this isn’t always the case. Huseman et al (1987) developed the idea of equity sensitivity, which determines the extent to which an individual will tolerate inequity. Huseman identified three categories of individuals: benevolents, equity sensitives and entitleds. Benevolents are ‘givers’ and tend to be more tolerant of under-rewarded inequity. Equity sensitives behave in accordance with equity theory, experiencing tension when faced with inequity. Entitleds prefer to be over-rewarded, having the attitude that they are owed and thus entitled to receive benefits. As a result, they are dissatisfied when in an under-rewarded or an equitable situation.

Question 39

Define the Rusbult’s investment model as theories of attachment

Answer 39

Carly Rusbult’s investment model of relationships (Rusbult, 1980) was developed as a way of understanding why people persist in some romantic relationships, but not in others. Relationships persist not just because of the positive qualities that attract one person to another i.e. their satisfaction with that relationship, but also because of the ties that bind partners to each other (this is referred to as their INVESTMENT in the relationship) and the absence of a better option beyond that particular relationship.

Question 40

Outline the three factors of Rusbult’s investment model

Answer 40

First is the satisfaction level and comparison with alternatives based on the idea of comparison levels from Social Exchange Theory. People will have a high level of satisfaction with relationships if they have more rewards (companionship, attention, emotional support) and fewer costs (arguments, time). Also committed to relationships if ‘Is there a better alternative to satisfy my needs?’ The answer is ‘no’.

Alternatives can include another partner or staying single. Rusbult proposed that investment size also contributes to the stability of a relationship.

Investment size is a measure of all the resources that are attached to the relationship and which would diminish in value or be lost completely if the relationship were to end. Rusbult argues that there are two major types of investment: Intrinsic Investments are any resources we put directly into the relationship. They can be tangible things such as money and possessions. They can also be resources less easy to quantify (intangibles) such as energy, emotion, and self-disclosures and Extrinsic Investments are resources that previously did not feature in the relationship, but are now closely associated with it. Tangibles include possession bought together (e.g. a car), mutual friends acquired since the relationship began and children. A good example of intangibility is shared memories. All of these factors together contribute to the partners commitment to the relationship and the likelihood of whether or not it will persist.

Question 41

Outline the commitment level in Rusbuldt’s investment model

Answer 41

If a person is committed to a relationship, due to high investments and low quality of alternatives, but is going through a rough patch with a partner (i.e. so aren’t satisfied with the relationship), they will work hard to put things right so the relationship will persist. Therefore they may adopt, knowingly or subconsciously, relationship maintenance mechanisms to get things back on track.

Question 42

Outline the Relationships maintenace mechanisms in Rusbuldt’s investment model

Answer 42

These mechanisms are:

Accommodation – acting in a way that promotes relationships, rather than keeping a tally of costs and rewards.
Willingness to sacrifice – putting partner’s interests first.
Forgiveness – willingness to forgive partner’s mistakes, both minor and serous ones.
Positive illusions – being unrealistically positive about partner’s qualities.
Ridiculing alternatives – minimising the advantages of potential alternatives and viewing them in a negative light.

Question 43

Evaluate Rusbuldt’s investment model

Answer 43

One strength of the Investment model is support from a meta-analysis by Le and Agnew (2003). They reviewed 52 studies which together included about 11,000 participants from five countries. They found that satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment size all predicted relationship commitment. Relationships in which commitment was greatest were the most stable and lasted longest. These outcomes were true for both men and women, across all cultures in the analysis, and for homosexual as well as heterosexual couples. This suggests there is validity to Rusbult’s claim that these factors are universally important features of romantic relationships

However, there may also be methodological issues with the supporting research as it is mainly correlational. Strong correlations have been found between all the important factors predicted by the investment model. For example most of the students in Le and Agnew meta analysis were correlational. However, correlational studies do not allow us to conclude that the factors identified by the model cause commitment in a relationship. It could be that the more committed you feel towards your partner, the more investment you are willing to make in the relationship, so the direction of casualty may be the reverse of that suggested by the model. Therefore it is not clear that the model has identified the causes of commitment rather than factors that are associated with it

There are also difficulties in measuring the variables of the investment model . A particular problem for the investment model is that it is difficult to measure commitment size and the other variables that lead to commitment in the relationship. Rusbult et al have developed the ‘Investment Model Scale’ to overcome this problem in 1998. They have shown this scale to be high in both reliability and validity in the measurement of these variables and shown it to be suitable for a wide variety of different populations. One potential problem is that the scale relies on self-report measures, which often have problems with respondents wishing to present themselves in a good light, therefore it may suffer from social desirability as participants may be answering in relation to demand characteristics Although this raises the possibility of biassed findings from the use of such methods, it would be extremely difficult to measure such a subjective state as commitment in any other way.

Question 44

Define Duck’s stage model of relationship dissolution

Answer 44

Duck’s theory of the breakdown of relationships is a STAGE MODEL i.e. it assumes relationships breakdown over specific stages – the breakdown of a relationship is a PROCESS as opposed to a SINGLE EVENT. It also argues that each stage has a ‘THRESHOLD’ or decision point; the decision a person makes when faced with the threshold influences the course of the relationship.

Question 45

Outline the 5 stages of Duck’s stage model of relationship dissolution

Answer 45

The first phase in this process is the intra-psychic stage. This is when a person admits to himself or herself that they are dissatisfied with their relationship, and they spend a lot of time thinking about the reasons for this dissatisfaction and possible ways forward. This stage focuses on a person’s internal thought process that occurs before confronting the partner. Before a person moves to the next stage, they reach a threshold of thinking ‘I can’t stand this anymore’.

The second phase, called dyadic, occurs when a person confronts their partner and voices their dissatisfaction. At this stage there are a lot of complaints coming from the partner initiating the break-up; common complaints involve a partner’s commitment to relationships. The dissatisfied partner also rethinks the alternatives to their current relationships. The threshold that is reached at this stage is: ‘I would be justified in withdrawing’.

If, up to this point, the couple generally kept their disagreements private, at the next phase they involve friends and relatives and make their distress public. This is the social phase of relationship breakdown. According to Duck, once the conflict reaches this stage, it is more difficult for a couple to mend their relationship: friends and family will take sides, intervene in the couple’s relationship and offer advice, which makes reconciliation much more problematic. The threshold at this stage is ‘I mean it’. The social phase usually leads to the dissolution of the relationship.

Having left their partner, both sides construct their version of why their relationship broke down, usually minimising their faults and maximising their partner’s, but at the same time trying to show themselves as trustworthy and loyal in order to attract a new partner. This process is called ‘grave-dressing’, signifying the closure of the previous relationship and readiness to start a new one. The threshold here is, unsurprisingly, ‘It’s time to start a new life’.

In 2006, Duck and his colleague Rollie proposed an addition to the model: the resurrection phase. They suggested that at this stage people move beyond the pain and distress associated with ending the relationship, and experience personal growth.

Question 46

Evaluate Duck’s breakdown model of relationships

Answer 46

A Strength is that the stage models of relationship breakdown like Duck’s do have practical applications. Especially in relation to couple’s counselling. Couples may be advised to use different strategies depending on the phase they are currently in. For example for a person in the itnra-physic phase it may be more useful to shift their attention to the positive aspects of their pattern’s personality, while for a couple in the dyadic phase communication about dissatisfaction and ways to balance is crucial. This shows that Duck’s model of relationship breakdown can be used successful to help couples contemporary break-up to improve their relationships are stay together

Studying the breakdown of relationships is sensitive and can have serious ethical issues. Due to these ethical constraints, this theory is based largely on retrospective data, which is a problem. Evidence to support Duck’s model is gained largely through retrospective self-reports and interviews. Retrospective data is unreliable and potentially not valid as it relies on a person’s memory and subjective account. The reports cannot be checked and may be exaggerated or influenced by demand characteristics such as social desirability (i.e. only reporting what is expected or accepted). This means we have to question the validity of Duck’s model as people may not be accurately reporting how their relationships actually broke down.

A further weakness is that this theory can be accused of being culturally biassed. This theory could be argued to be ethnocentric as it is based on research into western relationships and therefore may only apply to typical western relationships in individualistic cultures like the UK. It is unlikely that the same processes can apply to relationships in different cultures. For example, in collectivist cultures (where the contribution of the relationship to wider social group is emphasised) the individual may talk about their problems with their family or other members of the social group before they talk about the problems to their partner; they may do this because they need to judge the potential negative effect of the relationship breaking down on the social group and not just judge it in terms of their personal circumstances. Because of this, Duck’s theory may not apply beyond the Western culture in which it was developed.

Question 47

Define virtual relationships in social media

Answer 47

Virtual relationships are defined a as computer mediated communication (CMC) which includes a variety of electronic communication such as emails, chatrooms and social media like Instagram and facebook

Question 48

Outline how self disclosure may help increase self disclosure in online relationships

Answer 48

Jourard (1971) proposed the concept of ‘broadcasting self-disclosure’ to explain the difference between disclosure to a romantic partner and the sharing of personal information in a public situation. Jourard claimed that self-disclosure in the public domain involves presenting an ‘edited’ version of the self to others. Individuals using social network such as Facebook exercise different levels of self-disclosure depending on whether they are presenting information publicly or privately. People therefore feel more secure about disclosing intimate and sensitive information in private (including private messaging) because of the
increased control over disclosure to a selected individual.

Question 49

Outline anonymity in increasing self disclosure in online relationships

Answer 49

Most explanations for the high levels of self-disclosure in Internet relationships compared to FtF
relationships have focused on the psychological effects of anonymity. Individuals do not usually engage in self-disclosure with one another until they are confident that what they disclose remains confidential, and would not be leaked to mutual acquaintances. The dangers of this type of self-disclosure in FtF interactions are that confidentiality might be violated or the other person might respond negatively to the disclosure, leading to ridicule or rejection. The relative anonymity of Internet interactions greatly reduces the risks of such disclosure because people can share their inner thoughts and feelings with much less fear of disapproval and sanction from the other person. In this way, self-disclosures with online acquaintances are similar to the ‘strangers on a train’
phenomenon (Rubin, 1975).

Question 50

Outline the strangers on a train study in the argument that online relationships increase self disclosure

Answer 50

‘Strangers on a train’- In the 1970s, psychologist Zaik Rubin carried out a series of studies where
confederates disclosed personal information about themselves to a complete stranger on trains, in airport lounges or when standing at bus stops. He discovered that when confederates disclosed intimate details of their lives to a stranger they were often met with a reciprocal self-disclosure from the stranger.

Question 51

Outline the hyper personal model in online relationships

Answer 51

Walther (1996, 2011) proposed the hyperpersonal model of virtual relationships, suggesting that, as self-disclosure in online relationships happens earlier than in face-to-face ones, 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 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 conversation have more time to ‘edit’ their responses to present themselves in a more positive light; Walther calls this ‘selective self-presentation’. Projecting a positive image will then make an online partner want to disclose more personal information, increasing the intensity of the relationship.

Question 52

Outline an opposing view that online relationships do reduce self disclosure in relationships

Answer 52

However, Sproull and Kiesler (1986) suggested that online relationships might be less open and honest than face-to-face ones, because in real life we are relying on a lot of subtle cues, such as facial expressions and tone of voice, and these cues are absent in virtual communications (Reduced Cues Theory). According to this theory, reduction in communication cues 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 may fear becoming victims of verbal violence.

Question 53

Evaluate Self disclosure in virtual relationships in social media

Answer 53

A biological basis for SELF-DISCLOSURE in SOCIAL MEDIA has been found, adding support to the role of self-disclosure in online relationships. Tamir & Mitchell (2012) found evidence of a biological basis for the motivation to self-disclose on social media. They found increased MRI activity in two brain regions that are associated with reward, the nucleus accumbens and the ventral tegmental area. These areas were strongly activated when people were talking about themselves, and less so when they were talking about someone else online. Tamir & Mitchell also found that participants in their study experienced a greater sensation of pleasure when sharing their thoughts with a friend or family member, and less pleasure when they were told their thoughts would be best kept private. These findings suggest that the human tendency to share out personal experiences with others over social media may arise from the rewarding nature of self-disclosure.

One can argue that there is a lack of support for the hyper-personal model as challenged by Ruppert et al (2017). They carried out a meta analysis of 25 studies that compared self-disclosures in FTF and virtual interactions. They found that self-report studies showed that the frequency, breadth and depth of self-disclosures were all greater in FTF relationships. On the other hand experimental studies showed no significant differences between FTF and virtual relationships in terms of self-disclosure. This contradicts the hyper personal model’s view that the greater intimacy of virtual relationships should lead to more and deeper self-disclosures than in FtF relationships

One limitation of reduced cues theory is that online nonverbal cues are different rather than absent. Walther and Tidwell (1995) point out that people in online interactions use other cues, such as style and timing and messages. For instance, taking time to reply to a social media status update may be a more intimate act than an immediate response. But taking too much time could be interpreted as a snub. So there are nuances in virtual relationships that are just as subtle as in FtF relationships. Acronyms, emoticons and emojis can all be used as effective substitutes for facial expressions and tone of voice. This is hard for reduced cues theory to explain because it means virtual relationships can be just as personal as FtF ones

Question 54

Define the absence of gating in virtual relationships

Answer 54

Absence of gating refers to the way that virtual relationships are relatively anonymous. People are unable to use physical features such as attractiveness or age when considering whether or not they wish to form a relationship with someone else online. Therefore, the ‘gates’, which are potential barriers that might limit the opportunities for shy or less attractive individuals, are removed (absent) online.

Question 55

Outline the absence of gating in virtual relationships

Answer 55

Another difference between online and face-to-face interactions is absence of gating. In real life, our attraction to other people is greatly influenced by their appearance, mannerisms and factors such as age and ethnicity, limiting our choice of potential partners. In virtual interactions, however, these barriers (‘gates’) are absent; this creates more opportunities for shy and less attractive people to develop romantic relationships. Even when these factors are discovered later, when relationships move from virtual to the face-to-face phase, they rarely decrease an already-developed attraction, as a result of the feeling of intimacy brought by more open self-disclosure.

Zhao et al (2008) found that online social networks such as Facebook can empower ‘gated’ individuals to present the identities they hope to establish but are unable to in face- to-face situations. This reduction of gating obstacles also allows people to ‘stretch the truth’ a bit in their efforts to project a self that is more socially desirable than their ‘offline’ identity.

Question 56

Outline the Absence of gating in action in virtual relationships

Answer 56

Yurchisin et al (2005) interviewed 11 online daters and found that these individuals tended to give accounts of both their real and better selves in dating profiles as a way of attracting potential partners.

Some interviewees even admitted that they would steal another daters ideas or copy peoples images as a way of making themselves more popular. Yurchisin did however find that most online identities were still close to the person’s true identity in order to avoid unpleasant surprises in real life encounter

Question 57

Evaluate the absence of gating in virtual relationships in social media

Answer 57

There is a range of evidence which offers a degree of support for absence of gating and its importance in online relationships. Mckenna & Bargh (2000) looked at computer-mediated communication used by lonely and socially anxious people. They found that such people were able to express their ‘true selves’ more than in FtF situations. Of the romantic relationships that formed online, 70% survived more than 2 years and this is a higher position than for relationships formed in the online world. This suggests that the absence of gating allows individuals to overcome inhibitory or social anxiety and express themselves more authentically

Furthermore, research has suggested that FACEBOOK helps shy people have BETTER QUALITY FRIENDSHIPS and so shows the STRENGTH OF THE ABSENCE OF GATING beyond online romance
Baker & Oswald (2010) argue that virtual relationships are particularly helpful for shy people. Through social media sites like Facebook, shy people are able to overcome the barriers (gates) they face when trying to form relationships in real life. To test whether shy people really do benefit from Internet use, Baker & Oswald surveyed 207 make and female students about their shyness, Facebook usage and the quality of their friendships. For students who scored high for shyness, greater use of Facebook was associated with higher perceptions of friendship quality. In contrast, for those who scored low for shyness, Facebook usage was not associated with perception of friendship quality. This finding demonstrated that shy individuals (therefore ‘gated’) find particular value in virtual relationships.

Question 58

Define and outline parasocial relationships in virtual relationships in social media

Answer 58

Parasocial relationships are one-sided relationships that occur with media personalities outside of an individual’s real social network, generally without the personality’s knowledge, such as with hero worship of a celebrity. Parasocial encounters occur when individuals experience a media personality through media presentations, such as on a TV show.

Question 59

Outline the levels of parasocial relationships

Answer 59

Giles and Maltby (2006) identified three levels of celebrity worship, using the Celebrity Attitude Scale in a large-scale survey.

Stage 1 Entertain – Social: Giles and Maltby suggest that most people engage in parasocial relationships at some point in their lives, but most stay at the first level (Entertainment – Social), where celebrities are seen as a source of entertainment and as a topic for lighthearted gossips with friends. This is the least intense level of celebrity worship.

Stage 2 Intense – Personal: This is a deeper level of parasocial relationships. At this level a person has a more intense relationship with a celebrity. For example, they may see them as a soulmate and they have an intense interest in the celebrity’s personal life, such as their dress sense, food they like and entertainment in which they take part. This type of parasocial relationship is typical for teenagers who seem to be obsessed with every little detail of their favourite celebrity’s lifestyle.

Stage 3 Borderline pathological: This is the most intense level of parasocial relationships. At this level, a person takes celebrity worship to an extreme, has obsessive fantasies about the celebrity, spends large sums of money to obtain memorabilia and may engage in illegal activities such as stalking. At this level, it is also usual for people to believe that if only they were given a chance to meet their favourite celebrity in person, their feelings would be reciprocated.

Question 60

Outline the absorption addiction model in parasocial relationships

Answer 60

McCutcheon (2002) proposed the Absorption-Addiction Model to explain parasocial relationships. She suggests that people engage in celebrity worship to compensate for some deficiencies in their life, such as difficulty forming intimate relationships, poor psychological adjustment and lack of identity. Forming parasocial relationships with a celebrity allows them to achieve the fulfilment they lack in everyday life and adds a sense of purpose and excitement.

The absorption-addiction model has two components:
Absorption which is seeking fulfilment in celebrity worship motivates an individual to focus their attention as far as possible an the celebrity
Addiction - Just as with psychological addiction to a psychoactive substance the individual needs to increase their dose in order to gain satisfaction this may lead to more extreme behaviour and delusional thinking

Question 61

Outline how an absorption moves to an addiction in a parasocial relationships

Answer 61

Lange et al suggests, similar to what is stated above, that for some adolescents, an introverted
nature, an especially difficult circumstance, and a lack of meaningful relationships may leas them to
become increasingly ‘aborbed’ by the lives of these ‘parasocial friends’; or an individual who feels

They are a low achiever may become fantatical about a media personality who is perceived
successful, in doing so they hope to ‘absorb’ some of the success. If the level of absorption is high enough, the person may move onto higher levels of parasocial interaction, with the motivation driving the absorption may eventually become addictive, and an individual’s behavior may become more extreme. This can even result in a person becoming delusional in order to sustain the satisfaction felt by the parasocial interaction, and can even result in criminal behaviours, such as celebrity stalking, or the illusion they’re in an intimate relationship with the
celebrity.

Question 62

Evaluate the absorption addiction model of parasocial relationships

Answer 62

There is a range of supporting evidence which offers a degree of support for the absorption addiction model. Maltby et al. (2005) measured the relation between celebrity worship and body image in teenagers. They found that teenage girls who were at the intense-personal level of celebrity worship tended to have a poor body image, especially if they particularly admired a celebrity’s physical appearance. This is important as it helps us predict for those who are at risk of developing an eating disorder. This could help us identify and intervene with those with ED’s. This makes the absorption addiction model and identifying with parasocial relationships useful in identifying mental health issues. They have found a relationship between poor body image and parasocial relationships. It weakens the validity of the absorption addiction model

There is a range of SUPPORTING EVIDENCE which helps understand MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS
Maltby et al (2003) used the Eysenck personality questionnaire to assess the relationships between parasocial relationship level and personality. The following associations were found:Entertainment Social = Extraversion (socialable, lively), Intense Personal = Neuroticism (tense, emotional, moody) (Neuroticism is also linked to depression and anxiety) and Borderline Pathological = Psychoticism (anti social, ego centric). As neuroticism and psychoses are related to mental helath disorders, this provides an explanation of why higher levels of parasocial relationship are associated with poor mental health. This research therefore confirms the prediction of the absorption-addiction model that there is a correlation between the level of celebrity worship and poor psychological functioning.

HOWEVER, the absorption-addiction model has faced criticism as a valid explanation
The model has been criticised for being a better description of parasocial relationships than it is an explanation. For instance, the model is capable of describing characteristics of people who are most absorbed and addicted to a celebrity, but unlike attachment theory, it does not explain in detail why such characteristics develop and exactly what causes progression through the stages.

Question 63

Outline the attachment theory explanations in the parasocail relationships

Answer 63

Other psychologists use Bowlby’s attachment theory and Ainsworth’s types of attachment to explain celebrity worship. Bowlby’s theory predicts that individuals who didn’t form a strong bond with a primary caregiver in early childhood will try to find an attachment substitute as adults, and engaging in parasocial relationships allows them to do so.

Moreover, according to the description of attachment types described by Ainsworth suggest that individuals who formed insecure-resistant relationships with their caregiver in early childhood will be more likely to form parasocial relationships, as they are too afraid of the criticism and rejection that are a part of real life relationships. As was demonstrated by Ainsworth’s findings in Strange Situation study, insecure-resistant children were very clingy to their mothers, showed less explorative behaviour than children of other types, as they didn’t feel safe enough to leave a parent, and showed great distress when their mother left the room.

According to Hazan and Shaver, this behaviour translates into clingy and jealous behaviour in adulthood, making it difficult for such people to developed committed and lasting romantic relationships. Intensive celebrity worship allows them to engage in fantasy about the perfect relationship, without heartbreak and rejection.

Question 64

Evaluate the attachment theory in parasocial relationships

Answer 64

There is RESEARCH SUPPORT for a link between PARASOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS and ATTACHMENT STYLE. An Israeli study (Cohen, 2004) lends support to the claim that viewers would show the same negative response to a loss of a parsocial relationship as they would the loss of a real relationship. A sample of 381 adults completed questionnaires, including questions about their relationships with their favourite TV characters, how they would react if those characters were taken off air, and their attachment styles. Viewers expecting to lose their favourite characters anticipated negative reactions (e.g. feelings of sadness, anger, loneliness) similar to those experiences after the loss of close personal relationships. These reactions were related both to the intensity of the PSR with the favourite character and to the viewers’ attachment style, with insecure-resistant attached participants anticipating the most negative responses. This research supports the role of attachment style with the likelihood of developing a PSR.

There is research support for a link between parasocial relationships and attachment style. Kienlan et al (1997) found that 63% of stalkers experienced a loss of primary caregivers during childhood, usually due to parental separation, while more than 50% reported childhood emotional, physical or sexual abuse by primary caregivers. This supports the idea that disturbed attachment, patterns are related to extreme forms of parasocial relationships.

Parasocial relationships occur in many cultures and have cultural similarities. When watching a film or reading a book, viewers (or readers) must interpret and evaluate the content based on their own cultural environment. Schmid and Klimmt (2011) investigated whether there would be differences in the PSRs formed with the fictional character Harry Potter in two contrasting cultures. They studied Germany, an individualistic culture that stresses individuality over loyalty to the group, and
Mexico, a collectivist culture where the individual is more deeply involved in the social group. Despite differences between cultures, the researchers found fans from Mexico and fans from Germany displayed very similar patterns of parasocial interactions with Harry Potter and the other characters in the franchise. Their online survey revealed that fans from both cultures admired Harry potter, demonstrating the universal influence of mainstream media characters.