relationships

Question 1

what is the social exchange theory

Answer 1

romantic partners exchange gains and costs. a committed relationship is when reward exceeds costs and potential alternatives are less attractive than the current relationship

Question 2

SET rewards, costs and profits

Answer 2

thibault and Kelley (1959) said that behaviour in relationships reflect the economic assumptions of exchange. in a relationship we want to minimise costs and maximise gains. (the minimax principles)

Question 3

SET rewards and costs are subjective

Answer 3

what one person considers to be significant may be considered less valuable by the another. what is seen as valuable now may not be seen as valuable in the future

Question 4

SET rewards example

Answer 4

companionship, sex, emotional support

Question 5

SET costs example

Answer 5

time, stress, energy

Question 6

SET what is the comparison level? (CL)

Answer 6

one way we measure the profit in a relationship. it is essentially the amount of reward that you believe you deserve to get.

Question 7

SET (CL) influences

Answer 7

from experiences of previous relationships, social norms (movies) that determine what is widely considered to be reasonable level of reward

Question 8

SET (CL) self-esteem theory

Answer 8

someone with low self-esteem will have low CL and therefore will be satisfied with gaining just a small profit from a relationship (vise versa)

Question 9

SET what are comparison level for alternatives (CLalt)

Answer 9

predicts that we will stay in our current relationship only so long as we believe it is more rewarding than alternatives.

Question 10

SET Duck (1994)

Answer 10

‘the CLalt we adopt will depend on the state of our current relationship. if the costs in our current relationship outweigh the rewards, then alternatives become more attractive.’

Question 11

SET the four stages of relationship development

Answer 11

sampling stage
bargaining stage
commitment stage
institutionalisation stage

Question 12

SET AO3 - direction of cause and effect

Answer 12

dissatisfaction sets in when we suspect costs overweigh rewards or that alt is more attractive. Argyle said we only measure costs and rewards / attractiveness and alt if we are dissatisfied in relationship. thus, dissatisfaction comes first: miller found that people who rated themselves to be in a committed relationship spent less time looking at people.

Question 13

what is the equity theory?

Answer 13

criticises the SET as it fails to consider the need that most people desire equity in relationship.

Question 14

the role of equity

Answer 14

Walster et al - fairness, level of profits must be roughly the same.
if not then someone over/under benefits, leaving the under benefited unhappy and angry and over benefited feeling guilt and shame

Question 15

equity and equality

Answer 15

its about the fairness of the ratio rather than the size or number of costs/ rewards.
satisfying relationships are marked by negotiations to ensure equity, rewards are distributed fairly.

Question 16

two types of consequences of inequity

Answer 16

changes in perceived equity

dealing with inequity

Question 17

changes in perceived equity

Answer 17

Dissatisfaction is caused when there’s a change in the level of perceived equity as time goes on. may be natural to have more costs at the beginning but as time go on it may not be as satisfying than previously.

Question 18

dealing with inequity

Answer 18

the more unfair it feels, the harder they will work to restore equity - what was seen as a definite cost is now seen as the norm.

Question 19

equity theory AO3 research support

Answer 19

Utne, self-report study of 118 recent married couples, finding that couples considered their relationship as equitable were more satisfied than people who saw themselves over/under benefiting. therefore increases validity.

Question 20

equity theory AO3 individual differences

Answer 20

huseman et al suggests that people are less sensitive to equity than others. people are described as benevolent (prepared to have more costs than gains) and entitled (expect gains to outweigh and wouldn’t feel guilty over it). therefore equity is not necessarily important in romantic relationships and isn’t a universal law of social interaction.

Question 21

equity theory AO3 can be seen as culture bias

Answer 21

although there a link between equity and satisfaction, a study where couples from a collectivist culture (favour over benefitting) were compared to an individualist culture. (favour equity).

Question 22

Rusbults investment model (overview)

Answer 22

emphasises importance of commitment depending on three factors:

• satisfaction level
• comparison with alternatives
• investment size

Question 23

satisfaction and comparison with alternatives (key definitions)

Answer 23

• satisfaction: extent romantic partners feel rewards exceed costs
• comparison w alt: the judgement on partner and if they’d bring more rewards and fewer costs
• satisfying relationship: profitable and each partner is generally satisfied if they’re getting more from it

Question 24

investment size AO1

Answer 24

• the importance of resources and the resources we will lose if relationship ends
• rusbult et al proposes ‘intrinsic investments and extrinsic investments’
  size of investment increases when satisfaction is high, confidently predict the partners will be more committed

Question 25

intrinsic investments

Answer 25

resources directly put into the relationship e.g., money, possessions
can also be resources less easy to quantify e.g. energy, disclosure

Question 26

extrinsic investments

Answer 26

any resources that don’t feature in the relationship

e.g. buying stuff together or children

Question 27

satisfaction vs commitment AO1

Answer 27

• commitment is seen as main psychological factor
• this is important because it tells us why dissatisfied people stay in relationships
• they’re committed because they made an investment that they don’t want to see go to waste

Question 28

relationship maintenance mechanisms AO1

Answer 28

• commitment expresses itself in everyday maintenance behaviours
• rustbelts model argues that enduring partners don’t retaliate, rather they act to promote the relationship, easily forgiving their transgressions
• cognitive element: unrealistic positive alternatives in their own relationship and negative tempting alternatives for others relationships.

Question 29

investment model explains abusive relationships AO3

Answer 29

rusbult and Marta studied ‘battered’ women at a shelter and found that those most likely to return to an abusive partner reported making greatest investments and had fewest attractive alternatives
investment model recognises that a victim of IPV doesn’t have to be satisfied with a relationship to stay in it

Question 30

meta-analysis supports model AO3

Answer 30

Agnew et al
meta-analysis
52 studies (11K ppts from 5 diff countries)
all 3 factors predicted committed relationships
findings true for both genders, all cultures, homo and hetero couples

Question 31

model oversimplified investments AO3

Answer 31

goodfriend and agnew
more to invest than resources
early stages may not have more investments (may not live together)
ppl motivated to commit to cherished future plans

Question 32

Duck’s phase model of breakdown - summary

Answer 32

‘the ending of a relationship is not one-off event but a process that takes time and goes through distinct phases’

each phase is marked by one or both partners reaching a ‘threshold’: the point their perception of relationship changes

Question 33

Phase 1 (ducks model)

Answer 33

intra-psychic phase

threshold - ‘cant stand this anymore’
cognitive processing occurs, dissatisfied partner thinks on their dissatisfaction
tell a trusted friend
weigh up pros and cons, evaluate these against alts

Question 34

Phase 2 (ducks model)

Answer 34

dyadic phase
threshold ‘I’m justified with withdrawing’
interpersonal processes between partners, no longer avoid talking about it
confrontations occur, characterised by anxiety, hostility and lack of equity
two outcomes - desire to repair, determination to break up

Question 35

Phase 3 (ducks model)

Answer 35

social phase
threshold ‘I mean it’
wider processes (social networks, publicity)
partners seek support (choosing sides)
friends reassure, support other judge, blame
may help repair or reveal secrets
at this point, no return

Question 36

Phase 4 (ducks model)

Answer 36

grave-dressing phase
threshold ‘its inevitable’
phase of aftermath
partners creates stories
maintaining a positive reputation, showing them in a bad light
gossip important - each partner retains ‘social credit’ blaming each other
‘time to get a new life’

Question 37

Duck phase model AO3

methodological issues

Answer 37

most research is retrospective - puts give experiences some time after relationship has ended. recall may not be accurate or reliable. early stages of breakdown tend to be distorted; impossible to study. researchers reluctant to be involved early if they make things worse. thus ignores this early part of process

Question 38

Ducks phase model AO3

description rather than explanation

Answer 38

Flemlee’s fatal attraction hypothesis ‘the causes of breakdown can be found in the attractive qualities that brought partners together’ - relationship is threatened by partners getting too much of what they’re looking for
sense of humour may turn into he can’t take anything seriously

Question 39

Ducks phase model AO3

cultural bias

Answer 39

based on western cultures (USA)
Moghaddam et al ‘relationships in individualist cultures - generally voluntary and frequently come to an end. collectivist
collectivist cultures - obligatory, less easy to end’
lacks generalisability

Question 40

Ducks phase model AO3

real-life applications

Answer 40

helps identify and understand stages, suggests various ways of reversing it. recognises that different repair strategies.
Duck ‘intra-psychic phases encourage to focus on brooding positive aspects of partner
dyadic phase - communication improvements and wider social skills’

Question 41

Virtual relationships

AO1

Answer 41

computer-meditated-communication CMC
methods formed and maintained in relationships
social networking sits (SNSs) eg twitter, instagram

Question 42

self-disclosure AO1 (VR)

Answer 42

sharing personal info eg dreams, thoughts, fears
strengthen relationship, build trust
more SD - anonymity, less embarrassment, time to think about what to say
less SD - worry of blackmailing, trolling, catfishing
crucial feature to FTF (face to face)

Question 43

tow major self-disclosure theories (VR)

Answer 43

reduced cues theory

hyper-personal model

Question 44

reduced cues theory (VR)

Answer 44

CMC relationships lack many cues, thus less effective than FTF eg nonverbal cues (physical appearance)
CMC lacks cues to our emotional state (facial expressions, tone of voice)
VR more likely to involve blunt and aggressive communication

Question 45

hyper-personal model (VR)

Answer 45

Walther - ‘VR more personal, involve greater self-disclosure because its established earlier and more intense/intimate.
Cooper at al - also end quickly, high excitement level of interaction isn’t matched by level of trust, AKA ‘boom-and-bust phenomenon of VR’
selective self-representation - sender of msg more time to manipulate their online image (more control)
anonymity - when yk ppl don’t know ur identity, more likely to self-disclose about yourself to a stranger

Question 46

absence of gating (VR)

Answer 46

McKenna and Bargh: ‘a gate is any obstacle forming a relationship’
FTF interactions are gating in : physical attractiveness, stammer, social anxiety

Question 47

absence of gating: benefits and drawbacks(VR)

Answer 47

most gates are absent: VR can develop to the point where self-disclosure is more frequent and therefor, relationships develops quicker
a benefit: individual is free to be more like themselves although there’s a scope for ppl to create untrue identities (catfishing), deceiving ppl

Question 48

VR AO3:

lack of research for reduced cue theory

Answer 48

theory is wrong to suggest that there’s nonverbal cues entirely missing from CMC as they’re different, rather than absent. research: people online use other cues like style and timing of their msgs eg taking time to reply to a social network status update is often interpreted as more intimate act than immediate and use of acrostics (LOL) emotions and emojis for facial expressions/ tone of voice

Question 49

VR AO3:

research supporting hyper-personal model

Answer 49

model predicts that ppl are motivated to self-disclosure in CMC in ways which are sometimes ‘hyperhonest’ and ‘hyper dishonest’ eg questions asked online tend to be direct which is different to FTF convos (small talk). thus support assumptions of model as the way we self-disclose in CMC relationships is designed to present oursleves in exaggeratedly positive light which aids relationships formation.

Question 50

VR AO3:

support for absence of gating

Answer 50

McKenna and Bargh looked at CMC used by lonely and socially anxious people, finding themselves expressing true self more than FTF interactions. of romantic relationships initially formed online, 70% survived more than two years. this is a higher proportion than relationships formed FTF (offline world)