RELATIONSHIPS Flashcards
sexual selection
a type of natural selection (partner preference). Attributes or behaviours that increase reproductive success are passed on to aid reproductive success drive evolution
anisogamy
the difference between male and female sex cells.
male gamete
sperm - doesnt require much energy, vast numbers, lifetime
female gamete
ova/egg cells - large, produced at intervals, limited no. of fertile years
inter-sexual selection
between the sexes - strategies that a male uses to select a female or visa versa (women = quality, fit,height)
studies that support inter-sexual selection
Trivers(1972) - female makes greater investment so chosy as concequences of the wrong choice worse for female. Both chosy as lose invest rescources.
sexy sons hypothesis
Refers to when a female mates with a male who has a desirable characteristic, this ‘sexy’ trait is inherited by her son. Increases the likelihood that succeessive generaions of females will mate with her offspring
what is intra-sexual selection
within each sex - the strategies used between makes to be the one selected ( males seek quantity, unlimited sperm. Compete for fertile females)
EX. FOR PP - RS FOR INTER-SEXUAL SELECTION
-75% of men agreed to sexual request from women, 0% of women agreed to males request (Clark et al 1989)
- supports view (women choiser)
EX. FOR PP - RS FOR INTRA
- 10,000 adults questioned in 33 countries, men seek signs of reproductive capacity (youth), women want resources (Buss 1989)
- consistent sex differences, predictions right
EX. FOR PP - SOCIAL + CULTURAL INFLUENCES UNDERESTIMATED
- Rapid changes in partner preferences due to changing social norms like contraception etc (Bercezkei 1997)
- pp today are an outcome of evolutionary + cultural influences. Theory doesnt account for that = limited
self-disclosure
revealing personal information about yourself.
In relationships partners reveal more about their true selves as relationship develops, can strengthen relationship when used appropriately.
describe the social penetration theory
Altman + Taylor’s (1973) - how relationships develop. Gradually reveal your inner self to someone else (deepest thoughts + feelings).
involves RECIPROCAL EXCHANGE of information between intimate partners.
This displays trust for the relaionship to go further other person must also reveal sensitive info.
explain breadth + depth
We disclose superficial (low risk) info at the start of a relationship as too much info can put relationship in jepordy before it has developed. As it develops self disclosure becomes deeper leading to high risk info coming out as relationship progresses (true self revealed)
what is reciprocity of self-disclosure
disclosure must be returned, not just breadth + depth (REIS+SHAVER 1988)
Balance of self disclosure between partners increases intimacy + deepens relationship
AO3:SD - RESEAECH SUPPORT
- positive correlation between satisfaction + self disclosure (Sprecher+Hendrick), especially when partners take turns
- support findings so increases validity of theory
AO3:SD- REAL WORLD APPLCATION
- 57% of homosexual men + women said they use self-disclosure as maintainance stratergy, a skill that can be learnt (Haas + Stafford)
- shows psychological insight can be valuable in helping people who are having problems with their relationship
AO3:SD- CULTRAL DIFFERENCES
- less sexual self-disclosure in collectivist cultures abt sexual thoughts but experience the same satisfaction (Tang - US v China)
- based on findings from western cultures = not generalisable to other cultures
why is physical attractiveness so important?
symmetrical face is attractive because its an honest sign of genetic fitness. Baby faces are (wide eyes) trigger caring instinct (Larsen) both naturally selected
what is the halo effect
we have positive stereotypes of physically attractive ppl + assume they possess other positive characteristics (Dion et al)
what is the matching hypothesis
Walster + Walster 1969 - suggests we look for partners who are a similar level of attractiveness to us instead of choosing more attractive ppl
what was the procedure of the matching hypothesis
computer dance study (paired ppl up) - no support as chose most attractive (Walster et al) but supported by Berscheid et al replicated study but ppts chose partners (chose similar lvl of attractiveness)
AO3: PA - RS FOR HALO EFFECT
- Palmer + Peterson (2012) attractive ppl rated more politically competent, implications for poitics
- suggests there are dangers for democracy if politicans are judged based off looks
AO3: PA - EVOLUTIONARY EXPLAINATION
- some female features (small nose/large eyes) considered attractive across all cultures, sexual selection (Cunningham 1995)
- the importance of pa makes sense at an evolutionary lvl
AO3: PA - RESEARCH CHALLENGING MATCHING HYPOTHESIS
- online dating choices tend to go for more physically attractive ppl (Taylor)
- undermines validity of matching hypothesis as it contradicts the central prediction abt matching attractiveness
filter theory definition
how relationships form and develop
what is the first level of filter and explain it
social demography - a wide range of factors which influence the chances of potential partners meeting each other in the first place ( ethnic group, proximity, lvl of education, social class)
what is the 2nd lvl of filter and explain it
similarity in attitudes - partners who share our basic values (attractive) in early stages, tend to discount available individuals who differ in attitudes
Kerckhoff + Davis (1962)
compared the attitudes + personalities of student couples in short term (18months) + long term. Found that there are several criteria’s used to chose a partner
what is social demography + give examples
factors that influence the chance of people meeting in the first place.
eg, proximity, level of education, social class, religion
what is similarity in attitudes + give examples
where people tend to view others as more attractive if they share the same core beliefs + values. Particularly in the early stages of a relationship.
eg, views on career + importance of family
what is complementarity + give examples
Partner has traits that the other lacks, helping each other fulfil their need. Present in Long term couples. adds depth to the relationship
eg, ones dominant, the others submissive
FILTER THEORY - RESEARCH SUPPORT
- similarity linked with closeness in early stages, complimentary aft 18 months (Kerckoff + Davis) questionaire
- failure to replicate because of social changes + assumption that duration of relationship meant that relationship was ‘deeper’ (Levinger)
explain rewards, costs + profits
Thibault + Kelley(1959) compared behaviour in a relationship to economics. MINIMAX PRINCIPLE - maximise rewards, minimise costs.
describe comparison level
the amount of reward you believe you deserve. We consider a relationship worth pursuing if CL is high.
describe comparison level alternative
provides wider context for our current relationship (eg social media).
- SET predicts we stay in our relationship ONLY while believing it’s more rewarding than alternatives
DUCK (1994)
the cost of our current relationship outweighs the rewards, alternatives become more attractive.
what are the stages of relationship development
- sampling - experimenting rewards + costs
- bargaining - negotiating + identifying what is most profitable
- commitment - cost + rewards become more predictable
- institutionalisation - partners settled as norms of relationships firmly established
DUCK’S PHASE MODEL - Strength Real world application
- model provides strategies to reverse the breakdown. Duck (1994) ppl in infra-psychic phase focus on positive aspects of partner rather than negative
- (useful for partners/counsellors)
DUCK’S PHASE MODEL - LIMITATION - Incomplete model
- 5th resurrection phase added (partners apply what they learnt to new relationships), partners may return to earlier phases (Duck + Rollie)
what is deindividuation?
reduction in a person’s sense of individual identity.
what is the reduced cues theory
…
what is the hyperpersonal model
…
explain the absence of gating
Gate - any obstacle to forming a relationship (eg shyness, stammer)
Benefits+Drawbacks
Allows person to be their true self but permits a fake persona to deceive (eg changing gender,age, personality)
AO3 - VR - LACK OF SUPPORT FOR REDUCED CUES
- online cues are different rather than absent
- Virtual relationships still involve cues (eg. timing, emojis) so emotional states can still be expressed Walther (1995)
- means vr can be just as personal as ftf ones
AO3 - VR - LACK OF SUPPORT FOR THE HYPERPERSONAL MODEL
- grater self-disclosure ftf than in vr in self-report studies, or no difference in experimental studies (Ruppel et al 2017)
- contradicts hyperpersonal models view
AO3 - VR - SUPPORT FOR THE ABSENCE OF GATING
- 71% of relationships formed online by shy ppl still going aft 2 years (McKenna + Bargh 2000) compared to 49% formed offline (Davis et al)
- suggests shy ppl benefit online because the gating affecting ftf relationships is absent in vr
what is intra-sexual selection
within each sex - the stratergies used between makes to be the one selected
AO3: PA - RS FOR HALO EFFECT
- Palmer + Peterson (2012) attractive ppl rated more politically competent, implications for poitics
- suggests there are dangers for democracy if politicans are judged based off looks
define a parasocial relationship
those which are similar to ‘normal’ relationships but lack a key element. One sided relationships usually w/ a celeb where the ‘fan’ spends a lot of emotional energy, commitment + time
what are the levels of parasocial relationships
Maltby (2006) identified 3 lvls of a parasocial relationship: entertainment social, intense personal and borderline pathological.
describe the level entertainment social
- least intense lvl
- celeb is viewed as sources of enteertainment + fuel for social interaction
describe the intense personal level
intermediate lvl. Reflects greater personal involvement in para social rel w/ celeb. Eg considering them to be your ‘soulmate’
describe the level boardeline pathological
strongest lvl. features uncontrollable fantasies + extreme beh. Eg. Willingness to perform illegal acts on celeb (going to their house)
explain the absorption addiction model
Escape from reality, triggered by stress (ppl with low self esteem + lack of fulfilment in everyday rel) A fan absorbs themselves in the celebs world then needs to increase their does (like addiction to drug)
(McCutcheon)
what is absorption
Seeking fulfilment in celebrity worship motivates an individual to focus their attention on celeb to become preoccupied + identify w/ them
what is addiction
Individual needs to increase their dose to gain satisfaction. May lead to more extreme beh like delusional thinking. Eg stalking celeb and thinking their manager is stopping the rel from happening
explain the attachment explaination of parasocial relationships
Resistant types most likely to form para rel as adults bc they seek to have unfulfilled needs met but in a rel not accompanied by the threat of rejection, breakup, disappointment that real rel bring. Avoidant prefer to avoid pain + rejection altogether whether social or para social
AO3: PS - RS FOR LEVELS
-McCutcheon found a link between parasocial intensity + anxiety in intimate relationships
- suggests ‘celeb-worshippers’ can be classified into 3 catergories which are preddictive of actual behaviour
AO3: PS - SUPPORT FOR ABSORPTION ADDICTION MODEL
- Maltby found females para rel w/ celeb fem whose bodies they admired
- Correlations between lvl of celeb worship + poor psychological functioning (eg body image)
- supports models prediction
AO3: PS - UNIVERSAL TENDANCY
- insecure attachment linked to parasocial relationships across cultures (Dinka et al) collectivist v individualist
- insecure attatchment most likely to form a para rel
- supports attatchment type may be a universal explaination for the need to form parasocial relationship
—- no link between attachment (in)security + forming para social relationships (McCutcheon)
