Relationships Flashcards
Evolutionary explanations for mate preferences
CULTURAL TRADITIONS MAY BE JUST AS IMPORTANT AS EVOLUTIONARY FORCES: Bernstein (2015) points out that gender differences in mate preference patterns might stem from cultural traditions rather than being the result of evolved characteristics, e.g the fact women are denied economic and political power in many cultures might account for their tendency to rely on security and economic resources provided by men. An analysis of 37 cultures (Kassel and Sherma 1999) showed that women valued potential mates’ access to resources far more in those cultures where women’s status and educational opportunities were sharply limited. This suggests although findings in Buss’ study may show evidence of evolutionary forces at work in mate selection, we should not underestimate the role of social and economic factors in establishing mate preference patterns.
FEMALE PREFERENCES FOR HIGH-STATUS MEN MAY NOT BE UNIVERSAL: Buller (2005) claims evolutionary psychologists are mistaken in their claims of a universal female preference for high-status men as mates. He argues that the majority of studies attempting to determine female mate preferences have been carried out on female undergraduate students. These women expect to achieve high educational status and so have expectations of high income levels. The fact that these women prefer high-status men might be explained by a general preference for high status men or it may be better explained in terms of a preference for men with similar interests, education and prospects to their own. As a result, Butler concludes evidence for a universal female mating preference for high-status men is weak or non-existent.
MATE CHOICE IN REAL LIFE: studies such as Buss’s survey of mate choice might suffer from a serious problem of validity as they give us an indication of expressed preferences rather than being a reflection of what actually happens in real life. However, many real life studies also support these mate-choice hypotheses. For example, a study of actual marriages in 29 cultures (Buss, 1989) confirmed men do choose younger women. In addition, some critics suggest that questionnaires such as the ones used in Buss’s study are more valid measures of partner preference than real-life marriage statistics, particularly in cultures where arranged marriages are the norm.
MATE CHOICE AND THE MENSTRUAL CYCLE: Penton-Voak et al (1999) suggests thar female mate choice varies across the menstrual cycle. Typically women choose a slightly feminised version of a male face as ‘most attractive’ for a long-term relationship. A feminised appearance suggests kindness and cooperation in parental care. However, for a short term sexual relationship during the high conception risk phase of the menstrual cycle, the preferred face shape was more masculinised. This suggests possible genetic benefits in producing masculine offspring. However, a more recent meta-analysis (Wood et al 2014) of 58 studies was largely non-supportive of Penton-Voak et al’s study, specifically the claim of a prefernece for masculine males when women were at their most fertile.
Physical attractiveness
SPEED DATING AND THE CHALLENGE TO TRADITIONAL VIEWS OF ATTRACTION: Eastwick and Finkel (2008) claim that although men may value physical attractiveness more than women do when stating their ideal partner preferences, these differences may not predict real-life partner choice. They used evidence from sipped daring and backed this up with procedures 30 days later. Prior to the speed-dating sessions, participants showed traditional sex differences when stating the importance of physical attractiveness (men) and earning prospects (women) in an ideal partner. However, their ideal preferences failed to predict what inspired their actual behaviour at the event. No significant sex differences emerged in the degree to which judgements of targets’ physical attractiveness or earning prospects influenced speed daters’ romantic interest in those targets.
COMPLEX MATCHING: Sprecher and Hatfield (2009) offer an explanation as to 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 charming personality, kindness, status, money and so on. Sprecher and Hatfield refer to this tendency to compensate for a lack of physical attractiveness by offering other desirable traits such as ‘complex matching’. This suggests that people are able to attract partners far more physically attractive than themselves by offering compensatory assets, for example an older, wealthy man may pair with a younger, attractive women.
RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR SEX DIFFERENCES IN IMPORTANCE OF PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS: males with physically attractive partners are more satisfied with their relationship. Meltzer et al (2004) provided support for this claim. They found that objective ratings of wives’ attractiveness were positively related to levels of husbands’ satisfaction at the beginning of the marriage and remained that way over at least the first four years of marriage. In contrast, and supporting the lower importance that females attach to physical attractiveness in a mate, objective ratings of husbands’ physical attractiveness were not related to wives’ marital satisfaction, wither initially or over time.
MATCHING MAY NOT BE THAT IMPORTANT IN INITIAL ATTRACTION: Taylor et al (2011) cast doubt on the value of the matching hypothesis in attraction. In a study of online dating patterns, they found no evidence that daters’ decisions were driven by a similarity between their own and potential partners’ physical attractiveness. Instead they found evidence of an overall preference for attractive partners. This suggests that people do not take their own physical attractiveness into account in the initial stages of attraction, but instead aim for someone more desirable than themselves.
IMPLICATIONS OF SEX DIFFERENCES IN THE IMPORTANCE OF PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS: Meltzer et al (2014) claims that if physical attractiveness plays a stronger role in men’s long-term relationship satisfaction than in women’s, then women may experience increased pressures to maintain their physical attractiveness in order to successfully maintain a long term relationship. However, physical attractiveness is not the only predictor of marital satisfaction for a man. Both men and women also desire partners who are supportive, trustworthy and warm, and those with partners who demonstrate these qualities tend to be more satisfied with their relationship (Pasch and Bradbury, 1998). As a result, less physically attractive women who possess these other qualities tend to have partners who are every bit as satisfied as those with more physically attractive mates.
Self- disclosure
RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR SELF DISCOLSURE: Meta analysis by Collins and Miller (1994) provided research support for importance of self disclosure. They found people who engage in intimate disclosures tend to be liked more than people who disclose at lower levels, and people like others as a result of having disclosed to them. The relationship between disclosure and liking was stronger if the recipient believed that the disclosure was shared only with them rather than being shared indiscriminately with others. This supports the central role that self-disclosure plays in the development and maintenance or romantic relationships.
SELF-DISCLOSURE ON INTERNET ‘BOOM AND BUST’ PHENOMENON: some researchers suggested that relationships formed over the internet involve higher levels of self disclosure and attraction than in face to face relationships. Individuals communicating over the internet are often anonymous, this may lead them to reveal more information about themselves. Cooper and Sportolari (1997) refer to this as ‘boom and bust’ phenomenon. When people reveal more about themselves earlier than they would in a face to face interaction, relationships get intense very quickly (boom). However, because the underlying trust and true knowledge of other person are not there to support the relationship, it becomes difficult to sustain (bust). Cooper and Sportolari suggest this would explain why many individuals who are certain they have found their ‘soulmate’ online may leave an established relationship to meet people who do not turn out to be what they first seemed.
NORMS OF SELF DISCLOSURE RUN DEEP: Tal-Or and Hershman-shitrit (2015) showed relationship between gradual self disclosure and attraction applies not only to real life romantic relationships but also to liking reality TV contestants. Reality shows like big brother tend to be characterised by the very intimate self-disclosure of contestants early on in the shows. This rapid self-disclosure appears to conflict with what happens in everyday interactions, where such intimate self disclosure is welcomed only when it evolves gradually. However, Tal-Or and Hershamn-Shitrift found that, just as in real relationships, viewers preferred those individuals whose self disclosure evolved gradually and then became more intimate.
SELF-DISCLOSURE MAY BE GREATER IN FACE TO FACE THAN ONLINE: Knop et al (2016) challenges the assumption that people self disclose more in online relationships than face to face. This study revealed that members of a social group disclose personal information more often in face to face than online interactions no also disclose more intimate information. The authors suggest this may be due to relative lack of intimacy of internet as a context for personal self disclosure. A person who is disclosing appreciates nonverbal cues such as eye contact and attentive silence of someone they are disclosing to, both of which are absent in the online environment. It appears that individuals do not seize the opportunity to revel personal information online as much as expected, contrary to the belief that people disclose too much personal information via the internet.
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN PATTERNS OF SELF-DISCLOSURE: cults differ in the extent to which various topics are considered appropriate for conversation. In the west, typically people engage in more intimate self disclosure than non-westerners do. Americans, disclose more than Chinese or Japanese do (Chen, 1995). Cultural norms also shape how comfortable men and women are in self-disclosing. For example, Nakanishi (1986) found Japanese women prefer a lower level of personal conversations than Japanese men. This is opposite to the self-disclosure patters typically found in the west, where women prefer more disclosure than men. This suggests the importance of self-disclosure as an aspect of attraction is moderated by influence of culture.
Filter theory
LACK OF RESEARCH SUPPORT: Levinger et al (1970) failed to replicate the results of Kerckhoff and Davis study. In their study 330 couples who were ‘steadily attached’ went through the same procedures and there was no evidence that either similarity of attitudes and values or complementarity of needs influenced progress towards permanence in relationships. They also found no significant relationships between the length of the couples’ relationships and the influence of these different variables. In an attempt to explain why their research failed to replicate Kerckhoff and Davis’ findings, Levinger et al suggests questionnaires used in the original would not have been appropriate given the recent changes in social values and courtship patterns that had occurred in the years between the two studies.
REAL VALLUE OF FILTERING PROCESS: Duck (1973) suggests that the filtering process is important because it allows people to make predictions about their future interactions and so avoid investing in a relationship that ‘wont work’. Each person conducts a series of explorations, disclosing bits of information about themselves and making enquiries about the other person. Based on these exchanges, partners may decide to continue with a relationship or make a decision that it will not work and so end the relationship before becoming too deeply involved with the other person. This suggests, therefore, that the real value of filtering is that it stops people making the wrong choice and then having to live with the consequences.
PERCEIVED SIMILARITY MAY BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN ACTUAL SIMILARITY: although research has generally supported the importance of attitudinal similarity in attraction, it appears to be the perception of similarity that is more important than the actual similarity. Consistent with the assumptions of Kerckhoff and Davis’ second stage of the filtering process, some researchers have suggested that perceived similarity predicts attraction more strongly than does actual similarity (Hoyle, 1993). Tidwell et al (2013) tested this claim in the context of a speed dating event measuring actual and perceived similarity using a questionnaire. Researchers concluded that it was perceived rather than actual similarity that predicted romantic liking for these couples.
COMPLEMENTARITY OF NEEDS MAY NOT BE THAT IMPORTANT: although studies have consistently found support for the ‘similarity-attraction’ aspect of Kerckhoff and Davis’ theory, support for the importance of the complementarity of needs is much scarcer. Dijkstra and Barelds (2008) studied 760 singles on dating site (476 women, 284 men) who were looking for a long term mate. Participants’ personalities were measure and they were then asked to rate personality characteristics they desired in an ideal mate. The researchers found that although initially participants indicated that they desired a complementary partner rather than a similar one, there were strong correlations between their own personality and their idea partner’s personality. This finding lent support to the similarity attraction hypothesis rather than the complementarity of needs hypothesis.
A PROBLEM FOR FILTER THEORY: Kerckhoff and Davis’ filter theory assumes that relationships progresses when partners discover shared attitudes and values with their partner and the possession of needs that complement for their own. However, this may no longer be the case. For example, Thornton and Young-De Marco (2001) found evidence of changed attitudes towards relationships in young American adults over a period of a few decades. This included a weakening of the normative imperative to marry, attitudes towards mothers working outside the home and ore egalitarian attitudes towards gender roles in marriage. They conclude that as attitudes and values are constantly changing over time and that many people are not aware of their partners’ values, needs or role preferences, this weakens the relevance of filtering theory to mate selection.
Social exchange theory
EVIDENCE FOR INFLUENCE OF COMPARISON LEVEL FOR ALTERNATIVES: Sprecher (2001) in a longitudinal study at 101 dating couples at US university, found that the exchange variable most highly associated with relationship commitment was partner’s comparison level for alternatives. The study showed that when the comparison level for alternatives was high, commitment to and satisfaction with, the current relationship tended to be low. This was the case for both males and females. Sprecher suggests this is not surprising as those who lack alternatives are likely to remain committed (and satisfied) and those who are satisfied and committed to their relationship are more likely to devalue alternatives.
THE PROBLEM OF COSTS AND BENEFITS: a problem for social exchange theory is the confusion of what constitutes a cost and a benefit within a relationship. What might be considered rewarding to one person (e.g constant attention and praise) may be punishing to another (e.g it may be perceived as irritating). In addition, what might be seen as a benefit at one stage of the relationship may be seen as a cost at another juncture as partners, may redefine something they previously perceived as rewarding punishing (Littlejohn 1989). This suggests that it is difficult to classify all events in such simple terms as ‘costs’ or ‘benefits’, and challenges the view that all romantic relationships operate in this way.
THE PROBLEM OF ASSESSING VALUE: Nakonezny and Denton (2008) argue that for social exchange to be relevant to personal relationships, individuals must have some way of quantifying the value of costs and benefits in order to assess whether benefits received outweighs costs incurred. They point out that not only is value difficult to determine but so is the relative value of costs and benefits to individuals. This tends not to be the case in commercial and economic relationships, where social exchange theory is more typically applied. The vagueness of terms such as costs and benefits and the difficulty in assessing their value to individuals suggests that this theory is less comfortable explaining more personal (as opposed to commercial) relationships.
OVEREMPHASIS ON COSTS AND BENEFITS: a reliance on profitable outcomes as an indication of relationship satisfaction ignores other factors that play some role in this process. An individual’s own relational beliefs may make them more tolerant of a relatively low ratio of benefits to cost within their relationship. They may, for example, have the belief that ‘If you have committed yourself to a relationship, you live with what it brings’ or ‘it is selfish to focus on one’s own needs’. Although they may recognise an unfavourable ratio of benefits to costs, their relationship standard means that they continue to provide benefits to their partner and simply put up with the costs. This suggests that social exchange alone cannot explain relationship satisfaction without also considering individual differences in relational standards and beliefs.
REAL-WORLD APPLICATION- RELATIONSHIP THERAPY: individuals in unsuccessful marriages frequently report a lack of positive behaviour exchanges with their partner and an excess of negative exchanges. Gottman and Levenson (1992) found that, in successful marriages, the ratio of positive to negative exchanges was around 5:1 but in unsuccessful marriages this ratio was much lower, at around 1:1 or less. Integrated behavioural coupes therapy (IBCT) attempts to increase the proportion of positive exchanges within a relationship and decrease the proportion of negative exchanges, helping partners to break the negative patterns of behaviour that cause problems, thus making each other happier. There is evidence for its success at doing this. Christensen et al (2004) treated over 60 distressed couples using IBCT and found that about two-thirds reported significant improvements in the quality of their relationships as a result.
Equity theory
EQUITY SENSITIVITY: research challenges the assumption that every in is equally sensitive to inequity and experiences the same level of tension when they perceive inequitable relationships. Huseman et al (1987) identified three categories of individuals: benevolents, equity sensitives and entitled. 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. Entitled prefer to be over-rewarded, having the attitude that they are word and thus are entitled to receive benefits. As a result, they are dissatisfied when in an under-rewarded or an equitable situation. The concept of ‘equity sensitivity’ determines the extent to which an individual will tolerate inequity and demonstrates that there are important individual differences in the impact of inequitable relationships.
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN THE IMPORTANCE OF EQUITY: DeMaris et al (2010) point out that men and women are not equally affected by inequity in romantic relationships. Women tend to perceive themselves as more under-benefited compared to men ans are also more disturbed by being under-benefited than are man. DeMaris et al suggest the main reason for this is that women’s greater relationship focus may make them more sensitive to injustices and inequity. A consequence of this, coupled with the increased emphasis on gender equality in modern marriage, is that women are more likely to be vigilant about inequity and more likely to react negatively to being exploited.
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN THE IMPORTANCE OF EQUITY: there is a possibility that the concept of equity is not as important in non-Western cultures given that most research on equity theory has been carried out in the US and Western Europe. Aumer-Ryan et al (2006) investigated this possibility. They found that, in all cultures they studied, people considered it important that a relationship or marriage should be equitable. Both men and women from the US claimed to be in the most equitable relationships, and both men and women (but especially women) from Jamaica claimed to be in the least equitable relationships. This suggests that people in different cultures differ markedly in how far and equitable they consider their relationships to be.
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FROM THE STUDY OF NON-HUMAN PRIMATES: further evidence for the importance of equity and fairness in relationships comes from studies of other primates. In a study with Capuchin monkeys, Brosnan and de Waal (2003) found that female Capuchin monkeys became angry if they were denied a highly prized reward of grapes in return for playing a game. If another monkey (who had played no part in the game) received the grapes instead, the capuchins grew so angry that they hurled food at the experimenter. In a later study, Brosnan et al (2005) found that chimpanzees were more upset by injustice in casual relationships than in a close, intimate relationships, where injustice ‘caused barely a ripple’. These studies echo what researchers have found in human relationships and suggest that the perception of inequity has ancient origins.
A PROBLEM OF CASULITY: although research has established that inequity and dissatisfaction are linked, the nature of the casual relationship itself is not clear. Clark (1984) argues that in most relationships, couples do not think in terms of reward and equity. If they do, she claims, it is a sign that their marriages are in trouble. According to this perspective, dissatisfaction with a relationship is the cause, not the consequences of inequity. However, a study of married couples (Van Yperen and Buunk 1990) found that people in inequitable marriages became less satisfied over the course of a year, with no evidence for the converse. Despite these conflicting results, Hatfield and Rapson (2011) suggest that in failing marriages both processes might be operating. When marriages are faltering, partners become preoccupied with the inequities of the relationship and this can then lead to relationship dissolution.
Investment model
RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTMENT MODEL: the importance of commitment as an indicator of relationship stability is supported by a meta-analysis by Le et al (2010). They analysed data from nearly 38,000 participants in 137 studies over a 33-year period to discover the key variables that predicted ‘staying or leaving’ behaviour in non-marital romantic relationships. In line with predictions from Rusbult’s investment model, commitment (or lack of it) was a particularly strong predictor of whether a relationship would break up. However, other relational variables that make up the model, namely satisfaction, quality of alternatives and investments, were only modest predictors of the likelihood of staying in a relationship.
PROBLEMS IN MEASURING THE VARIABLES OF THE INVESTMENT MODEL: a particular problem for the
investment model is that it is difficult to measure commitment and the other variables (i.e satisfaction level, investment size and quality of alternatives) that lead to commitment in the relationship. Rusbult et al (1998) developed the ‘Investment model scale’ to overcome this problem. They found this scale to be high in both reliability and validity in the measurement of these variables, and suitable for a wide variety of different populations. However, a 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. This raises the possibility of biased findings from the use of such methods.
REAL-WORLD APPLICATION: EXPLAINING ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIPS: the investment model is able to explain why individuals may persist in a relationship with an abusive partners. Victims of partner abuse experience low satisfaction, which would lead us to predict that they would leave the abusive partner. Yet, despite this, many stay. The investment model highlights features of the relationship that would explain this. They may, for example, lack alternatives to the relationship or may have too much invested with that partner, making dissolution too costly. As a real-life validation of this Rusbult and Martz (1995) revealed that alternatives and investments were a strong indication of whether battered women at a shelter remained committed to or returned to their partner.
INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE IS ALSO IMPORTANT: Goodfriend and Agnew (2008) suggest that the notion of ‘investment’ should include not only things that have already been invested in the relationship, but also any plans that partners have made regarding the relationship. In ending a relationship, an individual would not only lose investments made to date, but also the possibility of achieving any of the future plans they had made with that partner. Some relationships persist therefore, not because of the current balance of investments made, but because of a motivation too see cherished future plans to come to fruition. Their research provided evidence that future plans were strongly predictive of commitment in romantic relationships, over and above past investments.
THE WIDE APPLICATION OF THE INVESTMENT MODEL: a strength of Rusbult’s investment model is that its main claim (that commitment is positively associated with satisfaction level and investment size is negatively associated with quality of alternatives) have been shown to be true across many different populations and in many different types of relationships. Research has supported the relevance of the investment model across different cultures, in a variety of different participant populations (e.g marital and non-marital relationships, gay and lesbian relationships, friendships and abusive relationships). The validity of the model is not restricted to just face-to-face relationships. In a study of the social media platform WeChat, Li (2018) confirmed the relationship between the three investment model predictors and commitment level. In particular, investment was more predictive of commitment level than the other two variables.
Relationship breakdown
FAILS TO REFLECT POSSIBILITY OF PERSONAL GROWTH: Duck (2005) acknowledged that his 1982 model failed to reflect the possibility of relational growth following breakdown. By introducing a new model with a final phase of ‘resurrection processes’ (Rollie and Duck 2006), Duck stressed that for many people, this is an opportunity to move beyond the distress associated with the ending of a relationship and instead engage in the process of personal growth. There is support for the existence of this new phase. Tashiro and Frazier (2003) surveyed 92 undergraduates who had recently broken up with a romantic partner. Respondents typically reported that they had not only experienced emotional distress but also personal growth, as predicted by Rollie and Duck’s updated model.
THE IMPACT OF THE SOCIAL PHASE VARIES BY TYPE OF RELATIONSHIP: Duck (2005) suggests that the nature and impact of the social phase experienced during breakup depends on the sort of relationship that is involved. For teenagers and young adults, romantic relationship are seen as more unstable than long-term adult relationships, and are largely recognised by others as being ‘testing grounds’ for future long-term commitments. As a result, individuals may receive sympathy but no real attempt at reconciliation for their confidants as there are ‘plenty more fish in the sea’. However, older people in longer-term relationships may have lower expectations of being able to find a replacement for the present partner, therefore the consequences of a breakup are more significant (Dickson 1995). This suggests that, for this age group, the social processes phase may be characterised by more obvious attempts by others to rescue the current relatiship.
BENEFITS OF THE GRAVE-DRESSING PHASE: research supports the importance of the grave-dressing phase in dealing with the after affects of relationship breakdown. The end of a relationship can be very stressful. Monroe et al (1999) found that students who experienced the end of a romantic relationship in the previous year had a greater risk of developing a major depressive disorder for the firs time. However, Tashiro and Frazier (2003) found that individuals are able to feel better about ending a relationship when they focus on the situation, rather than their own flaws, was responsible for the breakup. The benefit of grave-dressing, therefore, is that the individual is able to create stories that play down their role in the breakup and so do not threaten their psychological well-being.
ETHICAL ISSUES IN BREAKDOWN RESEARCH: carrying out research in this sensitive area raises particular issues of vulnerability (participants may experience distress revisiting the issues that led to breakdown) privacy (many such issues are of an intensely personal nature) and confidentiality (particularly for victims of an abusive relationship). A guiding principle in all psychological research is that the benefits of undertaking the research must outweigh the risks, most notably the impact of the research on the participants involved. This is a particularly difficult issue when dealing with vulnerable individuals attempting to cope with the trauma and emotional distress associated with a relationship breakup. Psychologists must ask themselves, therefore, whether they truly have the interests of the participants in mind when exploring their research question.
REAL-WORLD APPLICATION: IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERVENTION: Duck’s model stresses the importance of communication in relationship breakdown. Paying attention to the things that people say and the ways in which they talk about their relationship offers an insight into how they are thinking about their relationship. If the relationship was in the intrapsychic process phase, repair might involve re-emulating the partner’s behaviour in a more positive light. In the latest phases of the model, different strategies of repair are appropriate. For example, in the social processes phase, people outside the relationship (such as family members) may help the partners to patch up their differences. This suggests that the cues individuals offer through their communication at different stages provide opportunities for friends and family to provide appropriate support to prevent the relationship breaking up.
Virtual relationships in social media
IMPORTANCE OF THE INTERNET FOR ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS: Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012) demonstrated the importance of the internet and of social media in helping individuals to form and maintain relationships. In a study of 4,000 US adults, they found that individuals with internet access at home were far more likely to be partnered, and less likely to be single. Of these individuals, 71.8% of those who had internet access, this figure was much lower at 35.9%. Even after controlling for other important variables such as age, gender, education, sexual preference and religion, individuals with internet access were still twice as likely to have a partner compared to those without internet access. This research suggests that the internet may be displacing rather than simply complementing the traditional ways of meeting a romantic partner.
VIRTUAL RELATIONSHIPS CAN BE AS STRONG AS OFFLINE RELATIONSHIPS: it is often claimed that the nature of Internet communication is such that it can only lead to superficial relationships that cannot compare with the richness of face-to-face relationships (Putnam, 2000). For example, it is believed that relationships formed online are of lower quality and more temporary than relationships formed in more traditional ways. However, Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012) found no evidence to support this claim. In their research they found no difference in the quality of online and offline relationships, nor did they find that online relationships were more fragile than relationships formed online.
A BIOLOGICAL BASIS FOR SELF-DISCLOSURE ON FACEBOOK: Tamil and 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. These findings suggest that the human tendency to share our personal experiences with others over social media may arise from the rewarding nature of self-disclosure.
FACEBOOK HELPS SHY PEOPLE HAVE BETTER QUALITY FRIENDSHIPS: Baker and Oswald (2010) argue that shy individuals find particular value in virtual relationships. To test whether shy people really do benefit from internet use, Baker and Oswald surveyed 207 male 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. This suggests that, through social media sites like facebook, shy people are able to overcome the barriers they face when trying to form relationships in real life.
VIRTUAL RELATIONSHIPS HAVE CONSEQUENCES FOR OFFLINE RELATIONSHIPS: Zhao et al (2008) claim that we should not think of the online world and the offline world as being completely separate, as relationships formed online do have consequences for people’s offline lives. For example, the development of virtual relationships online allows some individuals to bypass gating obstacles and create the sort of identity that they are unable to establish in the offline world. The main consequence of these ‘digital slaves’ claim Zhao et al, is they can enhance the individual’s overall self image and so increase their chances to connect to others in their offline world.
Parasocial relationships
RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR FACTORS INVOLVED IN PARASOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS: a meta-analysis of studies (Schiappa et al 2007) provides research support for factors that are instrumental in the formation of PSRs. They found support for the assumption that people with higher levels of PSRs also watched more television and that there was a significant relationship between the degree to which a person perceives television characters as being real and their tendency to form PSRs. They also found evidence to support the claim that the likelihood of forming a PSR with TV characters was linked to those characters’ perceived attractiveness and their similarity to the viewer. The authors suggest that one consequence of this is that the cancellation or loss of a TV show may lead to feelings of ‘bereavement’ in viewers with a PSRs, similar to the feelings of bereavement experienced after loss of a ‘real’ relationship.
ARE PARASOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS LINKED TO LONELINESS?: PSRs were initially believed to be a substitute for ‘real’ social relationships and therefore linked to feelings of social isolation and loneliness. Greenwood and Long (2009) found that individuals may develop PSRs as a way of dealing with feelings of loneliness or loss. However, Eyal and Cohen (2006) also found evidence thar PSRs can also lead to loneliness following a parasocial ‘breakup’. In a sample of 279 students who were fans of the popular TV series Friends, the intensity of their PSR with their favourite character was the strongest predictor of their feelings of loneliness following broadcast of the final episode. This suggests that PSRs may not only compensate for feelings of loneliness, but their loss can also create feelings of loneliness.
THE ABSORPTION ADDICTION MODEL: LINKS TO MENTAL HEALTH: Maltby et al (2003) used the Eysenck personality questionnaire (EPQ) to assess the relationship between parasocial relationship level and personally in a sample drawn from students and the community. They found that whereas the entertainment-social level was associated with extra version (i.e. sociable, lively, active) the internet personal level was associated with neuroticism (i.e tense, emotional, moody). As neuroticism is related to anxiety and depression, this provides a clear explanation of why higher levels of parasocial relationship are associated with poorer mental health.
LOSS OF PARASOCIAL RELATIONSHIP IS LINKED TO ATTACHMENT STYLE: An Israeli study (cohen 2004) lends support to the claim that viewers would show the same negative response to loss of a parasocial relatinship as they would to the loss of a real relationship. A sample of 381 adults answered questions about how they would react if their favourite TV characters were taken off the air and also questions about their attachment style. Viewers expecting to lose their favourite characters anticipated negative reactions (e.g feelings of sadness, anger and lonliness) similar to those experienced after the loss of close personal relationships. These reactions were related to the intensity of the PSR with the favourite character. This study also supported the important influence of attachment style, with anxious-ambivalently attached participants anticipating the most negative responses.
CULTURAL SIMILARITIES IN PARASOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS: 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 universalist culture that stresses individuality over loyalty to the group, and Mexico, a collectivist culture where the individual is more deeply involved in social groups. Despite the differences between these cultures, the researchers found fans from Mexico and fans from Germany displayed very similar patterns of PSRs with Harry Potter and other characters in the franchise. This study demonstrates the universal influence of mainstream media characters and the commonalities between individuals’ own lives and relationships and those portrayed in films and books.
