Relationships Flashcards
(31 cards)
Sexual selection as an evolutionary explanation for partner preferences.
-partner preferences is driven by sexual selection
to maximise reprod success
-physical charac as a sign of genetic fitness are passed on offsprings to ⬆ success
-eg preference of muscular men in women, gene for muscular is passed on
Anisogamy as an evolutionary explanation PP.
-diff between F/M gametes causing them to have diff PP
-male gametes are created in large numbers
-females less rarely
Males and females differences in demands, reproductive system, choice of mate
MALES: sperm is more available,less energy, more fertile > promiscous > young females
FEMALES: eggs are more expensive> LTM mate> strong resorceful dominant male >
Intra sexual vs Inter sexual selection.
(within a sex vs between a sex)
1.Males chose quantity over quality
-compete for fertile W
-mate with as many women as possible to pass their genes
-⬆ RS
-leads to clear diff in characteristics between F/M, larger males have an adv, as they dont compete and why they shorter
- Females chose the opposite, as ova require more energy
-use courtship behaviour to select a resourceful partner and genetically fit
-chose carefully and invests time b/a birth
-the female preference is what determines the features to an offspring eg height
Evaluate sexual selection evolutionary explanation.
RTS
SELF
D
-RTS sex differences in human reproductive behaviour was conducted by a psychologist
-M/F asked questions to opposite sex “will you have sex with me”
-75% of males said yes , 0% said no
-supports SS as an evolutionary expl for differences in m/f as females choose carefully for LTM and males are promiscous.
-research is prone to social desirability
-based on self report, questions, interviews
-may lie to present themselves in best light possible e.g. females are ⬆ to refuse avoid being labelled as promiscous / prejudice/embarassment
- reducing IV of research into SS as an evolutionary expl to PP
- biological determinism
-PP only driven by internal factors as genes that control the preference such females chose a muscular men to ⬆ Rsuccess
-neglects role of free will that an individual can make a choice for their partner as due a personality
-limiting the evolutionare expl in PP
Outline self disclosure as a factor affecting attraction, (6)
self disclosure = MP
BP= attraction
- gradually revealings personal info in layers according to Social penetration theory
2.partner responds with a rewarding attitude and RECIPROCATE
3.balance of self disclosure ⬆intimacy,stronger rels and ⬆ attraction
4.as a rels progresses the depth of MP increases , starting revealing info as preferences to deeper info as secrets and memories, onion theory
RTS (Correlation) into self disclosure as a factor affecting BP
Link to reciprocation
limitations
-conducted a correlation research in couples between self disc and satisfaction
-m/f who used self disclosure were more satisfied, more committed/stronger rels
SO MORE ATTRACTION because
RECIPROCATED
-increasing IV of MP as factor of BP
…
-correlation only shows relationship between 2 variables , no cause and effect
-other factors as physical attractiveness may affect BP
- reducing IV of MP to BP
-social desirability, self report, lie
-couples lying how satisfied they were to present themselves in best light possible
Outline physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction, (6)
1.based on evolutionary explanation
2.people with symmetrical faces are more attractive , seen as a sign of genetic fitness
3.women with round faces, big eyes ⬆ attractive trigger protective instinct , ⬆ Reproduce
4.halo effect: physically attractive people are considered more sociable, succesful , ahve good personalities ⬆ attraction
5.matching hypothesis > rate ourselves based on own BP, find partners based on our level
Evaluate physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction, (6)
RTC
self
-RTC matching hypothesis was conducted by pscyh
on dating sites
-online daters met partners who were more attractive than them
- VS MP as did not consider their own BP level when choosing a partner
-SELF REPORT > social desir > reducing IV
-lie about importance of MP in a romantic rels to present themselves in best light and avoid prejudice
Outline filter theory as a factor affecting attraction (2)
Define + example
-there filters set for best rels
-narrow down the choices for a desirable partner
-3 levels, each hold diff level of importance in rels
-increase ATTRACTION
- Outline social demography.
-those who share ethnicity,education, location are more likely to share similar beliefs with us and are potential partners
-feel more attracted
-proximity, more closely available, more likely to form a rels
- Similarity in attitudes as filter theory in ATTRACTION
-checked social and cultural characteristic
-couple rels less than 18 months. STM couples
-partners agree on same values
-deeper rels, more self disclosure
-no similarity between couples, the rels will fall
- Complementarity.
-long term couples , partners need to complement each other
-one laughs, one make laugh
-opposite attracts
-MP couples they form a whole together, deeper rels, long lasting
Evaluate filter theory. 3 peels
-RTS similarity + complementarity
-self report
-lack temporal validity
-RTS as a longitudinal study on partners using questionnaires to assess the importance of complementarity and similarity in att, 7 months apart
-short term rels felt more closeness due to similarity
-long term couples gave more importance to complementarity
-supports filter theory as one is more important in early/later stages
-overestimate how complementary they are to each other, closer
- decrease IV
Social exchange theory to romantic relationships.INCLUDE comparison levels and alternatives(6)
⬆mutually beneficial
⬆profit
⬆reawards
1.Economic theory considers exchange between costs and rewards in a romantic relationship
2.more attraction/satisfaction to those who offer more rewards
3. a ratio between rewards and cost, aim to ⬆ rewards and reduce costs
4. a profitable rels comes where the rewards exceeds the costs , mutual benefit
5. 2 types of comparison when measuring profit
COMPARISON levels : comparing rewards with old rels to new ones, CL change as ⬆ experience
CL of alternatives : compare rewards pf current to potential alternatives rels
Evaluate SET and rewards/cost in romantic rels.
RTS -questionnaire
self report
alternative
-RTS SET as a theory of romantic rels was conducted by psych
-asked gay, lesb, hetero to complete a q to measure rels commitment and rewards/costs
-⬆ committed partners perceive ⬆ rewards and less costs and alternative rels unattractive
-supporting SET and importance of mutually beneficial and profit in rels
-questionnaire , social desirable
-fewer rewards to avoid prejudice and present rels in best light
-an alternative theory of romantic rels is Rusbult’investment model
-rewards.cost and profit are not most important factors in relationships but INVESTMENT
-more investment in a rels , money, house,children, more stronger rels and long lasting
-rather than exceeding rewards with less costs
-NOT SOLE
Outline equity(fair) theory to romantic relationship.(6)
- economic model
2.based on SET and how in works in real life rels - based on FAIRNESS for each partner
4.balance in profit and between rew/costs
5.each partner gets the same as they put in and inequity causes ‘dissatisfaction’
6.rels are maintained on equity - if inequity occurs > distressed and dissatisfied >no maintained rel > greater inequity ⬆ ⬆ dissatisfaction
- they will try to restore with MP to save relationship
Evaluate equity theory to romantic rels. (3 peels)
-same as SET
-questionnaire who had been married for 2 years measuring equity
-more equitable more satisfied ⬆ maintain rels ⬆stronger
-social desirability , lie there is more equity and fairness to present their rel in best light possible
-alternative is rusbult’investment model
-equity is not the most important factor but INVESTMENT IS
Compare SET with equity theory.
Outline Rusbults’ investment model of commitment : satisfaction , Comp ALt, investment size into romantic relationships .(6)
- importance of commitment in rels and depends on 3 factors
- SATISFACTION level - based on CL, comparing costs/rewards, profitable , has ⬆ rewards than costs, each partner is satisified as they receive more ⬆ MP
3.COMP with ALTERNATIVES -needs of currents rels is compared with an alternative possible rels, extent the partner can meet their em/sexual desires, if alt cannot, then ⬆ COMMITMENT
4.INVESTMENT SIZE : amount of rewards in a rels ,
intrisic investment (money, effort, time)- directly put in the rel
extrisic investment (children, house)- were not originally featured
Conclusion of RUSBULT MODEL .
HIGH SATISFACTION + NO ALT + ⬆ INVEST SIZE + ⬆ COMMITMENT IN REL
Evaluate Rusbult model.
-self report
-alternative
-correlational
-research is correlational between 3 factors and commitment
-no cause and effect
-more commitment more invested rather than opposite
-low control over extr variables.
-individuals may be committed due to cultural values, backgrounds
-not due to rewards and cost to increase satisfaction
reducing IV
-alternative explantion to rusbult model is SET
-suggesting rel is due to profit rather than investment
-that a rel is ⬆ maitained if there are rew/costs and rewards > costs
-SOLE
MUST : Outline Duck’s model of breakdown. (2 marks)
1.rels goes through phases in breakdown
-each stage there is a threshold
2.point perception of the rels changes
-.if threshold is met , go to next phase
Outline the two stages of Duck model of breakdown. (4)
name + threshold + explain
i do social graves
- intra-psychic : “i cant stand this anymore” > one problems doesn’t tell> one is dissats > other worries about their dissats >
-discuss pro cons and alternatives for future - dyadic phase> “I would be js withdrawing” > processes between partners > confront, argue about dissats > anxiety, may lack of equity
-break up or make up
