Relationships 👩❤️💋👨 Flashcards
A01 ‘self disclosure’
[Self disclosure]
when we reveal our thoughts and feelings
It allows you to build a closeness
[social penetration theory]
-Reciprocal process revealing your inner self to someone else
-builds a stronger relationship the more you share
Breadth- the range of topics discussed
Depth-how personal the information shared is
Give one strength into the research of ‘Self Disclosure’
-Helps couples improve communication
- researchers found 57% of couples said that open and honest self disclosure maintained and deepened their relationship
- therefore helps resolve problems
Give one Limitation of ‘Self Disclosure’
-Fails to consider Cultural differences
- Tang reviewed research into sexual self disclosure
- Men/women in USA disclose more than sexual thought than men/ women in china
-despite lower levels in 🇨🇳 same satisfaction rate
-therefore the prediction that increasing breadth and depth will lead to more satisfying and intimate rs is not true for all cultures
What is ‘Filter Theory’
States there are 3 factors to narrow down partners:
1) social demography
-the potential of partners meeting each other based on
-geographical location
-social class
-level of education
2) similarity in attitudes
-where you filter out beliefs and values
-leads to good communication promotes self disclosure
3) complementarity
-The ability to meet each others needs
-where one partner has a trait the other one lacks
Give one limitation of ‘Filter Theory’
-Cultural Bias
- most research uses ppts from individualist cultures who value free choice in relationships and preference of partners.
- In these cultures ppl may apply criteria described in filter theory freely
-However isn’t the same for collectivist cultures where it is common for arranged marriages so ppl not able to apply individual filters to select spouse
What is the ‘Matching Hypothesis’
- States how people will go for other people with similar attractiveness
- Don’t want to go for others deemed as more attractive in fear of rejection
What is the AO1 for ‘Social exchange theory?’
1} Economic theory considering how people exchange rewards and costs
2} suggest individuals attempt to maximise rewards and minimise cost
3} COMPARISON LEVELS - what we use to measure amount of rewards we believe we should receive.
- these expectations come from previous RS or social norms expectations
COMPARISON FOR ALTERNATIVES
SET suggests we stay in RS as long as we find it more rewarding than alternative RS
-if the cost of our current relationship outweighs the rewards then alternatives become more attractive
And Kelly proposed four stages in which relationships develop
What are the 4 stages of relationship development ?
1) SAMPLING- asses rewards and costs
2) BARGANING- exchange rewards & costs
3) COMMITMENT- RS becomes stable
4 INSTITUTIONALISATION- norms of RS established
One limitation of SET
hint ‘argyle’
- Argues dissatisfaction arises when RS stops being profitable
-However Argyle says we do not measure rewards or costs in RS nor attractiveness
-This only happens when we are dissatisfied with RS
-suggesting considering alternatives is because of dissatisfaction
One strength of SET (hint research support)
domestic violence
-RS support the idea of CL
-rusbult found that victims of domestic violence often return to partner because cannot find better alternatives & had investments 👦
-Shows cost of leaving is greater than reward of staying at home
another Limitation of SET
hint (culture bias)
women take care of
cultural and gender bias
E.g in some cultures women are expected to care for their partner such as by making them dinner
-However the SET may see them as unsatisfied as costs>rewards
-therefore SET cannot be applicable to collectivist cultures where the way women care for partner is different
AO1 for ‘Equity Theory’
-Economic theory
-Equity looks at the balance between rewards & Costs
-when there is lack of equity one partner over benefits and one partner under benefit leading to dissatisfaction
-problems in RS begin when one partner perceives inequity in RS
- to deal with inequity, one partner may work hard to make RS more equitable
One limitation of ‘Equity Theory’
universality 🇺🇸🇯🇲
-Suffers from lack of universality
-Ryan et al found couple in 🇺🇸 were most satisfied in RS when there was equity
-Whereas couple in 🇯🇲 were most satisfied when they were over benefitting rather than when RS was fair
-showing a cultural bias
Strength of Equity theory
research support
-Research support that equity leads to satisfaction
-researcher found that couple who considered RS equitable
- were more satisfied than those who saw themselves as over benefitting or under
-therefore equity in RS has high validity
Ao1 for Rusbults investment model
Rusbult developed an extended social exchange theory by proposing an investment model
Rusbult saw commitment is a key factor in sustaining a R/S
commitment depends on
1) satisfaction levels
-rewards>cost
2)Comparison with alternatives
-decide whether alternative are more rewarding and less costly
3)Investment size
-Rusbult found Cl and CLAT are not enough to explain commitment
if that was case rs would’ve ended as soon as costs>benefit
Intrinsic investment
- thing put directly in RS
-E.G effort money
Extrinsic investment
-Things brought in persons life through RS
-children, memories
One limitation of Rusbults investment model ( Reductionist)
-it’s reductionist as it fails to consider that there is more to investment
researcher point out here is more to investment than resources
-e.g at beginning of rs we don’t invest much
-they say relationship maintenance considered not only current investments but also future plans
therefore ending Rs will cause all that to go to loss
therefore individuals stay in rs due to motivation to see future plans come to life
Strength of Rudbult investment model
research support
meta analysis
-Rs support for commitment and satisfaction level
-e.g researcher conducted meta analysis over 33 year period and aimed to identify factors that predicted staying or leaving behv in non marital rs
- found that commitment was strong predictor of whether rs would fail
also found that satisfaction cWa and investment were modest predictors of likelihood of staying in rs
therefore showing universality
A01 for Ducks Phase model
The 4 stages
1) INTRAPSYCHIC STAGE
~(TH- I can’t stand it anymore )
~dissatisfied partner reflects on reason why they unhappy)
2) Dyadic stage
~[ TH- I would be justified with withdrawing ]
~ discuss dissatisfaction with partner can go one of two ways
3) Social Stage
[ TH- Dissatisfied partner concludes i mean it ]
~ breakup is public
~ friends apply reassurance
4) Grave dressing stage
[ TH- it’s now inevitable]
~ Create favourable story for public
~ Save face
Strength of Ducks phase model
real world application
has RWA through the use of Rs counselling
- recognises different repair strategies that are useful during different phases
-e.g person in intrapsychic stage may be useful to focus attention on +tive aspects
-this shows ducks phase model can be used to help partner contemplating a break up
Limitation of Ducks phase model
cultural bias
- it applied individualist cultures universally
-researchers found that individualist cultures Rs breakdowns are voluntary and frequent
-whereas collectivist cultures it’s less easy to end RS and involves wider familia - Affects validity of model as whole conception of romantic Rs differs between cultures
- therefore highly unlikely breakdown process is the same in all cultures
A01 for virtual Rs in social media
[Reduced Cue theory ]
-computer mediated communication RS less affective than FTF ones as they lack cues such as
-non verbal cues ( physical appearance)
-emotional state ( tone of voice )
verbal Rs involve more blunt and aggressive communication so less likely to self disclose
[Hyper personal model]
-Self disclosure is higher
- walter argues online RS more personal than FTF ones
- self disclosure happens more quicker
-therefore rs becomes more intimate
-these rs end quickly as exitemeny level doesn’t match up with trust level
[Absence of gating]
-anything that prevents you from forming a Rs
-e.g social anxiety
People online are free who they want to be
without gates rs can develop to where self disclosure is more frequent
Limitation of Reduces cue theory
lack of RS support
According to this theory all non verbal cues are absence from CMC interactions
- researcher found ppl use other cues
- such as taking time to respond, status updates
-too long shows you don’t care
-additionally emojis are effective substitutes for facial expressions
therefore may impact validity
Strength of virtual relationships
rs support hyper personal model
according to this model it suggests -people are motivated to self disclose in CMC interactions in ways which are hyper honest or hyper dishonest
- researchers found that questions asked online tend to be direct & to the point
- this different to FTF which tends to be safe small talk
A01 for parasocial Rs
-It’s a one sided relationship
most common with celebs
-Mc Cutheon developed celeb attitude scale
1) Entertainment social
~ least intense level of celeb worship
~ viewed as source of social interaction
2)Intense Personal
~ intermediate level
~ involved greater rs with celebs
3) Borderline pathological
~Strongest level
~spending excessive time or large sum of money
