RELATIONSHIPS Flashcards
evolutionary theory
- Explains human behaviour in terms of adaptiveness and reproductive success.
- Behaviour genetically inherited between generations must have been beneficial.
Help adapt to environment and survive (natural selection)
Help attract a mate and produce healthy offspring (sexual selection)
sexual selection
- Characteristics with an advantage for reproductive behaviour / likely to be attractive to potential mates or provide advantage over competitors for mating.
- Differences in partner preferences and reproductive behaviour strategies between males and females.
anisogamy
- Differences between male and female gametes.
- Males lack parental certainty so most successful reproductive strategy is to have sex with as many women as possible (quantity).
Sperm produced in large quantities over whole lifespan with little energy requirement.
Men focus more on physical characteristics as signs off fertility in prospective partners e.g. youth, hip-waist ratio. - Ova production is more energy intensive with a more limited capacity.
Extends into pregnancy.
More reproductive success to have fewer sexual partners and go for the highest quality mate e.g. provide resources and protection for themselves and offspring.
sexual selection strategies
inter-sexual selection
intra-sexual selection
inter-sexual selection
- How chooses a partner from the other sex.
- Female choice – usually choosier over prospective mates due to anisogamy and level of investment in producing and caring for offspring.
Need to be more careful with who they mate with and to ensure most successful outcome – that offspring will inherit good genetics and have greater chance of survival through protection and provision of resources.
Females look for quality – fewer sexual partners of higher standard.
intra-sexual selection
- Competition for prospective partners.
- Male usually compete with other males to mate and reproduce with females.
- Males forced to compete against each other for prospective partners as females are choosier.
Males adopt quantity approach to ensure their genes get passed on by impregnating as many women as possible.
evolutionary theory strengths
research support (Clark and Hatfield)
Clark and Hatfield asked participants to approach opposite sex students on a university campus and ask them whether they would go to bed with them. They found that 75% of male students agreed but not a single female said yes.
Supports the idea that men focus on quantitative sex whereas women are choosier and prefer to look for a long-term partner.
Suggests theory has validity.
evolutionary theory strengths
research support (lonely hearts)
Waynforth and Dunbar researched ‘lonely hearts’ columns in newspapers and found that women tended to describe themselves in terms of physical attractiveness and youth while men advertised their resources and intelligence more.
Suggests that men find youthful physical characteristics more attractive and is what they look for in a partner, as indicative of fertility, whilst women look for resources.
Suggests theory has validity.
evolutionary theory weaknesses
does not consider social and cultural influences
Gender roles have changed over time as women now also have careers and can provide resources for children.
Logical that change in roles would impact upon partner preferences and sexual behaviour.
o Do not necessarily look for a man to provide.
o Contraceptives mean there is less risk of impregnation, allowing women to engage in casual sex.
Therefore partner preference and reproductive behaviour may be influence not just by evolutionary factors but also current socio-cultural climate. To gain a more comprehensive understanding we need to take a more holistic approach.
evolutionary theory weaknesses
assumes heterosexual norms
Evolutionary ideas on sexual behaviour assume heterosexual norms.
Motivating influence behind sexual behaviour is reproduction, to ensure survival of genetics. Not relevant for homosexual relationships.
Theory does not consider all relationships.
Theory is reductionist, lacks generalisability and is temporally bound.
evolutionary theory weaknesses
socially sensitive
Socially sensitive – research causes offence, reinforces stereotypes or discrimination.
Suggests that men like having more sexual partners, condones male promiscuity.
Judge women who are more sexually active.
Excuses male infidelity, but negative and against nature for women.
factor affecting attraction
self-disclosure
physical attractiveness
filter theory
theories of romantic relationships
social exchange theory
equity theory
Rusbult’s investment model
self-disclosure
- Refers to extent to which a person reveals personal information about themselves (including intimate thoughts, feelings and experiences) to another person.
- Important in development of romantic relationships.
- Greater disclosure leads to greater attraction and intimacy.
- Can present risks – making yourself too vulnerable, do not know whether you can trust them, lead to rejection or embarrassment.
social penetration theory
- Self-disclosure is a gradual process that helps relationships develop through revealing your inner self to someone.
- Should be reciprocal exchange of information.
- Will gradually reveal more intimate details as relationship progresses and trust built.
Less risk of embarrassment or rejection. - Breadth refers to the amount of information willing to share.
- Depth refers to how personal or intimate the information is.
onion analogy
- Peripheral layer – superficial topics like hobbies, interest, brief overview of family members, factual information, sports, TV shows, age, education, career
- Intermediate layers – opinions, experiences, political and religious views
- Central layers – future plans, aspirations, core values, trauma, fears, self-concept
disclosure and attraction
factors
- Content – highly intimate information may be seen as inappropriate and violating social norms, especially if relationship in early stages. Can decrease attraction.
- Appropriateness – ‘over the top’ sharing in too much breadth early on can indicate a person is maladjusted and lacking in social skills as are only concerned with themselves. Can decrease attraction.
- Attributions – reasons for self-disclosure important. Less attraction if individual shares personal information to everyone. More attraction if individual sees us as someone they especially want to disclose intimate information to.
self-disclosure strengths
evidence to support
Correlational evidence to support.
Sprechter and Hendrick studies heterosexual couples and found a strong positive correlation between high measures of satisfaction and high self-disclosure.
Suggests a link between intimacy and self-disclosure, theory has validity.
However, research is correlation so cause and effect is not established.
self-disclosure strengths
self-report evidence
Self-report evidence to support.
Laurenceau had participants write daily diary entries and found that self-disclosure and perceived self-disclosure in a partner were associated with higher levels of intimacy in long-term married couples. Less intimate couples self-disclosed less frequently.
Suggests that self-disclosure is important in building trust and meaningful relationships.
However, results can be affected by social desirability from self-report.
self-disclosure strengths
applicability to many
High applicability to varied sexual orientations.
Hass and Stafford found that 57% of homosexuals stated that open and honest self-disclosure was the main way they maintained and deepened committed relationships.
Suggests theory has validity.
High applicability and generalisability.
self-disclosure strengths
real world application
Real world application
Can help people who are less skilled at relationships as help make a connection through knowing which information to disclose and help achieve levels of intimacy appropriate for each stage of relationship. Can develop intimacy through increased information disclosed.
Useful as helps achieve more successful relationships.
self-disclosure weaknesses
culturally relativist
Important across many cultures affecting attraction but not universal, culturally relativist.
Tang reviewed research literature into sexual self-disclosure (views on sexual practices). American males and females disclosed more sexual thoughts and feelings than males and females from China. Appropriate level of self-disclosure was linked to relationship satisfaction in both cultures.
Suggests theory is ethnocentric.
self-disclosure weaknesses
nomothetic
Idea of self-disclosure impacting attraction and success of relationships is nomothetic.
Social penetration theory proposes that all people have the same need to self-disclosure in a relationship for it to be deemed successful and to progress.
Neglects to consider individual differences and the influence that different personality types may have on need for self-disclosure.
More introverted people may feel less comfortable with self-disclosure.
Depth of information may be less attractive and can have a negative effect on success of relationship.
Self-disclosure and its impact on attraction may be more nuanced between individuals that theory suggests.
physical attractiveness
matching hypothesis
complex matching
characteristics of physical attractiveness
halo effect
matching hypothesis
- Individuals seek partners who are similar in terms of physical attractiveness.
- Involves assessing own level of physical attractiveness and looking for potential partners with similar attractiveness.
Less chance of being rejected than if went for most attractive people. - Individuals feel more secure in a relationship with someone of equal physical attractiveness as less fear that more attractive partner might go elsewhere.
- Suggests people must settle for mating ‘within their league’.
complex matching
- Some people in a relationship may not be judged as equally attractive.
Can enter relationships offering many desirable characteristics other than physical attractiveness and can compensate for lack of physical attractiveness.
E.g. personality, humour, intelligence, wealth
characteristics of physical attractiveness
- Shackelford and Larson found that people with symmetrical faces are considered more attractive as they may be an indication of good genetic fitness.
- Jones found that neotenous (baby face) faces were considered more attractive across different cultures, particularly in females.
E.g. big eyes, widely separated, delicate chin, small nose, and full lips.
Triggers a caring response and is a symbol of fertility.
halo effect
- Physically attractive people tend to be judged as more kind, strong, sociable and successful compared to unattractive people.
- Belief that good-looking people will have positive characteristics makes the more attractive.
Behave more positively, encourages such characteristics.
E.g. pretty privilege – tend to be treated better, makes them a better person.
physical attractiveness strengths
supporting research
Supporting research into matching hypothesis.
Silverman conducted a correlation study with couples where they judged the attractiveness level of each partner individually. There was a significant similarity between partners’ levels of attractiveness.
Demonstrates consistency of matching hypothesis.
However, correlational research does not provide cause and effect.
Attractive ratings may be subjective and differ between people due to personal preferences.
physical attractiveness strengths
across cultures
Physical attractiveness is an important factor in forming relationships across cultures.
Cunnigham found that white, Asian and Hispanic males all rated females with neotenous facial features as highly attractive.
Universality of findings suggests that attractiveness as a decisive factor in choosing a partner may be a genetically reproduced mechanism, aiding sexual selection.
Supports role of nature as suggests that human behaviour is mainly a result of biological rather than environmental influences. Suggests physical attractiveness is key universal factor in who we are attracted to.
physical attractiveness weaknesses
depends on medium
Matching hypothesis depends on the medium being used.
Taylor studied online dating site choices and found that people often sought meetings with potential partners who were physically more attractive than them.
Suggests the theory of matching hypothesis is not applicable to all relationships as this contradicts matching hypothesis when it comes to meeting potential partners online.
physical attractiveness weaknesses
individual differences
Theory fails to consider the influence of individual differences.
Asked male and female participants to rate how much they would like a target individual based on a photo and biographical info and they completed a questionnaire to measure sexist attitudes.
Participants who scored high on the questionnaire were more influenced by physical attractiveness.
Attitudes we hold influence how superficial we are in a romantic relationship, suggesting that what is desirable to a partner is subjective.
filter theory
- Have filters that prospective partners must pass through that narrow down who we are willing to engage in a relationship with.
- Start with field of availables – everyone you could potentially form a relationship with.
- Use filters to narrow down to a field of desirables – people you’d be willing to form a relationship using filters.
- Different filters are more prominent depending on the stage of relationship.
social demography filter
- Factors influencing likelihood of partners meeting in the first place.
- More prominent early in relationship.
- Includes location/proximity, social class, level of education, ethnicity and religion.
- Anyone too different from our own social demography is discarded.
- Leads to homogamy – engaging in relationships with those most similar to us.
similarity in attitude filter
- First 18 months of a relationship
- Similarity of attitudes becomes more important
- E.g. views on family, careers
- If partners discover that their differences are too great, the relationship is less likely to continue.
- Byrne found the ‘law of attraction’ where we are more attracted to those who are similar to us.
complementarity filter
- More prominent as relationship becomes more firmly established.
- E.g. whether a person’s personality complements own traits and satisfies our emotional needs.
- As relationship progresses it becomes more ‘opposites attract’.
Creates sense of partnership being a whole ‘other half’.
filter theory strengths
research support
Gruber-Baldini carried out a longitudinal study of couples aged 21 and found that those who were similar in educational level and stage at the start of the relationship were more likely to stay together and have a successful relationship.
Supports social demographic as age and education similarities led to better relationship. Filter at the beginning of a relationship as affect who attracted to and deterministic of success of long-term relationship.
Suggests theory has validity.
However, limited sample.
Complementarity and similarity of attitudes may not be as important to young couples and may focus more on social demographic. Perhaps not yet looking to settle down.
filter theory weaknesses
validity issues
Validity issues with filter theory.
Online data means that social demographic variables do not limit field of availables. Greater potential of meeting people from different ethnic groups and social backgrounds, reducing need for similarities to ourselves.
Technology also reduces importance of proximity – can meet people online and video chat apps and increased ease of travels reduces need for physical proximity.
Technological advances mean that filter theory lacks temporal validity and findings do not apply to relationships in today’s society.
filter theory weaknesses
causation
Direction of causation in relation to similarity of attitudes can be questioned.
Anderson argued that the emotional responses of partners in long-term relationships became more alike over time rather than being similar from the start – emotional convergence.
Challenges similarity of attitudes filter as do not need to be similar in the first place and not filtered out because of lack of similarity.
Reduces validity of the theory.
filter theory weaknesses
culture bound
Most research supporting filter theory uses participants from individualistic Western cultures.
Individualistic cultures value free choice in relationships and choice of partners due to individual preferences. May apply criteria without influence from others.
Common in collectivist cultures for romantic relationships to be arranged, so partners are not free to apply individual filters.
Suggests filter theory suffers from culture bias, as it assumes that the rules of partner choice in Western cultures applies to relationships universally.
