Relationships Flashcards
define sexual selection
an evolutionary explanation of partner preference. attributes or behaviours that increase reproductive success and are passed on and may become exaggerated over future generations of offspring
inter-sexual selection
preferred female strategy, women need to be choosy and pick the most genetically fit partner bc ova are rarer than sperm
intra-sexual selection
mate selection, preferred male strategy, refers to competition between males to be able to mate w females
anisogamy
the difference between male and female sex cells
characteristics males sought through intersexual selection
young, hourglass shape, large eyes, rosy cheeks
mens reproductive behaviour
promiscuity, maximises opportunity for mating success
characteristics females sought through intersexual selection
faithful,committed,strong,able to gain resources with ease
female reproductive behaviour
be choosy- select the best available mate as your baby needs the best genes
self-disclosure
revealing personal information about yourself. romantic partners reveal more about their true selves as the relationship develops
altman and taylor’s self-disclosure theory
believed it has 2 elements, breadth & depth , and as both of these increase, romantic partners become more committed to eachother.
we start by disclosing a high amount of info, but it’s low risk & superficial.
breadth of disclosure is narrow
reish and shaver
for a relationship to develop, and increase in depth/breadth there needs to be a reciprocal element to disclosure
factors affecting attraction
self disclosure, physical attractiveness, the filter model
how does physical attractiveness affect attraction
neotenous features- wide set and large eyes, small nose etc. trigger a protective or caring instinct, a valuable resource for females wanting to reproduce
Shackleford & Larsen
found that people with facial symmetry are rated as more attractive - may be an honest signal of genetics
the halo effect
physical attractiveness stereotype suggests people who are attractive are consistently rated as kind, sociable & successful compared to unattractive people
-has a disproportionate influence on our judgements of a person’s other attributes e.g personality
the matching hypothesis
-choose partners who’re roughly similarly attractive
-do this by making a rough judgement on our own ‘value’ to potential partners
-requires a balance of what we ideally like in a partner & what we’re prepared to settle for to avoid being rejected
the filter theory- kercher and davis
argues a relationship develops in 3 stages. at each stage, people are filtered down until the individual is left with the most desirable partners (field of desirables)
-social/demographic
-similarity of attitudes
-complementarity of needs
social demographic filter
live near to each other, same school/workplace, similar background/age
similarity filter
similarity becomes important, sharing the same attitudes, interests & beliefs are easier to get along with
far
if there’s less in common, far less likely to want to continue to build a relationship w them
complimentary of needs
helps us to distinguish the needs between someone who’ll meet our needs in the long term, and someone who won’t
social exchange theory- thibaut & kelley
if the rewards in relationship outweigh the costs, the relationship is in ‘profit’
comparison for alternatives
comparing current relationship with the other potential relationships on offer
comparison level
comparing the current relationship with one’s views of what a relationship should be like
minimax principle
SET- those in a relationship try to minimise loses and maximise rewards
stages of relationship development
sampling, bargaining, commitment, institutionalisation,
sampling stage
explore the rewards and costs of social exchange by experimenting with them in our own relationships/observing others do so
bargaining stage
marks the beginning of the relationship, when partners start exchanging various rewards/costs, negotiating/identifying what is profitable
commitment stage
sources of rewards/costs become more predictable and the relationship is more stable as rewards increase and costs lessen
institutionalisation
partner’s now settled down because the norms of the relationship are firmly established
equity theory-
maximising rewards, minimising costs but also the relationship being equitablee
equity
the idea of fairness for each partner; emphasises the need for each partner to experience a balance between their cost/effort and their benefit/reward
consequences of inequity
distress and dissatisfaction, perception of equity changes, greater inequity, greater dissatisfaction
dealing with inequity
behaviour or cognitive shift
behavioural shift
the more unfair a relationship is the harder they will work to restore equity, but the must believe change is possible
cognitive shift
some partners change their perception on rewards and costs so that their relationship feels more equitable, even if nothing changes.
e.g what was once seen as a cost is normalised
rusbults investment theory model components
satisfaction level
comparison w alternatives
investment size
=commitment level
=relationship maintenance mechanisms
intrinsic investment
any resources put into a relationship. tangible: money, possessions. intangible: energy, emotion
extrinsic investment
resources that previously did not feature in the relationship but are now closely associated with it.
tangible: possessions bought together.Intangible: shared memories
relationship maintenance mechanisms
Forgiveness
Willingness to sacrifice
Accomodation
Ridiculing alternatives
Positive illusions
duck’s phase model of relationship breakup stages
intra-psychic, dyadic, social, grave-dressing
intra-psychic stage
cognitive process, privately mulling ideas over, weighs up pros/cons against alternatives (e.g being alone)
dyadic stage
confrontations where dissatisfaction is aired. anxiety, hostility complaints over lack of equity
2 outcomes= renewed desire to repair/next phase
social stage
gossip traded/ecouraged, focus now wider now breakup is public, usually point of no return, friends blame one partner/fasten breakup/help repair
grave-dressing stage
focus on aftermath, creating a story to protect reputation, disatisfied partner concludes it’s time to get a new life
social stage threshold
'’i cant stand this anymore’’, indicating a determination that something needs to change
dyadic stage threshold
come to the conclusion ‘i would be justified in withdrawing’
social phase threshold
disatisfied partner concludes ‘i mean it’
