RELATIONSHIPS Flashcards
Define sexual selection
- Evolutionary explanation for partner preferences
- Attributes or behaviours that increase reproductive success are passed on and may become exaggerated over succeeding generations of offspring
Define anisogamy
- Difference between male and female+ female sex cells
What are the two mating strategies proposed by Charles Darwin?
- Intersexual selection
- Intrasexual selection
Outline intersexual selection
- Preferred mating strategy for females
- Members of one sex evolve preferences for desirable qualities in potential mates
- QUALITY OVER QUANTITY
(E.g. attractiveness + resources gain a mating advantage)
Outline intrasexual selection
- Preferred mating strategy for males
- Individuals of one sex competes with members of the same sex for members of the other sex
- QUANTITY OVER QUALITY
- successful individuals can mate + pass on their genes
Explain why mechanisms for mate choice evolve?
- Random mating is stupid mating
- Being ‘choosy’ (which is time + energy consuming) pays off as the genetic quality of a mate determines half the genetic quality of offspring
- Low-quality mates are likely to produce unattractive, unhealthy offspring
- FEMALES attracted to males who have resources + can invest resources in her and her offspring, can parent well + can protect them - for females creating offspring is TIME + ENERGY CONSUMING
- MALES - creating offspring requires little time, energy and responsibility
Outline a study supporting intersexual selection
- Fisher’s (1930) ‘sexy sons’ hypothesis
- If female chooses to mate w/ attractive male, her offspring will also grow up to be attractive so they will also attract mates
^— ensures female’s genes passed on
Define physical dimorphism
Differences in the body size and physical appearance between males and females
Outline the procedure of Buss (1989)
- Explored what males and females looked for in a long-term partner
- 10000 people from 37 different cultures
- Participants asked to rate each of 18 characteristics (e.g. physical attractiveness, good financial prospect) on how important they would be in choosing a mate
- Four-point scale used: 3 (indispensable) to 0 (irrelevant)
Outline the findings of Buss (1989)
RESOURCES - women desired mates who had good financial prospects more than men - desire for men with resources or ambition
PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS - men placed more importance on physical attractiveness - cues a woman’s health + fertility
YOUTH - men universally wanted mates who were younger than them - indicated fertility
OTHER - both sexes wanted intelligent (linked to parenting skill) + kind (linked to interest in long-term relationships) mates
What are evolutionary explanations?
Focus on adaptive nature of behaviour
^— Modern behaviours are believed to have evolved because they solved challenges faced by our distant ancestors + became widespread in the gene pool
Briefly explain what is meant by the ‘matching hypothesis’
Claims that when people look for a partner for a romantic relationship, they tend to look for someone whose social desirability approximately equals their own
Walster and Walster (1969)
Outline the role of physical attractiveness in attraction
- Shackelford and Larsen (1997) - Symmetrical face more attractive = signs of genetic fitness
- NEOTONOUS features thought to trigger protective + caring instincts, related to formation of attachment
BOTH EVOLUTIONARY
What is the Halo effect?
- We hold preconceived ideas about the attributes of physically attractiveness people
^— believe all other attributes overwhelmingly positive
Pretty privilege
Outline the matching hypothesis as it applies to attraction
- Claims that, when initiating romantic relationships, individuals seek out partners whose social desirability approximately equals their own
- When choosing a partner, individuals first assess their own ‘value’ in the eyes of a potential romantic partner + select the best available candidates who would likely be attracted to them
- Both would theoretically be attracted to those most socially desirable, but partners similar to them in social desirability means increased likelihood of success
Describe the relationship between the matching hypothesis and physical attractiveness
- Matching hypothesis proposed ppl pair up with those with equal social desirability (a range of assets), though it has changed to only be associated with physical attractiveness
^— expect people to pair up with those similarly physically attractive - Walster et al: ‘realistic’ choices - each individual is influenced by the chances of their affection being reciprocated
Outline the procedure of one study of the matching hypothesis
- Walster et al (1966) advertised a ‘computer dance’ for new students at Uni of Minnesota
- 177 males + 170 females were randomly selected to take part
- When they came to pick up their tickets, 4 student accomplices surreptitiously rated each of them for physical attractiveness
- Participants then asked to complete long questionnaires (e.g. to assess personality, intelligence, etc) + told that the data would be used to allocate their ideal partner for the evening of the dance - PAIRING ACTUALLY RANDOM
- During intermission, participants asked to complete a questionnaire about their dates + a questionnaire 6 months after the dance
Outline the findings of one study of the matching hypothesis
- Walster et al. (1966)
- DID NOT SUPPORT MATCHING HYPOTHESIS
- Once participants had met their dates, they responded more positively to physically attractive dates regardless of their own physical attractiveness + were more likely to subsequently try to arrange dates with them if they were physically attractive
- Personality + intelligence did not affect liking the dates or any attempt to date them
What is self-disclosure?
When a person reveals intimate personal information about themselves to another person
What is social penetration theory?
- Altman & Taylor
- Suggests that as the relationship between individuals develops, interpersonal communications breadth + depth increase from shallow to more intimate
What is breadth in self-disclosure?
Types of topics
What is depth in self-disclosure?
Level of detail in topics
List THREE elements of self-disclosure
- Reciprocity
- Attributions
- Appropriateness
Explain reciprocity in self-disclosure
Relationships will only develop is both individuals are active in disclosing information + responding appropriately
Explain attributions in self-disclosure
Individuals consider the motivations behind self-disclosure
^— someone who discloses to everyone is seen as less attractive than someone who reveals to fewer people
Explain appropriateness in self-disclosure
While revealing information is generally seen as improving relationships, breaking social norms or revealing information too early (TMI) can have the opposite reaction (lowering attraction)
Describe the relationship between self-disclosure and satisfaction
Relationship between self-disclosure + relationship satisfaction is based on the many forms of self-disclosure
^— e.g. disclosing taste in music + disclosing inner fears and fantasies are VERY different
- It is not self-disclosure that predicts relationship satisfaction, but the TYPE of self-disclosure
Outline the procedure of one key study into self-disclosure
- Sprecher et al. (2013)
- 156 undergrad students @ US uni paired into dyads
^— approx. 2/3 of dyads were female-female + 1/3 were male-female - each dyad of unacquainted individuals engaged in self-disclosure over Skype
- RECIPROCAL CONDITION: dyad members took turns asking questions + disclosing
- NON-RECIPROCAL CONDITION: one person asked questions in 1st interaction while other disclosed
- The two then switched roles for second interaction (extended reciprocity)
Outline the findings of one key study into self-disclosure
- Sprecher et al. (2013)
- RECIPROCAL CONDITION: individuals reported more liking, closeness, perceived similarity + enjoyment of interaction than other condition after 1st interaction
- Difference remained after participants in NON-RECIPROCAL dyads switched disclosure roles during second interaction
- Showed that turn-taking self-disclosure reciprocity is more likely to lead to positive interpersonal outcomes than extend reciprocity
What is filter theory?
- Kirchhoff & Davies (1962)
- Romantic partners are chosen by using a serious of filters that narrow down the ‘field of availables’ from which we might eventually make our choice from the newly formed ‘field of desirables’
^— these are made of from those who pass through each filter
What are the THREE filters in the filter theory?
- Social demography
- Similarity in attitudes
- Complementarity
Explain social demography in filter theory
- We are more likely to come into contact w/ people who live nearby and people who share characteristics like social class, education level + economic status
Explain similarity in attitudes in filter theory
- Due to social demography, we are more likely it come into contact with people with similar core values (e.g. attitudes, values + beliefs)
^— these people are seen as more attractive/compatible - these shared attitudes also help to encourage self-disclosure in the beginning
Explain complementarity in filter theory
- We are attracted to those people who provide for our emotional needs
^— partners can have mutually beneficial differences - How well two people fit together as a couple + meet each other’s needs
- OPPOSITES ATTRACT
Outline the procedure of one study of the filter theory of attraction in romantic relationships
- Kerchhoff + Davies (1962)
- Longitudinal study on 94 dating couple @ Duke University in US
^— each partner in the couple completed two questionnaires assessing degree of which they shared attitudes + values & degree of need complementarity - 7 months after initial testing, couple completed further questionnaire assessing how close they felt to their partner compared to the beginning of the study
Outline the findings of one study of the filter theory of attraction in romantic relationships
- In initial analysis, only similarity appeared to be related to partner closeness | THEN divided couples into short-term (<18 months) and long-timer (>18 months)
- Short-term: Similarity in attitudes + values was most significant predictor of how close they felt to their partner
- Long-term: Only complementarity was predictive of how close individuals were to partners
What is Social Exchange Theory?
A theory of how relationships form + develop - assumes partners act out of self-interest in exchanging rewards + costs
- Assumes relationships are guided by the MINIMAX principle
- THIBAUT + KELLEY (1959) proposed relationships could be explained in terms of economics: satisfaction judged in terms of profit (perceives value of rewards minus the value of costs)
What is the MINIMAX principle?
States that partners try to minimise losses and maximise gains
How is relationship profit assessed in SET?
- Comparison Level
- Comparison Level for Alternatives
What is comparison level (CL)?
- Our perception of what rewards we deserve in a relationship - a standard against which all our relationships are judged
- This is the product of our experiences in other relationships together with our general views of what we might expect from this particular exchange
- If profit exceeds CL, then the relationship is deemed worthwhile and the person is attractive
- Someone who has previously had an unpleasant/unsatisfying relationship may have a very low CL + be perfectly happy in a relatively poor relationship
- If perceived profits > CL for both individuals, there is more solidarity between them
What is comparison level for alternatives (CLA)?
- An individual considers if there may be a greater profit in a different relationship w/ different partner
^— weighs up potential increase in rewards form different partner, minus any costs from ending current relationship - A new relationship can take the place of the current one if it’s anticipated profit level is higher
- Individual will be committed to current relationship if benefits & costs are greater than those perceived in an alt. relationship (or even having no relationship)
- Relationships may become less stable is one (or both) of the partners has a low level of dependence on that relationship
What are SET’s four stages of a relationship?
- Sampling stage
- Bargaining stage
- Commitment stage
- Institutionalisation stage
What is the sampling stage of SET?
- involves exploring rewards + costs or relationships by experimenting in own relationships & observing others
What is the bargaining stage of SET?
- occurs at start of relationship where romantic partners negotiate around rewards and costs
What is the commitment stage of SET?
- where relationships become more stable
Costs reduce + rewards increase
What is the institutionalisation stage of SET?
- when partners become settled because norms of relationship are settled
Outline the procedure of one study of SET
- Kurdek + Schmitt (1986)
- Investigated importance of social exchange factors in determining relationship quality in 185 couples
^— comprised 44 heterosexual married couples, 35 co-habiting heterosexual couples, 50 same-sex male couples _ 56 same-sex female couples - Each couple lived together + had no children living with them
- Each couple completed a questionnaire without discussing their answers with each other
Outline the findings of one study of SET
- Kurdek + Schmitt (1986)
- For each of the 4 different types of couple, greater relationship satisfaction was associated with:
^— perception of many benefits of current relationship (CL)
^— seeing alternatives to the current relationship as less attractive (CLA) - these findings show that the factors that predict satisfaction in same-sex relationships are the same ones that predict satisfaction in heterosexual relationships
What is equity theory (ET)?
- Walster et al.(1978) suggests partners aim for fairness
^— feel most comfortable when rewards are roughly equal to costs
Describe how inequity can distress partners
- Underbenefitted partner feels: anger + resentment -> ends relationship
- Overbenefitted partner feels: discomfort, guilt, shame -> ends relationship
Describe the consequences on inequity
- The more perceived inequity, the stronger sense of dissatisfaction (there is predicted to be a strong positive correlation)
- At the start of a relationship, it may feel natural to contribute more than what’s being received
^— but if that continues as relationship continues, dissatisfaction will set in
Outline the procedure of one study into equity theory
- Stafford and Canary (2006)
- Interested in how equity and satisfaction predicted the use of maintenance strategies typically used in marriage
- Asked 200+ married couples to complete measures of equity and relationship satisfaction
- Additionally, each spouse was asked questions about their use of relationship maintenance strategies such as assurances (emphasising affections + commitment), sharing tasks (household responsibilities + chores) & positivity (communicating in an upbeat manner)
Outline the findings of one study into equity theory
- Stafford + Canary (2006)
- Revealed that satisfaction was highest for spouses who perceived their relationships to be equitable, followed by overbenefitted partners, then underbenefitted partners
- Under benefitted husbands particularly reported lower levels of relationship maintenance strategies compared to equitable or overbenfitted husbands
- Relationship between equity and marital happiness appeared to be complementary
- Spouses who were treated equitably tended to be happier and do were more likely to engage in behaviours contributing to spouse’s sense of equity + happiness
What are the two ways of restoring equity in relationships?
- Behavioural
- Cognitive
Describe the behavioural method of restoring equity in a relationship
- Overbenefitted partner may increase costs
- Underbenefitted partner may decrease costs
Describe the cognitive method of restoring equity in a relationship
- Dissatisfied partner might revise their perceptions of rewards + costs so relationship feels more fair even if nothing changes
- What was once perceived as a cost (e.g. abuse) can become accepted as the norm of the relationship
Equity q.
What is the Investment Model of Relationships?
- Rusbult’s Investment Model (RIM)
- A way of understanding why people remain in some romantic relationships but not others
- A development of SET, considering how much has been invested in the current relationship, not just current satisfaction
What is commitment in the Investment Model?
The likelihood that an individual will persist with their current relationship
- increased commitment = remain in a relationship
What are the three factors that contribute to commitment in the Investment Model?
- Satisfaction
- Alternatives
- Investments
Outline the role of satisfaction the Investment Model of Relationships
- Refers to the positive versus negative emotions experiences within a relationship
- Influenced by the extent to which the other person fulfils the individual’s most important needs
^— e.g. a partner may feel satisfied to the degree that the other partner gratifies their domestic, companionate and sexual needs
Outline the role of alternatives the Investment Model of Relationships
- Quality of alternatives refers to the extent to which an individual’s most important needs might be better fulfilled outside the current relationship
^— perceiving that an attractive alternative might provide superior outcomes to those experiences in the current relationship might lead an individual towards that alternative and away from their current relationship - However, if alternatives are not present, an individual may persist with a relationship due to lack of better options
- Attractive alternatives are not always other people
^— e.g. no relationship may be more attractive than the current one
Outline the role of investments the Investment Model of Relationships
What are the two types of investment?
- Intrinsic
- Extrinsic
What is an intrinsic investment?
Things we put directly into the relationship (e.g. money, energy + self-disclosure)
What is an extrinsic investment?
Things brought into peoples’ lives as a result of the relationship (e.g. shared mortgage, house, children, shared memories)
What is Duck’s Model of Relationships Breakdown?
- Duck (1982)
- proposed a phase model of relationship breakdown
^— ending of a relationship is not a one-off | IT IS A PROCESS
What are the four phases of relationship breakdown?
- Intrapsychic phase
- Dyadic phase
- Social phase
- Grave-dressing phase
Explain the Intrapsychic phase of relationship breakdown
- PHASE 1
- One partner admits to themselves that they are dissatisfied w/ the relationship
^— burdened by feeling of resentment + a sense of being under-benefited
Explain the Dyadic phase of relationship breakdown
- PHASE 2
- Individuals confront their partners + begin to discuss their feelings of discontentment + the future of the relationship
- Feeling of guilt + anger are likely to surface as part of these discussions
^— may discover partner also has concerns - Couple may become away of the forces binding them together (e.g. children + other investments) + the costs that would be incurred
- Relationship can be saved is both partners are motivated to resolve the issue (may seek couples therapy)
- Or may involve others
Explain the Social phase of relationship breakdown
- PHASE 3
- Privacy gone, dissatisfaction spills over to network of friends/family
- Distress experienced by one/both partners is now made public
^— harder for partners to deny there is a problem with their relationship + harder for them to bring about reconciliation - Others may take sides, offer advice/support, or may help in mending disputes between 2 sides
Explain the Grave-dressing phase of relationship breakdown
- PHASE 4
- Left the relationship
- Each partner must present themselves to others as trustworthy + loyal (to attract a new partner)
- Striving to construct a representation of the failed relationship that doesn’t paint their contribution to it as unfavourable
- May also strategically reinterpret their view of their partner
^— e.g. initially attracted to their ‘rebellious nature’ but now label that trait as irresponsible
What are virtual relationships?
Relationships that are formed + maintained using online communication platforms such as emails, social media, texting, chat rooms, etc…
What are the two theories on self-disclosure in virtual relationships?
- Reduced cues theory
- Hyperpersonal model
What is the reduced cues theory?
- Sproull + Kiesler (1986) - SD DECREASES in virtual; relationships
- Virtual relationships lack non-verbal cues (e.g. facial expressions, vocal tone, by language
^— this is relied on in face-to-face relationships - Leads to de-individuation
^— causes blunt + even aggressive communication + this results in a reluctance to self-disclose
What is de-individuation?
In terms of virtual relationships, people online feel free from social norms and become disinhibited
What is the hyperpersonal model?
- Walter (1996) - SD INCREASES in virtual relationships
- Virtual relationships can develop very quickly as self-disclosure happens early (INTENSE + INTIMATE)
According to the hyperpersonal model, why is self-disclosure higher?
- Sender has greater control of what they’re disclose (selective self-presentation) + may be hyperhonest or hyper dishonest
- Receiver’s feedback may reinforce sender’s selective self-presentation + prompt further self-disclosure
- Anonymity = INCREASED self-disclosure
What are gates in terms of virtual relationships?
Barriers that limit opportunities for the less attractive shy, or less socially-skilled to form relationships in face-to-face encounters
Outline the effect of absence of gating in virtual relationships
- Due to relative anonymity of internet, gates are not initially evident + are less likely to stop potential relationships forming
- Removing traditional gating features that dominate initial liking + relationship formation is that a person’s true self id more likely to be active in internet relationships than irl
Outline the nature of self-disclosure in virtual relationships
Define parasocial relationships
An individual is attracted to another person (usually a celebrity), who is usually unaware of the existence of the person who has created the relationship
List the levels of celebrity worship using the Celebrity Attitude Scale
- Entertainment-social
- Intense-personal
- Borderline-pathological
Outline the absorption addiction model
- McCutcheon (2002)
- Most people never go beyond admiring celebrities because of he celebrities’ entertainment/social value
- Those who go much further than that + engage in celebrity worship are compensating for deficiencies in life
^— e.g. difficulty forming intimate relationships, low self-esteem or poor psychological functioning - Forming parasocial relationships allows them to achieve fulfilment they lack in everyday life
- Someone who starts as entertainment-social may be triggered into a more intense level by a stressful life event
What is the entertainment-social level of parasocial relationships
- Fans are attracted to a favourite celebrity + will watch, keep up with, read + learn about that celebrity for entertainment + gossip purposes
^— e.g. friends w/ interests in reality TV enjoy discussing drama between characters on Love Island
^— e.g. “Learning the life story of my favourite celebrity is a lot of fun@
What is the intense-personal level of parasocial relationships
Involves a deeper level of involvement and reflects intensive + compulsive feelings about the celebrity, akin to the obsessive tendencies of fans often referred to in the literature
^— e.g. Kylie Jenner fan might frequently comment on her social media posts + think they are soulmates
^— e.g. “I love to talk to others who admire my favourite celebrity”
What is the borderline-pathological level of parasocial relationships
Typified by empathy w/ the celebrity (as individuals at this level identify with the celebrities successes + failure
- Also over identification with the celebrity + uncontrollable behaviours + fantasies about their lives
^— e.g. Christiano Ronaldo fan spend more money on signed football boots or be willing to commit illegal acts to see him
^— e.g. “If I walked through the door of my favourite celebrity’s house, they would be happy to see me”
Explain the absorption element of the absorption addiction model
- Seeking fulfilment in celebrity worship motivates an individual to focus attention on the celebrity to become absorbed in the celebrity’s existence and identify with them
Explain the addiction element of the absorption addiction model
- Like physiological addition
^— an individual needs to increase their ‘dose’ of involvement to gain satisfaction
^— may lead to more extreme behaviours + delusional thinking (i.e. borderline pathological)
Outline the attachment theory explanation of parasocial relationships
- Bowlby’s attachment theory suggests early difficulties in attachment may lead to difficulties in forming successful relationships irl
- Parasocial relationships may function similarly to ‘real life’ relationships in terms of attachment behaviours
^— relationships with TV personalities exhibit to some degree the three fundamental properties of adult attachment
What are Weiss’ (1991) three fundamental properties of adult attachment?
- Proximity seeking
- Secure base
- Protest at disruption
Explain the role of proximity seeking in parasocial relationships
- Individuals attempt to reduce the distance between themselves and their attachment figure
^— fans exhibit proximity-seeking behaviour w/ parasocial relationships - Research shown that people like to stay informed about their favourite celebrities - collecting trivia about them, rearranging schedules to see them on TV, attempting to contact through letters or in person
Explain the role of secure bases in parasocial relationships
- Presence of attachment figure provides a sense of security for the individual (a ‘safe haven’) that allows them to explore the world
- W/ parasocial relationships, where little/no chance of rejection from the attachment figure, the individual can create a secure base from which they can explore other relationships in a safe way
Explain the protests at disruption in parasocial relationships
- Best marker of an attachment may be the presence of prolonged distress following separation/loss of an attachment figure
^— e.g. BBC axing Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear in 2015 was met by raw emotion associated with the loss of an attachment figure
^— met with comments such as ‘I want to cry’ + ‘Top Gear gave my life purpose’
What two attachment styles did Ainswoth associate with unhealthy emotional development?
- Insecure-resistant
- Insecure-avoidant
State the association of the insecure-resistant attachment type with parasocial relationships
- MOST LIEKLY to form parasocial relationships
^— they want to have their unfulfilled needs met but w/out rejection, disappointment + criticism they associate with real relationships
State the association of the insecure-avoidant attachment type with parasocial relationships
- AVOID pain + rejection of any type of relationship (parasocial or social)
