relationships Flashcards
what are the factors affecting attraction?
1 physical attractiveness , including the matching hypothesis
2 self disclosure
3 filter theory
what physical features are we attracted to?
facial symmetry is thought to be a signal of genetic fitness .
neotenous faces baby face like big eyes make men want to care for them and protect them
fertility features like wide hips show women can give birth better and small waist shows no already pregnant so they can carry on their bloodline
wide top for men to protect offspring
what is the halo effect?
we believe that physically attractive people other attributes are also overwhelmingly positive like being nicer and smarter.
dion et al 1972 found that physically attractive people are consistently found kind strong sociable and successful compared to unattractive people.
what is the matching hypothesis?
Walster suggested you should be more attracted to a person who matches your attractiveness level.
all uni students secretly rate attractiveness ]and you bought a ticket
filled questionnaire told going be matched on personality but randomly put with a partner
findings didn’t support the hypothesis
spent time with someone more attractive was rated better then someone same as you
he conducted a further study this time participants met before computer dance and were given a choice of who to partner to the dance
not just physical attractiveness makes a relationship work
people have other features that make them attractive like being funny or a gentleman. this suggests that people are able to attract partners far more physically attractive than themselves by offering compensatory assets for an example an older wealthy man may pair with an attractive young women
physical attractiveness is not always import in initial attraction
research shown when we look at online dating they dont think of their own attractiveness they just think wow there attractive and go for them which doest support mathing hypothesis but actually support what walster found in comptutar dance
physical attractiveness is more important for males and are more satisfied with their relationship
meltzer provided support for this claim they found objective ratings of their wives attractiveness were positively related to levels of hsubands satisfaction at the begining of marriage and remained. in contrast and supporting women dont have correlation with attraction and satisfactory of relationship
what is self disclosure?
it is telling someone your deepest thoughts and feelings can strengthen a romantic bond when used appropriately . a way of developing trust in a relationship without trust a relationship will not develop and be long lasting
what is social penetration theory
a gradual processes of revealing your inner self to someone and them reciprocating between intimate partner when one discloses it shows trust .
as they increasingly disclose more information the partners penetrate more deeply into each others lives, this signals that a person likes us.
what is spreachers study
it was 156 uni students paired into two person couples two thirds were female and one third were male female. spreacher and hendrick found strong correlations between several measures of satisfaction and self- disclosure in hetrosexual couples
counter- spreacher and hendrick found strong positive correlations but this does not mean that self disclosure causes relationships to be satisfying. it may be that satisfied partners disclose more , or both caused by times sent together.
This suggests that self disclosure may not cause satisfaction directly which reduces he validity of social penetration theory.
a meta analysis much bigger sample more generalisable
relationship was stronger
some researchers have suggested that relationships formed over the internet involve higher levels of self disclosure than in face to face relationships
as couples do this they may lack trust which has usually developed in face to face relationships. explains why some people who leave relationships with someone that they met online usually end in disaster.
there are cultural differences when it comes to self disclosure
in western people are more likely to engage intimate self disclosure Americans are more likely to disclose.
alpha bias exaggerates difference
what is filter theory ?
suggest we chose romantic partners by using a sense of filters what narrows down the field of availables.
social demorgraphy
same location
socail class
friends
more likely same ethnic
similarity in attitude
values need to agree
best predictor of the relationship becoming stable
complementary attributes
somebody meeting a need you need in them
if one partner s particular low n a particular attribute in the other it should be high
longitudinal study
evidence to support found complementary of needs more important where relationships gets to 18 months. our needs change as our relationships develop
Duck 1973
suggest real value of the filtering process
that it allows people to make predictions about their future interactions and so avoid investing in a relationship that wont work. real life application
important is that males and females filter out different things due to having different needs applies to age and culture
most research to support filter theory was performed in individualistic cultures where relationships are affected by different limiting factors. cultural relativism not generalisable
what is natural selection?
when certain features exist because they provide an advantages which insures survival. therefore the features are passed on through genes to the future offspring.
what is sexual selection?
when certain bodily features exist because they are valued by potential partners and deemed attractive , leading to increased opportunities for mating and greater reproductive success.
what is anisogamy and mate selection?
the difference between males and females sex cells. male sperm is extremely mobile small and produced in vast numbers. whereas female eggs are large static and not plentiful. this leads to two types of mating strategies - sexual selection theory.
inter sexual selection
takes place when members of one sex often females choose males from the other sex. females may choose mates for a range of reasons these could be because they could appear more healthy so will pass a good genes to offspring.
intra sexual selection
takes place when members of one sex usually makes compete for access to the other sex. characteristics that make a male more successful in a fight are likely to be passed on to offspring.
What was buss 1989 study?
a study of 10,000 adults in 33 countries : females place greater value on resources ranked characteristics such as good financial prospects ambition and industriius makes valued reproductive capacity in terms of good cooks chasity and youth. these finding reflect sex differences in mating strategies due to anisogamy and support predictions about partner preferences from sexual selection theory.
Buss evaluation
outdated view change society women provide for herseck and dont need to look for a male to do that
supports intra selection
what did Clark and halfreud suggest?
women are less likely to agree to a one night stand. Whereas males would support inter selection no females
#wherea 75% males agreed to one night stand
clark and halfreud evaluation
limited sample only done on university students
however supports that women are more choosy than males have evolved a different strategy to ensure reproductive success to carry on their bloodline
women arent sociallised to talk freely about sexual relationships
also socially desirable
what’s Cunningham’s research?
men were attracted to women with large eyes and small nose and chins. theses are all features which are child like which is important to men as it shows youth.
Cunningham’s evaluation
neonates face
shows more fertile which shows carry on bloodline
which supports intra selection
whats singh 1993 findings?
that men found women with small waists and large hips most attractive as this is a honest signal that the women is fertile but not currently pregant .
Singh evaluation
support intra selection raising babies that are their theirs and no one elses
what is the social exchange theory?
this is an economic ( weakness , oversimplify) theory of relationships which suggests that we seek to give and receive valuable goods in relationships. the theory assumes that we act of self - interest.
we aim to minimise losses and maximise profits. we just our satisfaction in relationhsips by how much profit we gain. we stay in relationships because we are in profit.
comparison level
one way in which we measure profit
will consider previous relationships and cultural norm to decide whether a relationship is profitable. our expectations are based on media ideas what relationships should look like
it is also linked with our self esteem- high self esteem means we have high expectations
low self esteem might have lower expectations
comparison level for alternatives
another way which we measure profit
a partner may consider whether the alternative another relationship or being alone is more profitable than the current relationships
people stay in relationships if they are more profitable than the alternative
duck suggests that contented partner wont even consider alternatives and may not realise they exist
Thibault and kelley suggest relationships develops through four stages which are:
1 sampling explore cost and rewards to offer
2 bargaining negotiate what is a cost and what is a reward at this point they make the decision if they want to carry on the relationship
3 commitment more stable relationship cost reduce rewards increase
4 institutionalisation when partner becomes settled because norms of the relationships are established
What do clark and mills suggest?
that this theory fails to distinguish between two types of relationships more likely in romantic relationships then platonic ones
therefore ungeneralisable
What does Set theory suggest?
That dissatisfaction sets in when costs out weigh the rewards. or alternatives seem more attractive However potential problem with cause and effect but argyle argues dissatisfaction comes first then we start to perceive costs and alternatives committed partners do no even notice alternatives. therefore considering costs/alternatives is caused by dissatisfaction rather than the reverse a direction not predicted by social exchange theory
it is difficult to measure costs and rewards in relationships because
its subjective as its different for different people therefore cant generalise the findings
what is equity theory?
the term equity means fairness both partners level of profit needs to be fair so roughly the same. levels of costs and rewards do not need to be the same.
when there is a lack of equity for example one partner over benefits and the other under benefits from the relationships there will be disatisfaction.
over benefitted partner will feel guitly
under benefitted partner will feel resentful and frustrated this partner wil be more likely wanting to change this- inequity
consequences of inequity
both partners will feel disatisfieds
over benefitted will feel guilty and under benefitted will feel resentful and most wanting a change
changes in perception of equity
view things as fair
might be happy at the start to put loads of effort in but as the relationships develop so does our perception of whether this is okay.
Dealing with inequity
just accept it or say goodbye to the relationship, under benefitted feel more dissatisfied try have change level of profit which is behavioural or changing what you think about cost and rewards which is cognitive so they feel more equitable even though nothing has changed
what was once perceived as a cost can seem and become as the norm for the relationship
There is research to support equity theory
Mary Utne looked at couples that have been recently married found their relationship to be equitable were more satisfied then those who believed they were under or over benefitted
on the other handf correlation adn self reports which give socially desired answers instead of truthful ones positive correlation
this study supports the central predictions of equity theory that equity is a major concern of couples and is linked with satisfaction.
dont know about long term marriages as it was only recently married.
cultural limitations for equity theory
found that individualist cultures consider their relationship to be most satisfying when their relationship was equitable. however partners in a collectivist culture jamaica were most satisfied when over benefitting men and women so not explained by gener differences. this suggests that the theory is limited as it only applies to some cultures,
individual differences in equity theory
some people are more concearned about equity then others. they describe some partners as benevolent who are prepared to contribute more to the relationship.
on the other hand others believe they are entitled to being overbenefitted and accept it without feeling guilty. this shows that a desire for equity varies from one individual to another and is not a universal feauture of romantic relationships/
what is rusbults investment model?
if satisfaction levels are high comparison with alternatives are low. when you invest more in a relationship like a house or children or finances you are less likely to leave.
we stay because we are committed satisfaction contributes to this
behavioural maintenance strategies
Accommodation promote the relationship no tit for tat point scoring. putting their partners interests first willingness to sacrifice.
forgiving them for any serious transgressions
cognitive maintenance strategies positive illusions taking about partner in a positive way.
ridiculing alternatives negative views about alternative no one else will put up with me or with that
extrinsic
resources that are acquired from the relationship
e.g. kids house
instrinisic
resources we directly put in
there is research to support rusbult investment model
meta analysis by Agnew reviewed 52 studies from late 1970 to 1990sudies which together included 11,000 participants from five countries. they found that satisfaction comparison with alternatives and investment predicted commitment - commitment linked with greater stability and longevity. the outcomes were true for both men and women across all cultures and for homosexual and heterosexual relationships. this suggests that the models claim that these are universally important in relationships is valid.
rusbults investment model is based on correlational research
cant imply cause and effect even the strongest correlation is no evidence of a causation. couldn’t find another alternative cant study relationships in experimental methods. it does not follow the factors in the correlations caused commitment e.g. perhaps commitment comes before investment.
rusbults investment models explains why people stay in abusive relationships
real life application rusbult studied women staying at a shelter. hose reporting the greatest investment and fewest alternatives were most likely to return to abusive partners. the women i this study were dissatisfied with their relationship but returned to their partners because they were committed to them. therefore the model shows that satisfaction on its own cannot explain why people stay in relationships - commitment and investment are also factors.
what are ducks 5 phase model of a relationship breakdown?
it refers to the break down relationships as a process
1 intra- psychic phase
2 dyadic phase
3 social phase
4 grave dressing phase
5 resurrection phase, which was added later
what’s the intra-psychic stage?
i cant stand this anymore! indicating a determination that something has to change the focus of this phase is on cognitive process occurring with the individual. The dissatisfied partner worries about the reasons for this and will usually focus on the partners shortcomings. the partner thinks over this privately and weigh up pros and cons about their relationship
what’s the dyadic phase ?
cannot avoid talking about their relationship any longer. there is a series of confrontation over a period of time in which the relationship is discussed. this is the time where they may see a counsellor if point done well they may exit the model and continue maintenance
whats the social phase?
dissatisfied partner concludes i mean it! couples social networks break up is made public partners will seek support and try to forge pacts. mutual friends find they are expected to choose sides. factions are formed gossip is traded
whats the grave dressing phase?
inevitable
aftermath once relationship is dead the time comes to bury it by spinning it . likely to make a variation where they will be judged most favourably.
whats the resurrection phase?
ex partners can turn their attention to future relationship using the experiences gained from their recently added
there are methodological issues with the research studies for duck phase model of relationship break down
socially desiability bias. ducks model is retrospective partcipant generally give their experiences of breakdown process some time after relationship has ended. this means that what we recall may not be reliable , its impossible to study this phase in the relationship when problems first appear,
the ducks phase model theory has real world application
the model suggests that some repair strategies might be more effective at one stage of relationship break down than another. for example in the intra psychic stage partners could worry more positively about each other. improving communication skills is beneficial in the dyadic stage. this suggests that the model can provide supportive insights to help people through difficult times in their lives.
ducks phase model may be culturally biased
on the other hand Moghaddam, argue the model is based on breakdown in individualist cultures where relationships are mostly voluntary and often end. relationships in collectivist cultures are often obligatory and less easy to end the whole concept of romantic relationships differs between cultures . therefore the models application to reverse breakdown can only be applied in some cultures,
self disclosure in computer mediated communication cmc
self disclosure in online relationships is more likely top make people feel more open they might be more likely to open up as there is less focus on physical appearance. There are two opposing theories about how self- disclosure works in virtual relationships.
what is the reduced cues theory?
cmc relationships are less effective than f to f ones as they lack the normal cues non verbal communication like gestures and facial expressions leads to deindividuation which then leads to disinhibited in relations to other. therefore less likely to disclose personal information because you dont see the person as real.
what is the hyperpersonal model?
cmc relationships can be intense more quickly. we are more likely to disclose personal information because we can be anonymous. selective self presentation display what we want to be seen and show perfect version of ourselves online
whats the evaluation for reduced cues theory?
lack of research support , the theory is wrong to say it has no cues as we use emojis to display how we are feeling. this is hard for reduced cues theory to explain because it suggests virtual relationships can be as personal as ftf ie no differences
what’s the evaluation for hype personal model?
there is research support for hyperpersonal model people asre more motivated to be hyper honset or hyper dishonest in online relationships supports idea we disclose more/. questions online are often more direct
what is meant by absence of gating in virtual relationships?
A gate is a barrier which may prevent you from starting a relationship with someone this could be physical in attractiveness as a stammer anxiety or shyness as online could not see this
whats the evalaution for absence of gating in virtual relationships ?
research to support the absence of gating mckenna and bargh researched lonely and socially anxious people they found that when relationships were formed online over 70% lasted more than two years. this is higher than when the relationships were instigated in the real world.
there are different types of cmc
if you compare communication over dating sites that is likely to be less direct because you may see someone in the real world eventually. in comparison online chat rooms or twitter people may be more direct and give lots of information because they do not anticipate that they will see the person in real life. therefore the theories are only a small part of our understanding and not valid.
relationships are multimodel
this means that they exist both online and offline therefore its not as straightforward to say that relationships are one or the other
what is a parasocial relationship?
one sided relationship with a celebrity. the person feels close to their celebrity but the celebrity has no idea they exist
Horton and wohl
the fan knows all about the celebrity but the celebrity doesn’t know the fan exists. could be relationship with a team, an organisation a brand or an fictional character
levels of parasocial relationships
mcCutcheon et al 2002 developed the celebrity attiude scales [ self report=socially desireability bias] which was used by maltby et al 2006 to collect research to develop the three levels of a parasocial relationship
mild- entertainment - social
moderate- intense-personal
severe - borderline pathological
what is the mild entertainment social level?
celeberities are viewed as a source of entertainment with minimal emotional investment
what is moderate intense personal Para social level?
celebrities are seen as potential soulmates with a deep interest in their levels
what is severe borderline pathological level in Para social relationships?
significant resources are spent to feel close to celeberities believing in a friendship
what is the absorption -addiction model?
explanation of Para social relationships?
explains parasocial relationships as a total pre-occupation in a celebrity life, plus an addiction to having a stronger involvement. A parasocial relationship allows them to escape from reality. someone who initially has an entertainment social orientation to a celebrity may be triggered into a more intense involvement by some personal crisis or stressful life event. it has two components:
absoption or addiction
Absorption
compensates for some deficiencies in their life lack of identity difficulty forming intimate relationships. gives fulfilment and a sense of purpose
Addiction
sense fulfilment becomes addictive dopamine hit and want to do it again
what do Giles and maltby suggest?
that a parasocial relationships develops through three levels. Firstly, the fan is attracted to the celebrity , they will watch them follow them on social media keep up with their business. secondly they will become more intense and start to have feeling towards them. thirdly they become addicted and start to develop uncontrollable behaviour and fantasies about their lives.
evaluation of the absorption - addiction model
-one problem is that it offers a better description rather than explanation. therefore it lacks validity as it cannot be used to explain why people develop Para social relationships.
Maltby evaluation 2005
Maltby 2005 - most research is correlational so cant establish cause and effect lack identity
Maltby evaluation 2003
useful applications types of personality practical
- extravert psychotic and neurotic, he found that extravert were more likely to be at the entertainment social level and neurotics at the intense personal level and psychotics at the borderline pathological level. supporting absorption addiction model this suggests research into para social can be used to improve professional understanding
what is attachment theory?
it attempts to explain where para social relationships develop from. suggests a tendency to form parasocial relationships in adolescence and adulthood because of attachment difficulties in early life.
Bowlby suggested early difficulties could lead to emotional troubles - think about continuity hypothesis that your internal working model with continue to effect your relationships.
what did Ainsworth suggest about Para social relationships?
Ainsworth suggested that insecure resistant and insecure avoidant attachment types developed if attachment was not secure.
Insecure resistant attachment types need to have unfulfilled needs met through a parasocial relationship because they are not able top do this in real life for fear of rejection and break up.
evaluation of attachment theory
- mccutcheon et al 2006 failed to find any evidence of a link between attachment type and prevalence of parasocial relationships. Therefore the validity of this theory is poor
methodological issues - lack of research
overall evaluation for attachment theory
Research has shown that para social relationships tend to be the same in different cultures. For example when schmid and klimmet 2011 studied germany and mexico they found similar patterns of para social relationships regarding harry potter .this shows the importance of mainstream media in different cultures.
methodological issues:
