Relationships Flashcards
What’s sexual selection
traits which increase reproductive success,
eg aggression (in males) and child bearing hips (in women) give an
evolutionary advantage. Those who show these traits are more likely to
survive and pass on the genes responsible.
Inter-sexual selection
.
Certain traits increase attractiveness and thereby induce members of the opposite sex to mate with them.
Intra-sexual selection
Certain traits enable competition with members of the same sex e.g. strength enables males to compete
successfully for females.
Male strategy example
Sneak copulation – males mate with females other than their partners if given the opportunity, as it
increases their chances of reproductive success. They want to have as much offspring as possible and continue the bloodline
Female strategy example
Sexy sons hypothesis – females select attractive males as they will produce sons with the same attractive
features, increasing their sons’ and thus their own reproductive success.
Evaluation for Evolutionary Explanations for Partner Preferences
☺ Research to support the evolutionary explanation for partner preferences was conducted by Buss
(1989). He carried out a survey on over 10,000 participants from 37 countries and found that males
prefer young, physically attractive females, whereas females prefer resource rich, ambitious males.
These findings reflect sex differences in sexual selection, therefore supporting predictions of partner
preferences made by the evolutionary explanation.
In addition, the evolutionary explanation for partner preferences lacks temporal validity. In modern
society the expectations of males and females are less stereotyped. For example, women are more
autonomous so less dependent on finding a man with resources to support them. Furthermore, there
has been a huge increase in single women having children. Therefore, evolutionary explanations of
partner preferences may not be applicable to the present day.
Biological dtermism , unconscious ideas, lack free will
Factors affecting attraction
Self disclosure
Filter theory
Physical attractiveness
Factors affecting attraction- self disclosure
Self-disclosure refers to revealing personal information about yourself.
It predicts indivs gradually reveal their inner self to someone else going from
superficial information and then deeper info
- it increases attractiveness and closeness and by revealing ur true self it invites the partner to reciprocate in a rewarding way which deepens the intimacy and rs
Self disclosure AO3
☺ Research to support was conducted by Sprecher and Hendrick. They
studied heterosexual dating couples found strong correlations between measures of
satisfaction and self-disclosure (both theirs and their partner’s). Men and women who used self-
disclosure and those who believed their partners did likewise were more satisfied with, and
committed to their romantic relationships. Therefore, supporting self-disclosure as a factor
affecting attraction in romantic relationships
d - Cultural bias – Self-disclosure patterns vary across cultures. For example, Western cultures (individualistic) tend to disclose more personal information than collectivist cultures like Japan or China. This suggests self-disclosure is not universally beneficial. Findings can’t be Generlised to collectivist cultures
Factors Affecting Attraction: Physical attractiveness (AO1)
Based on an evolutionary theory. found ppl with symmetrical faces
are rated as more attractive.Bc it may be a signal of genetic fitness as its difficult
to fake facial symmetry.
Women with neotenous (baby-face) features eg separated large eyes and a small nose are seen
as more attractive because they trigger a protective and caring instinct
Found physical attractive ppl are rated more successful sociable and kind compared to unattractive ppl (halo effect)
Matching hypothesis - ppl will get w someone who has the same lvl of attractiveness as themselves
Factors affecting attraction
ao3
D - alternate explanations, for it which is self disclosure
A - In addition, there are many similarities across cultures when studying physical attractiveness as a
factor affecting attraction in romantic relationships. Large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small nose and
high eyebrows were rated attractive by Hispanic and Asian males. Furthermore, American and Korean
students judged physically attractive people to be more trustworthy, friendly and mature. This therefore
means it is possible to generalise findings from western cultures to non-western cultures as they have
displayed similarities when investigating physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction in
romantic relationships.
Furthermore, research into physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction in romantic
relationships is often carried out using self-reports (questionnaires and interviews) which could lead to
social desirability bias eg . Seeming cocky or superficial
Factors Affecting Attraction: Filter theory (AO1)
Filter Theory explains how people develop romantic relationships by filtering potential partners based on different criteria over time. It’s split into 3 stages
Social demography
- Social Demography – the first filter, individs are more likely to form relationships with those who share similar social backgrounds (e.g., age, ethnicity, religion, location, and social class). Proximity and accessibility play a role in initial attraction.
Similarity in attitudes
- Similarity in Attitudes – As the relationship progresses, partners evaluate whether they share similar values, beliefs, and interests. This is crucial in the early stages of a relationship, as having the same attitudes promotes deeper connection and reduces conflicts.
Complementarity
- Complementarity – In long-term relationships, individuals seek partners whose traits complement their own. For example, one partner might be more dominant while the other is more nurturing. This balance enhances relationship stability and satisfaction.
Ao3 to filter theory
❌ Cultural bias – The theory is based on Western, individualistic cultures where people have free will to choose partners, so it may not apply to collectivist cultures where parents choose their own filters to their children through arranged marriages.
❌ Lack of temporal validity – this theory was made 1962 Online dating has changed how people meet, making social demography less relevant.
❌Alternate explanations eg physical attractiveness
✅ Supporting evidence – Kerckhoff & Davis (1962) found that attitude similarity was important in short-term relationships, whereas complementarity was crucial for long-term couples.
Social exchange theory (SET)
An economic theory of relationships that considers how parties exchange rewards and costs.
Homan suggested that relationships involve rewards BUT ALSO costs (e.g. money, time, and emotional
distress). He suggests individuals are attracted to those who offer rewards.and an indiv seeks to maximise reward and minimise cost
If rewards outweigh the costs, there is PROFIT. Vice versa, there is loss, which leads to dissatisfaction.
Therefore a relationship where the rewards exceed the costs and is mutually beneficial will be
maintained.
What are comparison levels (apart of SET ao1)
This develops from
our past relationships and we use this to compare with our current relationship rewards, it’s the amount of reward u believe u deserve to get
What are the comparison levels of alternatives part of SET
We compare our rewards and costs in our current
relationships compared to potential ones.
Ao3 to SET
Research has shown the social economic theory doesn’t consider altruism and only applies to rs where couples ‘keep score’ and couples can be happy to provide and care for their partner without caring about the profits (communal couple) . Thus the SET ignores doing nice things for someone else out basic kindness and simplifies it to profit and loss , so this theory can only be applied to certain rs types (the exchange couple) where couples score keep about who’s winning and loosing
Disadv- there are alternate theory’s to be considered
SET also shown to work better for explaining how relationships last, rather than how they start. Rusbult asked ppt to complete questionnaires over a 7 month period noting the costs and rewards in their rs it was found set didn’t explain the honey moon stage where balances of exchanges are ignored but later on in the rs this is when ppl question is the rs is worth it based on the costs and rewards
The Equity Theory (Walster) is another economic model .
the idea of fairness for each partner, Each partner
should experience a balance between their cost/effort and their benefit/reward. profit levels should be the same, if
there is inequity then there will be dissatisfaction
If someone is under benefited and the partner is over benefitting this is a period of imbalance , they can negotiate trade offs to achieve fairness, this is realignment
Ao3 equity theory
☺ Research comes from Dainton who studied 219 individuals in romantic
relationships. findings : those in rs of perceived inequity had low rs
satisfaction & indivs were motivated to return to an equitable state to
maintain the relationship, giving further support for the importance of realignment. This suggests that
equity is one of the main factors in relationship satisfaction and maintenance supporting the equity
theory as a theory or romantic relationships.
Disadv - may not apply to all cultures. Research found
there are culture differences in the link between equity and satisfaction. Couples from an
individualist culture (USA) considered their relationships to be most satisfying when the relationship
was equitable whereas partners in a collectivist culture (Jamaica) were most satisfied when they were
overbenefitting. This was true of both men and women, so cannot be explained by gender differences.
This suggest that the theory is not universal in nature when explaining romantic relationships.
Disadv - alternate explanations to rs
Rusbult’s Investment model of commitment, satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment.
AO1
Emphasises the importance of commitment in relationships , commitment depends on 3 factors:
1. Satisfaction- the degree to which the partner meets the individual’s needs, eg ) sexual
- Comparison with alternatives – eg the extent to which an alternative partner could better fulfil your
emotional and sexual needs. If you believe they cannot be, then the commitment to the relationship is
stronger. Better alternatives = less satisfaction. - Investment size – This refers to the amount and importance of the rewards associated with a relationship.
There are two types of investment , direct and indirect . Intrinsic investment refers to resources put directly into the relationship) e.g. time . Extrinsic investment (refers to investments which did not previously feature in the relationship which
are now closely associated with it) e.g. shared friends,
High satisfaction + no better alternative + a larger investment size
Increased lvl of commitment to the rs
Ao3 to rusbult
☺ Research carried out by Rusbult gave the investment
model scale (IMS) to student participants in heterosexual relationships. She found that commitment in
relationships was positively correlated with satisfaction level, negatively correlated with the quality of
alternatives and positively correlated with investment size. This was also given to participants in
homosexual relationships and participants in marital relationships and the same findings into all three
factors were found. Suggesting that Rusbult’s investment model can be used as a theory to explain a
variety of romantic relationships.
Critisim is that research is correlational cause and effect cannot be established between commitment and the
three factors. It cannot be proven that the three factors (satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and
investment size) cause commitment in a relationship. It may actually be the case that because someone
is committed in a relationship they feel they want to invest more. Therefore this decreases the internal
validity
Disadv- alternate explanation
