Relationships Flashcards
Self-disclosure (AO1)
Self-disclosure - revealing personal info about yourself
Increased disclosure = greater feelings of intimacy and satisfaction
Social penetration theory:
A gradual process of revealing your inner self to someone in layers
Breadth - range of topics (at the start we speak about a few safe topics)
Depth - detail of topics (at the start we reveal superficial info that is low risk)
Reciprocity - returning the self-disclosure (when one person self-discloses they display trust leading to the other to self-disclose - turn taking)
Self-disclosure (AO3)
P: research support
E: Sprecher and Hendrick found a close correlation between level of satisfaction and overall self disclosure
T: shows self disclosure is an important factor affecting attraction - increases credibility
F: high ecological validity - real dates observed
P: Do not know direction of causation
E: it may be that as partners become more satisfied they disclose more deeply and broadly
T: cannot claim for sure that increased self-disclosure leads to satisfaction - cannot establish cause and effect
P: increased self-disclosure does not always lead to satisfaction
E: duck’s phase model states that during a relationship breakdown, we disclose more as an attempt to save the relationship even though it often does not work
T: increased self-disclosure can also lead to dissatisfaction
P: real world application
E: it can be used in counselling where the aim is to upskill the less skilled partner’s use of self-disclosure
T: improves couples quality of life
Physical attraction - (AO1)
Symmetry - an equal face is attractive as it is a sign of genetic fitness (sexual selection)
Neotenous - baby-face features are attractive as they trigger a protective instinct (valuable for reproduction)
Halo effect - people who are judged as attractive typically are perceived in a positive light
Dion et al - found attractive people are consistently rates as successful, kind and sociable compared to unattractive people
C: correlation - not causation
Matching hypothesis - we choose a partner of similar attractiveness to ourselves in order to:
- avoid rejection by someone out of our league
- we subconsciously have an idea of our own level of attractiveness
Silverman - found high degree of similarity between attractiveness from observer ratings of couples on dates
F: high ecological validity
Physical attraction - (AO3)
P: culture bias
E: not all relationships are governed by attraction as in arranged marriages the most important thing to consider is the suitors family (benefits of joining households)
T: cannot people applied across cultures
P: ignores other factors affecting initial attraction
E: such as humour, location, opinions
T: only a partial explanation
Filter theory - (AO1)
Field of availables - the entire set of potential romantic partners
Filed of desirables - a limited collection of potential romantic partners based on our preferences
1: Social demography - geographical location, social class, religion
2: Similarity in attitudes - share the same beliefs/ interests/ morals and values
3: Complementary - having traits the other lacks
Filter theory - (AO3)
P: contradictory research
E: Anderson et al - found partners become more similar in their emotional responses over time as opposed to begin with
T: suggests similarity isn’t a cause of attraction but rather happens within the relationship
P: low temporal validity
E: the role of social demography has changed over time sure to things such as dating apps (location does not matter)
T: filter theory is outdated and cannot explain modern day relationships - reduces its explanatory power
C: does not impact the 2nd and 3rd filters
P: culture bias
E: most research is conducted in individualistic cultures where there is free choice in relationships but this isnt always the case in collectivist cultures such as arranged marriages
T: not a universal explanation
P: research support
E: study found 50% of citizens of Columbus, Ohio were married to partners who initially lives within walking distance of their house
T: increases the credibility
Evolutionary explanation of partner preference - (AO1)
Evolution - the process of natural selection ensures that specific traits providing a survival advantage are passes on from one generation to another
Sexual selection - characteristics that increases reproductive success are passed on (may become exaggerated over time)
Anisogamy - the differences between male and female sex cells
- sperm - small, created continuously in vast numbers from puberty to old age, do not require huge investment of energy = no shortage of fertile males
- egg - large, produced at intervals for a limited number of fertile years, require huge investment of energy = fertile females are a rare resource
Intra-sexual selection: males compete with other males and those who are successful are able to pass on their genes (mate with as many as possible)
Inter-sexual selection - Females need to be more careful when choosing a partner due to investment of time, energy and resources to raise a child (mate with one genetically fit partner who can provide for you and your offspring)
Physical dimorphism - different sexual selection strategies lead to different physical appearances
Male - physically strong and aggressive (compete)
Female - opposite
Evolutionary explanations of partner preference - (AO3)
P: research support
E: Buss conducted a survey of heterosexual mate selection and found that men preferred good looks, youth and chasity while women preferred financial prospects, industriousness and dependability
T: reflects anisogamy - increases credibility
C: excludes homosexual couples - doesn’t account for all modern day relationships
P: Research support
E: study of university students who were asked if they would go to bed with them tonight found 0% females said yes but 75% of males said yes
T: supports evolutionary theory - increases credibility
P: cannot account for all relationships
E: does not explain preferences of LGBTQ+ community as these do not result in reproductive success
T: only a partial explanation
P: deterministic
E: preference is determined by gender
T: ignored the role of free will, pessimistic
Equity theory - (AO1)
Relationships are fair and equal
Equal rewards and costs = equal profit
Fairness = satisfaction (maintains relationship)
Underbenefitting - more costs, fewer rewards
Overbenefitting - more rewards, fewer costs
Equity theory - (AO3)
P: research support
E: those who found their relationship to be equitable were more satisfied than those who reported over or under benefitting
T: increases credibility
P: gender differences
E: women tend to be more disturbed when under-benefitting and feel more guilt over-benefitting
T: gender bias
P: culture bias
E: individualistic are happy when their is equity but collectivist are happy to over-benefit
T: cannot explain development of relationships in all cultures
P: individual differences
E: Benevolent are happy to under-benefit whereas entitleds want to over-benefit
T: cannot explain all individual experiences - limits explanatory power
P: alternative theory
E: social exchange theory
T: not a sole explanation
Social exchange theory - (AO1)
Satisfaction = maintenance
- Maximise profit by maximising rewards and minimising costs
Comparison level - the amount of reward you believe you deserve to get from your current relationship
Influenced by:
- self-esteem (high self-esteem = high expectations)
- social norms (social media, tv)
- previous relationships
Comparison level with alternatives - whether other potential relationships or being single would be more rewarding
Influenced by:
- the state of our current relationship
Thibaut and Kelly’s 4-stage model
Sampling - partners explore different rewards and costs
Bargaining - partners exchange rewards and costs to find the most profitable situation
Commitment - relationship is stable and rewards/ costs are familiar
Institutionalisation - rewards/ costs are firmly established
Social exchange theory - (AO3)
P: research support
E: most satisfied partners perceived the most rewards and fewest costs
T: findings match SET - increasing credibility
F: uses gay and heterosexual couples so we can generalise to all relationships, increasing its usefulness
P: accounts for Individual differences
E: as rewards and costs are subjective, what might be more rewarding to one person may be less rewarding to another
T: explains all relationships
C: cannot operationalise as it is subjective
P: real world application
E: integrated behavioural couples therapy includes partners being encouraged to increases the amount of positive exchanges in a day and decrease negative ones
T: increases couples QOL
F: benefits economy - save money with no divorce
P: reductionist
E: reduces the complex phenomena of relationships down to reward and costs
T: too simplistic
P: alternative explanation
E: equity theory
T: not a sole explanation
Rusbult’s investment model - (AO1)
Commitment is the most important factor for maintaining a relationship (a desire to continue a relationship reflecting the belief it has a viable future)
Investment - the extent and importance of recourses associated with the relationship
Satisfaction - fulfilment of ones wishes, expectations or needs
CLAl - whether potential other relationships or being single would be more rewarding
Intrinsic investment - resources we put directly into a relationship (money, possessions)
Extrinsic investment - new resources put into together are shared (possessions bought together - house)
Rusbult’s investment model - (AO3)
P: research support
E: found in 52 studies, satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment size all predicted relationship commitment
T: increases credibility
F: large sample - 11000 PPTs
P: explains all relationships
E: shows people stay in abusive relations as they feel they will lose their investment into the relationship (children) if they leave, even if the costs are high (physical or emotional abuse)
T: can be applied to a wide range of relationships
P: investment may have been oversimplified
E: in the early stages of a relationship, little investment is made but it doesn’t mean the relationship does not last
T: it may need to be extended to include factors such as future plans - incomplete
Duck’s phase model - (AO1)
The ending of a relationship is a process that takes time through 4 distinct stages
1: Intra-psychic phase - one partner privately perceives dissatisfaction
2: Dyadic phase - both partners are aware of the problem - discussion
3: Social phase - partners disclose their problems to others - friends and family
4: Grave dressing phase - each partner comes to term with the breakdown - constructs a narrative of events
Duck’s phase model - (AO3)
P: missing 5th phase
E: resurrection - partners apply what they learned from the recent breakdown to future relationships
T: incomplete model
P: lacks explanatory power
E: only tells us what each phase looks like rather than the cause. Fatal attraction hypothesis - the same qualities that drew you to a person are the same qualities that pull you apart
T: fatal attraction hypothesis is more useful
P: culture bias
E: in individualistic cultures relationships end often and voluntarily but in collectivist cultures they are often obligatory and less easy to end due to shame
T: no universal
Virtual relationships - (AO1)
Decreasing self-disclosure:
Reduced cues theory - less cues (prompts of how to respond) in virtual relationships, leading to reducing a person’s sense of individual identity (deindividuation) leads to people feeling freer from the constraints of social norms (disinhibition), leading to blunt and aggressive communication. Therefore the conversation dies out
Increases self-disclosure:
Hyper personal model - self-disclosure happens more quickly in virtual relationships, leading to virtual relationships developing quicker with higher intensity, leading to hyper honesty and hyper dishonesty as senders have more time to manipulate their messages
Anonymity promotes self-disclosure (strangers on a train effect)
Absence of gating - gates (obstacles to face-to-face relationships - stammer) are absent in virtual relationships meaning those who would struggle to develop a face0to-face relationship can develop one
Catfishing can occur
Virtual relationships - (AO3)
P: cues are not completely absent from virtual relationships
E: emojis, acronyms
T: contradicts reduced cues theory
P: Research support
E: found frequency, breadth and depth were greater in FTF relationships
T: supports reduced cues
C: relied on self-report measures, reducing validity
P: online relationships are not only conducted online
E: they are multi-modal
P: culture bias
E: not all cultures have the same access to technology
T: cannot be applied to all cultures
Parasocial relationships - (AO1)
Parasocial relationships are:
- One-sided
- Unreciprocated
- Lots of time and energy invested
Absorption-addiction model:
- focusing on a person and becoming preoccupied with their lives
- the addictive nature means it escalates as individuals need a higher dose to be satisfied, leading to increasingly risky behaviour
Entertainment social: least intense level where celebs are merely a source of entertainment
Intense-personal: a feeling of greater personal involvement
Borderline pathological: intense level involving engaging in extreme behaviours
Parasocial relationships - (AO3)
P:
