Relationships Flashcards
What is cultural bias?
Cultural bias occurs when people from one culture make assumptions about the behaviour of those from another culture based on their own cultural norms and practices
What is Ethnocentrism?
Ethnocentrism occurs when we use our own ethnic group as a basis for judgements about other groups. We tend to view the beliefs, customs and behaviours of our own culture as ‘normal’ or superior. Those of other cultures are seen as ‘strange’ or deviant when theories are generalised to the whole population.
What is alpha bias?
Alpha bias assumes that there are real and enduring differences between males and females. It exaggerates the differences and implies one gender is superior to the other
What is beta bias?
Beta bias ignores or minimises sex differences. It exaggerates the similarity between men and women.
What is Androcentrism?
Androcentrism is when the bias takes male thinking/behaviour as the norm and regarding female behaviour as deviant. inferior and abnormal if its different to the male.
What is estrocentrism?
Estrocentrism is the opposite of androcentrism where female behaviour is seen as the norm.
What is deindividuation theory?
Deindividuation is the process where people lose their personal identity and adopt a group identity and therefore take less repsonsibility for their inhibitions about violence.
Explanations for formation of relationships
Matching hypothesis and filter model
Matching hypothesis AO1
- Refers to physical attractiveness
- Idea that we will form relationships with a partner of similar attractiveness to ourselves
- We are aware of our own attractiveness and act realistically and aim for the person who most closely matches our own attractiveness
Walster et al study
MH:
Male and female university students brought tickets for ball
Completed detailed questionnaire about themselves
Students were rated for physical attractiveness
Assigned a partner randomly
During the ball the male students were asked whether they
would ask their partner on a second date and on what basis
The factor that determined this the most was her physical attractiveness regardless of males attractiveness
AO2:
Low ecological validity as no social rejection like in real life
fundamentally flawed- not a valid test
Silverman study
MH:
Investigated matching which had already occurred.
Couples were observed in naturalistic dating settings of bars etc
2 males and 2 females formed observe team
Observed couples =18-22 yrs and unmarried
Each observer independently rated the dating partner of opposite sex on 5 point scale
Found extremely high degree of similarity between the attractiveness of the couple members
More similar the attractiveness = happier they seemed
60% highly similar 46% moderately 22% least similar appeared happy
AO2: Naturalistic covert only a snapshot of relationship may normally be happy low ecological validity subjective rating of happiness
Berscheid and Walster
MH:
Ppts had to stipulate what kind of partners they wished for when buying tickets for ball
People again rated for physical attractiveness
Ppts rated as high, low or average attractiveness tended to ask for dates of a corresponding level of attractiveness
AO2:
Better than computer dance study 1 as more ecologically valid asking what partner they want
Objective measure
Murstein study
MH:
Photographs of faces of steady or engaged couples were compared with random couples
Real couples were consistently judged to be more similar to each other in physical attractiveness than the random pairs
AO2:
Overcomes halo effect
Studies supporting matching hypothesis
Silverman
Berschied and Walster
Mustein
Studies again matching hypothesis
Walster et al
IDA for Matching Hypothesis
Cultural bias: developed in USA a culture where individuals are able to select their own partners and are therefore free to use physical attractiveness as a selection criterion
Ethnocentrism- norm for our culture but not for others. Non-western cultures have arranged marriages arranged by family. Limits generalisability of MH
Gender Differences- MH ignores gender differences saying men value physical attractiveness more. According to Takeuchi there is a gender difference in the degree to which physical attractiveness is valued by an opposite sex partner. Found attractiveness of men for women was less valued as they can compensate for lack of attractiveness with status and personality, wealth.
MH gives an explanation for formation as there doesn’t need to be a match necessarily for relationship to develop
Complex matching- People come into relationships offering many desirable characters which can compensate for looks.
Filter model- devleoped to explain why people are attracted to one another and go on to form a relationship
PA- Dating agencies and tv shows could use these to make successful matches
Criticisms- doesn’t account for short term relationships (one night stands) internet dating
Formation of relationships explanation 2
The filter model (Kerckhoff and Davis)
AO1 Filter model
Filter 1 =Social/demographic variables of background etc which make up the field for potential partners to be chosen from
Filter 2= Similarity of attitudes and values- applied once together and if couple share beliefs communication should be easier. People with different attitudes filtered out
Filter 3= Complementarity of emotional needs- almost established relationship- opposites attract so if one is more dominant etc
AO2 Filter model research evidence
Filter 1 support- Gruber-Baldini et al and Sprecher
Filter 2 support- Sprecher + Kerckhoff and Davis
Filter 3 Kerckhoff and Davis + Winch
Gruber Baldini study
21 couples and found those who were similar in educational level and age at start of relationship were more likely to stay together
Sprecher study
Found that couples who were matched in physical attractiveness, social background and interests were more likely to develop a long-term relationship
Kerckhoff and Davis
Longitudinal study of couples who has been together for about 18 months. Asked to complete several questionnaires over a 7 month period in which they reported on attitude similarity and personality traits with their partner. It was found that attitude similarity was the most important factor up to about 18 months into a relationship. After this psychological compatibility and the ability to meet each others needs became important
Winch study
Found that happy marriages are often based on each partners ability to fulfil the needs of the other e.g women who displayed a need to be nurturant were often married to men who needed to be nurtured.
AO2 Filter model- Methodological commentary
Self report methods used so risk of social desirability of answers may exaggerate or over emphasise
Longitudinal- can’t remember or accurate perception
Outdated model, non experimental research
AO2 Filter Model IDA
Potential cultural bias- doesn’t account for arranged marriages
Uses westernised ideas people matched based on religion/wealth/ ethnicity/culture by parents or family.
Alternative explanations: Filter model has more factors considers personality and not just matching hypothesis more practical applications for filter model- dating sites
PA: dating sites match people up based on interests values and other factors. Tinder etc
Other AO2: Temporal- easier to contact people now- Skype
complex matching- other desirable characteristics
Social exchange theory AO1
Humans suggests we are attracted to those who provide us with economic reward especially when in short supply. SET involves the exchange of resources and it the development depends on how mutually beneficial the relationship feels
Rewards = money, attention, status, gratification, pleasure
Costs= financial costs, emotional and physical pain, disappointment and embarrassment.
Females tend to see intimacy and self-growth as rewards
Males see sexual gratification as reward and monetary losses as a cost
Outcome= Rewards- Costs
Minimax strategy
Thibaut and Kelly
When in a relationship we try to minimise costs but maximise benefits. Relationships will last longer if the rewards exceeds the costs
SET AO2
RE: Rustbelt found that peoples satisfaction alternatives and investments all predicted how committed they were to their relationship and whether it lasted. Supported by other researches with samples from married and homosexual couples and in different cultures.
Validity questioned: short term and long term - different results (Floyd, clarke and Mills)
IDA: Cultural bias- westernised ideas
PA: Behavioural marital therapy
Floyd study
Found that commitment develops when couples are satisfied with and feel rewarded in a relationship and when they perceive that equally or more attractive alternative relationships are not available to them
Clarke and Mills study
Distinguished between 2 types of relationship based on the norms of giving and receiving benefits. In communal relationships there is a principal concern for the other’s needs and welfare so that there is no expectation that a benefit will be repaid.
In exchange relationships benefits given by one person in response to possible benefits received in return.
Suggests that SET only applies to certain kinds of relationships and doesn’t apply to relationships which don’t emphasise economics
Equity theory AO1
Walster et al:
Suggests couples keep track on what they put in and get out of relationships and if this is roughly equal they are likely to feel satisfied and maintain relationship
ET predicts if one partner is over or under benefitting it will be less likely to be maintained.
Under beenfitting partners feel angry, resentful and deprived
Over benefitting partners feel guilty and uncomfortable
People prefer to receive too much rather than too little even if it makes them feel uneasy
Equity theory AO2
Van Yperen and Buunk supports ET as most satisfied couples were ones most equitable.
Hatfield et al supports ET as theory says students inequitable relationships who are either over or underbenefitting were more likely to end the relationship.However ppts may have been rushed to rate the amount of effort money they feel they put into their relationship.
IDA:
Gender differences- Prins et al found that dutch women but not men in inequitable relationships were more likely to cheat. These women may be trying to obtain benefits elsewhere in order to re-balance their own cost-benefit ratio.
Kahn et al- Has found that men are more likely to focus on the norm of equity in relationships.
Women however focused on the norm of equality
Cultural differences:
Aumer-Ryan and Hatfield- found couples from UWI in Jamaica were most satisfied when the relationship was inequitable and individual was overbenefitting. Whereas in UH in Hawaii couples most satisfied when relationship was requitable. Jamaicans could be more of a collectivist culture and Hawaii more individualistic
Van Yperen and Buunk study
Longitudinal study using 259 couples
86% married and rest cohabiting
Score for equity using Hatfields local Measurement of Satisfaction and found that
65% of men and women felt their relationship was equitable
25% of men felt over benefitted
25% of women felt under benefitted
Breakdown of relationships theories
Rollie and Duck’s model
Rollie and Duck’s model AO1
1) Breakdown- one partner becomes dissatisfied
2) Intrapsychic- Social withdrawal and resentment
3) Dyadic- Partners voice problems and reevaluate
4) Social- Break up is aired and made public
5) Grave dressing- reasons for relationship ending
6) Resurrection- Preparation for future relationships
Rollie and Duck’s model AO2
RE- Tashiro and Frazier support resurrection aspect as surveyed undergraduates who had recently broken up and they experienced emotional distress and personal growth- new insights and clear idea for future.
Methodological: Cannot be applied universally as relationships are individual and dynamic and therefore unlikely to use all stages at same speed and order.
Retrospective studies used- not always accurately recorded and women more likely to seek help possible gender differences
IDA:
Cultural bias- applies to more western individualistic societies, doesn’t apply to arranged marriages in non-western
Heterosexual bias- developed from experience of white middle class, heterosexual ppts. May not represent gay and lesbian
PA- couple therapy/marriage counselling
dyadic stage- talking about things in positive light
Other:
Akert- found the role people played in break up was prediction of dissolution experience. Partners who didnt initiate break up were more sad but those who did felt less sad but more guilty and experienced less negative symptoms. -Individual differences
Sexual selection
Humans evolve by natural selection
Mind designed to solve problems of survival and reproduction
Genes that lead to behaviour that enhances survival and reproduction will be inherited
What is natural selection?
Features that give a survival advantage
What is sexual selection?
Features that give a reproductive advantage
Parental investment theory
Females invest more because they produce fewer gametes
Males produce more gametes
Females can have limited number of offspring in lifetime
Males can have more offspring without high levels of investment
greater maternal than paternal certainty
Makes women more selective evaluating type of mate
Parental investment is any investment type by the parent in an individual offspring that increases the offsprings chance of survival. (i.e. reductive success) at the cost of the parents ability to invest in other offspring.
Evolutionary theory 1
Women will be choosier than men; showing less of an interest in short term sexual liaisons
Evolutionary theory 2
Women will be attracted to qualities that suggest willingness and ability to invest in offspring e.g. having resources and status
Evolutionary theory 3
Men will be attracted to indicators of fertility such as youth and health
Sexual selection AO2 Prediction 1
Prediction 1: Clark and hatfield found 50% of both men and women agreed to date. 6% of females vs 69% males agreed to go back home with them 0% women vs 75% men agreed to sex
Clark- replicated assured ppts of trust and same results
Gueguen:
83% men agreed to have sex with highly attractive women and 60% for average
3% of women agreed to have sex with highly attractive and 0% agreed to average.
Subjective measure of attractiveness.
Social desirability ppts scared to admit
PPts may be in relationship
Sexual orientation
doesn’t measure short term sexual liaisons
Social expectations
Population validity- American students but field study reduces demand characteristics
Sexual selection AO2 Prediction 2
Prediction 2:
Dunbar and Waynforth found that women were 4.5 times more likely to request wealth as a quality in a desired partner in a content analysis of dating adverts. Supports prediction as shows women look for qualities that benefit their offspring
+High ecological validity info gathered from newspapers
+no motivation to lie rules out social desirability
-American newspaper used not generalisable
Buss found women favoured factors like financial prospects ambition and older age these all help the offspring
+cross cultural study (37 cultures)
+high sample size (10,000)
-Found that kindness and intelligence rated higher than financial prospects- Screecher’s study reinforces this
Sexual selection AO2 Prediction 3
Singh 1993
Investigated the waist to hip ratio int arms of attractiveness
Studied Miss American pageants winners and playboy centre folds. Found that 0.7 WHR was consistent for female attractiveness.
Supports as shows large WHR is indicator between pre pubertal and a woman- not pregnant and more healthy.
Singh 2009
Research into diverse racial groups found a universality in terms of a low WHR being associated with attractiveness
Results showed that in each culture they rated a low WHR as more attractive irrespective of higher or lower BMI
Strong support that this is due to an adaptation in sexual selection process.
Strassberg and Holty- against prediction
2 Different adverts in female seeking male- different key words either 1) financially in dependent, successful, ambitious vs 2) attractive slim lovely. 500 responses collected independent woman ad most successful suggesting sex and attractiveness is not sole focus for men today.
AO2 Sexual selection IDA
Nature vs Nurture
- Ignores cultural diversity and stresses the similarities
- Doesn’t consider other influences religion etc
-Focuses on nature too much
Karremans dressed mannequins same but varied WHR and found that 0.7 WHR preferred to 0.84 by blind men
Blind person not exposed to ideal body type and evolved preference.
Cultural difference could represent evolutionary pressure
Gender Bias:
- Alpha bias “women are choosier”
-Anti-women agenda: legitimises immoral male sexual behaviour
Buss found kindness and intelligence were consistently rated by both men and women as more important than financial status which highlights alpha bias in EE. Selective findings
Determinism:
Evolutionary theory sets clear roles for women and men. Women to look after babies and men be promiscuous and reproducing. Setting up roles
Parental investment definition
Parental investment is any investment type by the parent in an individual offspring that increases the offsprings chance of survival. (i.e. reductive success) at the cost of the parents ability to invest in other offspring.
What factors determine the level of investment from a parent with a child?
1) Whether and how closely parent is genetically related to child
2) How certain A is of genetic relatedness
3) Possible number of offspring that can be produced
Female investment
Substantial; egg takes energy and time to produce sex
Carrying foetus
Giving birth
Looking after infant until old enough
Male investment
Relatively small-little time and energy just sex sperm courting
Why do females invest more?
High levels of investment are essential for woman reproductive success but not for men
Sex differences in parental investment AO2
Geary that father’s spend less time interacting with and caring for their children than mothers in all cultures. Supports theory as it shows how males invest less than females with offspring and EEA behaviour has evolved
Cultural variation- If an environment has fewer resources it makes evolutionary sense for male to adopt a high investment-low promiscuity strategy to ensure reproductive success.
Euler and Weitzel found that maternal grandmother provided more care for grandchildren than maternal grandfather and paternal grandmothers. Paternal grandfathers contributed least. Shows issues of paternal uncertainty.
Anderson et al:
Anderson looked at the willingness of men to pay for their childs college funds as a measure of parental investment. Found men did not discriminate between a child with current partner and one from previous. This criticises theory as shows equal high levels of investment from father regardless if child is biologically theirs.
May be because father wants to convince current partner he is a good provider and promote future mating possibilities.
EE ma be oversimplified in generalising paternal investment as it doesn’t account for step children.
Sex Differences in parental Investment IDA
Gender Bias:
- Alpha bias
- Implies women should invest more: social implication (working mothers)
- Perpetuates the stereotype of stay at home mum
- Mothers should raise the children rather than follow a career
- Job- less likely to be hired due to be expected to go on maternity leave
Determinism:
- Parenting behaviour determined by genetic inheritance
- Men are genetically predisposed to invest less
- Men leaving partner to raise their child to find another woman
Breakdown of Relationships theory 2
Evolutionary explanations
Evolutionary explanations for breakdown AO1
Infidelity-Paternity uncertainty
Infertility- Female concern, men looking to reproduce
Lack of economic support- Men be affected worse as women look for qualities like financial prospects for offspint
Evolutionary explanations of breakdown AO2
Betzig:
Used Human resources Area Files to investigate reasons for marital breakdown and found order was infidelity, infertility, Personality, economics, in-laws, absence, health.
Supports EE as Infidelity and Infertility top 2 for divorce
Buunk
Supports infidelity as found men showed greater psychological and physiological distress to sexual rather than emotions infidelity which contrasts with women. This is because of paternity uncertainty.
Fisher:
From 45 societies, 31 yrs of data found 39% of divorces occurs when there are no children, 26% single child and 19% two children
However doesn’t control for duration of marriage and larger families may struggle more financially
Evolutionary explanations of breakdown AO2 IDA
Cultural differences:
Some societies don’t allow divorce
Buunk study showed US had large sex differences and Germany and Netherlands had medium- doesn’t specify why.
Determinism:
Determines people break up for only those reason and not other factors
Undermines gender equality and supports stereotype than men are more powerful.
Effects of early experience theories
Bowlbys attachment theory
SLT
Bowlbys attachment theory AO1
3 types of attachment
Maternal sensitivity hypothesis
Internal working model
Continuity Hypothesis
Name the 3 types of attachments
Type A= Insecure Avoidant
Type B= Secure Attachment
Type C = Insecure Resistent
What is the internal working model?
IWM is built on past experience that influences our responses and actions
What is the continuity hypothesis?
The idea that the relationship with one special attachment figure (monotropy) provides an infant with an internal working model for all future relationships
Early experience AO2
Hazan and shaver: IWM 56% secure 24% avoidant 20% resistant
Waters- 20 years later 12 months 72% same attachment
Levis et al 18 years later 42%- not consistent
Determinism:
Doesn’t account for life events
Too simplistic
However Quinton and Rutter found women who had difficult experience developed security if they had positive school experience and strong relationships later- may not be as deterministic.
Nature vs Nurture
Bowl by focuses on nurture notices its innate fails to consider other innate characteristics apart from caregiver sensitivity
Pagans temperament hypothesis suggests born with an easy slow to warm up to an difficult temperament which affects how easy it is for caregiver to interact.
Easy temperament = trusting and stable relationships weakening support for IWM
Effects of early experience theory 2
SLT
SLT AO1 for effects of early experience
Observation- son observed father being abusive to mother
Retention- Son identifies father as role model
Reproduction- Son associantes violence with relationship
Motivation- Following father as role model, repeat violence
SLT AO2 for effects of early experience
Gray and Sternberg found that adolescents who are raised in an environment where their parents treat them with warmth and are emotionally available may be better prepared fro relationships and intimacy in their own adult relationships. Supports as shows children exhibit behaviours displayed to them by parents.
Moeller and Stattin
Found that boys who shared affectionate and truthful relationship with their fathers in adolescence felt greater satisfaction with their romantic partners in adulthood. not same for girls and mothers though. Supports as boys exhibited the behaviour their father displayed to them in their own relationships.
IDA:
Nurture focus- ignores temperament hypothesis
Explains cultural differences in adult relationships because all parents are different.
Gender differences shows male/son relationship is different
What is a individualistic culture?
Individual rights goals etc I rather than we More likely to be western, capitalist societies Focus on romantic love Higher rates of divorce Individual choice of partners
What is a collectivist culture?
We rather than I More likely to be eastern Interdependence Stew on responsibility to family Arranged marriages Lower rates of divorce Not based on love
How does culture influence romantic relationships?
Social learning- media is a major source and people we perceive to be similar to us or of high status or nurturing.
Socialisation- Different norm, values and expectations about life including relationships
Conformity- People want to fit in. There are often negative consequences for not confirming to the norm. we use others as a source of information about what is beneficial to us.
AO2 for influence of culture
Collectivist:
Zaikai + Shurayadi support found favour in arranged marriages
Le Vine et al support as wanting to get married even when they had no choice
Madathil and Benshoff found Asian Indians from India in arranged marriages positive correlation between satisfaction and choice and rated higher than Americans in free choice marriages. but not true for asian Indians in arranged marriages in America.
Individualistic:
Moore and Leung0 positive attitudes towards romantic love was endorsed
Ethnocentrism: Western cultures also dominated by collectivist values in history-temporal shift
Economic development and media- globalisation and urbanisation arranged marriages becoming more flexible
Methodological issues:
- Sampling issues: ppts may no the representative of culture could lead to more individual differences within countries rather than broad between cultures
- Self report- marital satisfaction
- Language issues: translation affected twisted by researcher
