Relationships Flashcards
Define sexual selection×
Selecting a mate because of the advantageous characteristics they possess e.g. IQ or physical ability
Define anisogamy
Sexual reproduction in which gametes of the two sexes are dissimilar
How do females act when choosing a sexual partner? Why?
Very selective - invest 9 months into pregnancy, need a partner who’s genetically healthy to pass down to offspring
What aspects do females look for in regards to sexual selection?
Genetically fit
Wealthy
Tall
What is the ‘sexy sons’ hypothesis?
Females sexually select male partners with desirable traits so their sons inherit the traits
How do males act in regards to sexual selection?
Compete with each other for the best mate - have greater chance for sexual selection (millions of sperm produced)
What do males look for in regards to sexual selection?
Young
Healthy
Hourglass figure
What is mate guarding?
Male guards the female to ensure she doesn’t mate with anyone else
Define cuckoldry
The fear of a males’ sexual partner getting pregnant by another man, and having to raise the child
State three disadvantages of the evolutionary explanation of sexual selection
- Ignores homosexuals, those who are infertile and those who can’t naturally reproduce - relationship for other reasons than reproduction
- Gender biased - in regards to long term, males can select many partners but females only one (unfair)
- Male need to protect female may lead to abuse of power - could lead to domestic violence (destructive relationship)
State three advantages of the evolutionary explanation for sexual selection
- Dunbar (2000) found childless males were shorter - suggests female selection of taller males - supports sociobiological theory
- Singh (2002) investigated male preference towards womens’ hip to waist ratio or body size - waist to hip ratio favored (0:7 - small waist, wide hips)
- Greiling (2000) found short term mating beneficial for women as it gives them a chance to leave a poor quality relationship or produce more genetically diverse offspring - short term reproductive strategies applicable to both males and females
Describe the study conducted by Buss (1989)
Investigated what males and females look for in a long term partner - 10,000pps across 37 cultures.
Rated 18 characteristics using a 4 point scale.
Females desired: good finance, resources and ambition
Males desired: reproductive value, younger and fertile
Both desired: intelligence, kindness
State two disadvantages of Buss’ study
- Buller (2005) questioned female preference to higher status men. Studies into sexual selection tend to use female undergrads of high education who’d expect a high income, so are seeking an equal. Weak evidence for females choosing high stature males to support them
- Characteristics are suggestive, and some qualities are subjective (e.g. Attractiveness)
State an advantage of Buss’ study
Large sample of 10,000 pps across 37 cultures - no cultural bias, can generalise
Define self disclosure
Revealing of person, intimate thoughts, feelings and information about ourselves to someone else
What does self-disclosure reveal about a relationship?
People reveal more personal info to people they like. People who self-disclose are seen as likeable, kind and trustworthy
Define reciprocal self disclosure
The expectation of the same level of self-disclosure from others as you give out
State the four factors that affect the success of self-disclosure
- Appropriateness - it may be judged as lacking social skills, and not attractive e.g. on a first date
- Attributions for self-disclosure - why someone is disclosing the information - less successful if revealed to everyone
- Gender differences - females are typically better communicators - males threatened by too much self-disclosure
- Content - Too intimate info may be inappropriate and violate social norms - decreases attraction and causes threat in recipient. Attraction strongest when medium level of intimacy
State three advantages of the importance of self-disclosure
- Altman and Taylor (1973) supported their self-disclosure theory - found self-disclosure on the first date is inappropriate and made the individual seem maladjusted
- Kito (2010) investigated Japanese and American students in homo and hetero sexual couples, and cross-sex friendships. Heterosexuals had highest self-disclosure - important factor
- Tal-Or (2015) found self-disclosure is gradual and affects attraction. E.g. viewers preferred contestants who gradually self-disclosed instead of early-on
State two disadvantages of the importance of self-disclosure
- Unlikely that attraction is solely based on self-disclosure - other factors are needed
- Research found internet relationships involve more self-disclosure due to anonymity, so it’s easier to disclose - ‘Boom or Bust’ Theory
What is the ‘Boom or Bust’ Theory by Cooper (1997)?
Those in internet relationships self-disclose earlier than usual - gets intense quickly (boom), or is difficult to sustain due to pace (bust)
Describe Sprecher’s 2013 self-disclosure study
Investigated whether reciprocal self-disclosure was important in determining attraction.
156 American undergrads in pairs - 66% female-female, 33% male-female - spoke over Skype. One group reciprocal, one group one-sided.
Assessed on the experience (liking, closeness, perceived similarity and enjoyment) - found reciprocal led to a greater experience
State an advantage of Sprecher’s self-disclosure study
- Supported by Kito (2010) - cross-cultural research of homosexual, heterosexual and cross-sex friendships
State three disadvantages of Sprecher’s self-disclosure study
- Measured via Skype - may interfere with the quality of self-disclosure. Lacks validity - may not accurately portray the importance of self-disclosure
- Only conducted in America, and used undergraduates - can’t generalise
- Doesn’t account for other factors influencing the attraction e.g. physical attraction
How do men and women perceive the importance of attractiveness? What are typical pre-conceived conceptions about attractive people?
Men put more importance on physical attractiveness for short and long term, whereas women place importance on physical attractiveness for short term only. Value facial symmetry and strength.
It’s assumed that their personality is reflective of their looks - sociable, optimistic, successful, trustworthy
What is the halo effect?
When the impression of an individual is incorrectly formed from one characteristic. Physically attractive person behaves more positively due to receiving positive attraction
State three advantages of the halo effect theory
- Palmer and Peterson (2012) found that physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgeable and intelligent - effect apparent even when informed the attractive person had no expertise in politics - danger for politicians
- Applies to jobs, friendships and first impressions - key factor in judgement of individuals
- Kim (1997) found USA and Korean students judged attractive people as trustworthy, mature and friendly - stereotypes evident in collectivist and individualistic cultures
State a disadvantage of the halo effect theory
Towhey found not all people deem physical attractiveness highly - had female and male pps rate people from pictures and biological info. Pps did a MACHO test (measures sexist attitudes) - those with high scores were more influenced by physical attractiveness. Influence of physical attractiveness moderated by other factors
What is the Matching Hypothesis by Walster?
Individuals seek out parts with the same social desirability as them (physical attractiveness). First assess their own value and seek out a similar partner
What factors influence the Matching Hypothesis?
Preferences - people prefer to date attractive people
Realistic choices - to avoid rejection, people approach those on a similar level
Reality - some people settle for attainable relationships
State two advantages of the matching hypothess
- Murstein and Silverman (1972) found the hypothesis can be applied to examine physical attraction in relationships, in experiments and real life. Studies involved judgement of couples’ attractiveness - suggests matching hypothesis is a very strong factor
- Cavior (1972) found evidence for the hypothesis in long term couples - followed the hypothesis more than casual daters
State two disadvantages of the matching hypothesis
- Taylor (2011) studied date choices on a dating site - found people more eager to meet up with attractive partners, and didn’t consider their own level of attractiveness - hypothesis doesn’t always apply in real world
- Hamilton contradicts this due to the possibility of mismatching - complex matching can occur. Attractive person with unattractive person due to other traits ‘making up for it’
Describe the study by Walster and Walster on the Matching Hypothesis
177 male, 170 female uni students from USA - filled in questionnaire on IQ and personality to obtain ideal partner at a dance. Judged on physical attractiveness while filling in questionnaire - paired pps randomly. Individuals assessed on enjoyment after the dance, and followed up 6 months later.
Found physical attractiveness a big factor in whether they wanted to see the date again - specifically if more attractive. People often aim higher
What is the filter theory?
Kerckhoff and Davis found there are filtering factors prominent at different stages of sexual selection
What are the three different filters in the filter theory?
- Social demography
- Similarity in attitudes
- Complementarity of needs
Describe social demography as a filter
Based on social characteristics and variables, such as age, ethnicity, social background and location. Might feel more attracted to those with a similar social demography - can be restricting however.
Describe similarity in attitudes as a filter
Based on psychological characteristics - same attitudes, values and beliefs. Of central importance - helps predict stability of the relationship (esp if <18months)
Describe complementarity of needs as a filter
Based on emotional characteristics - more attraction if needs are complementary. Similar needs may cause a dysfunctional relationship (e.g. dominance)
State two advantages of the filter theory
- Taylor (2010) found 85% of Americans married in 2008 married to their own ethnic group - supports social demography
- Hoyle (1993) found that perceived similarity predicts attraction better than actual similarities. Tidwell conducted speed dating - pps made quick decisions about attraction. Measured actual and perceived similarity between pps - perceived similarity predicted liking more than actual similarity
State three disadvantages of the filter theory
- Anderson (2003) did a longitudinal study of cohabiting partners - became more similar during the relationship, which increased attraction. This is emotional convergence.
- Online dating allows for meeting people further away and not of the same social demography - filter theory may not be accurate.
- Levinger (1970) studied 330 couples and found no evidence that similarity of attitudes or complementarity of needs was needed in regards to permanent relationships. There’s been dispute that at 18 months a relationship becomes long term.
Describe Kerckhoff and Davis’ study on the Filter Theory
94 coupled from US uni - answered 2 questionnaires to assess shared attitudes, values and complementarity of needs in relation to closeness. 7 months later completed another questionnaire on closeness.
Couples divided into: short term (<18months) - similarity of values was important, long term (>18 months) - complementarity of needs more important
State 2 advantages of Kerckhoff and Davis’ study on the filter theory
- Longitudinal - strong support for theory in both short and long term relationships
- Highlights how different filters have more prominence at different stages of the relationship - can be applied to couples at different stages
State 2 disadvantages of Kerckhoff and Davis’ study on the filter theory
- Individual differences - some people may be attracted to people opposite to them for more excitement. Research has been found to show that opposites attract
- Use of questionnaires is criticized - might not be effective in collecting high quality data. Pps may lie (social desirability bias), so results may not be valid. Improvement would be to use interviews as well
Describe the Social Exchange Theory by Kelley (1959)
Based on the idea of relationships being a business - monitor rewards, costs and profit, and look for the best deal. For a relationship to be successful, the rewards minus costs should be a positive value - aim for high rewards and low costs. Can negotiate for more rewards.
What is a comparison level in reference to the Social Exchange Theory?
Reference level to use when comparing previous relationship to present relationship in terms of rewards and costs - should be low for a successful relationship
What is a comparison level for alternatives in reference to the Social Exchange Theory?
Reference level to use when comparing present partner to those around that are potential partners. If CL.alt is high, they may switch to the new partner
State two advantages of the Social Exchange Theory
- Gottman (1992) found individuals in unsuccessful marriages reported a frequent lack of positive exchanges with their partner and an excess of negative exchanges. The ratio should be 5:1 positive to negative exchanges for a successful marriage.
- Jacobson (2000) founded ‘Integrated couples therapy’ - helps partners break negative patterns of behaviour and decrease negative exchanges. 66% of couples reported significant improvements using this therapy type
State three disadvantages of the Social Exchange Theory
- Argyle challenged the theory that people spend so much time monitoring rewards and costs, and only do this once the relationship becomes dissatisfying. Duck agreed with this.
- Research into this theory focuses on students in short term relationships - results may be invalid. Can’t successfully apply findings to older, long-term couples. Have to treat the findings with caution.
- Moghaddam (1998) criticised the theory as only being applicable to western cultures. Perception of rewards and costs is culturally relative - might not be as important in a collectivist culture, where family values and love may be more important. In more wealthy cultures, rewards would be materialistic.
Describe the study conducted by Kurdek and Schmitt (1986) on the Social Exchange Theory
Investigated 4 types of couples: 44 straight married, 35 straight not married, 50 same sex males, 56 same sex females. Each person answered questionnaire, not allowed to discuss with partner. Greatest satisfaction when CL was low and when there weren’t many alternatives to form a CL.alt. Same factors predict satisfaction for homosexuals and heterosexuals
State two advantages of Kurdek and Schmitt’s study
- Examines a range of relationships - explains how relationships operate in general, more externally valid
- Supported by the cognitive and behavioural approaches - individuals constantly thinking about whether they’re getting a good deal or not, relies on subjective judgements. Operant conditioning may occur if people stay in a relationship because of the rewards it offers
State two disadvantages of Kurdek and Schmitt’s study
- Questionnaire used to assess satisfaction - prone to social desirability bias and lying. Results may be invalid. Should have used interviews as well to obtain more valid results
- Term ‘reward’ needs to be operationalised - difficult to compare the value of one reward to another. Should’ve investigated the quality of the reward instead of only the quantity of rewards to increase validity
What are the four principles of the Equity Theory by Hatfield and Walster?
1, Profit - aim to maximise rewards with minimal costs
- Distribution - negotiation is needed to ensure fairness occurs, and compensations may occur
- Dissatisfaction - an unfair relationship produces stress
- Realignment - dissatisfied person will try to restore equity so it can continue
What are the main ideas of the Equity Theory by Hatfield and Walster?
People expect to receive rewards proportional to the rewards they give, and aim to achieve fairness and equity. If people over-benefit they might feel guilty, and if people under-benefit they might feel angry. Imbalance tolerated only if both parties agree. Doesn’t have to be equal, but fair.
Rewards - costs = X - should be same for both
State two advantages of the Equity Theory by Hatfield and Walster
- DeMaris (2007) investigated the influence of inequitable relationships on marital disruption and divorce. Studied 1500 couples - only women would comment on inequity if they were under-benefiting. If too a high degree, high risk of divorce. Equity is very important for females - tend to be more honest and direct when asked.
- Brosnan (2003) found female monkeys became angry if denied a prize when playing a game, especially if other monkeys who didn’t play received a prize - hurled food at researcher. Ideas of equity rooted in ancient origins
State three disadvantages of the Equity Theory by Hatfield and Walster
- Theory more applicable to western cultures - more concerned with equal rewards and costs. Collectivist cultures may value family values and roles within the family being met rather than the equity of rewards and costs
- Buunk (1996) found there’s no association between equity and the future quality and maintenance of a relationship. People have free will to choose to continue a relationship or not
- Mills and Clark (1982) claimed it’s difficult to assess the equity theory as many rewards and costs are emotional/psychological - can’t be easily quantified and measured. Trying to quantify rewards could diminish love
Describe the study carried out by Hatfied (1979) in reference to the Equity Theory
Newly married couples answered a questionnaire and indicated the extent to which they received more or less rewards than they expected from the marriage. Those who under-benefited had the lowest level of overall satisfaction and experienced most anger. Those who over-benefited admitted to feeling guilty. Couples who were equitable had highest level of satisfaction and more chance of the relationship continuing. No difference in males that over-benefit or are equitable, women who over-benefit less satisfied than if equitable.
State two disadvantages of the study by Hatfield (1979)
- Questionnaire - subject to social desirability bias and lying, influences validity of results
- Only examines newly married couples, would have been more effective to examine other couples to be able to generalise to wider population
State two advantages of the study by Hatfield (1979)
- Highlights important gender differences in relationships. Equity very important for females, but not males - happy for inequity to occur especially if they over-benefit. Could imply males are more selfish
- Support from other economic theories - Social Exchange Theory by Kelley
What is the main focus of Rusbult’s Investment model?
Examines a range of factors which have an effect of the amount of commitment that people put into their relationship, and whether the relationship is likely to continue or not
What are the three factors that influence commitment levels? (Rusbult’s Investment Model)
- Satisfaction - influenced by extent their needs are fulfilled in a relationship, can be compared against previous relationships
- Comparison with alternatives - might be a higher quality alternative, or being single
- Investment size - measure of the importance of the relationship and what could be lost if it ended, contributes to the stability. Powerful psychological force which motivates people to continue with their relationship. INTRINSIC - direct investments, e.g. money, emotions EXTRINSIC - things that developed over time e.g. children
What is the commitment level? (Rusbult’s Investment Model)
Measure of whether the relationship will continue. Should be equal input from both. High satisfaction, low comparison and high investment size = high commitment level
State three advantages of Rusbult’s Investment Model
- Van Lange (1997) studied students from Taiwan and Netherlands - supported the relative effects of the factors on commitment levels. Shows cultural validity
- Useful. Can explain infidelity - low satisfaction, high quality alternative = low commitment. Can explain staying in abusive relationships - may have low quality of alternatives and too high investment (children) to leave
- Investment Model Scale questionnaire given to homosexual pps and heterosexual marital pps - found factors all important when considering commitment
State two disadvantages of Rusbult’s Investment Model
- Difficult to measure factors of commitment - investment model scale raises issues of social desirability bias as it used self-reports to construct scale
- Doesn’t consider gender differences in relationships - females report higher satisfaction, poorer quality of alternatives, greater investment and stronger commitment than males
State and describe the four stages of relationship breakdown, as described by Duck (1982)
- Intrapsychic: privately thinking about relationship (partner’s faults, under-benefitting), withdraw from social interactions with partner, don’t say anything
- Dyadic: partners communicate with each other - think about investments and inequities. Could be reconciliation, therapy may be useful
- Social: In case of break up, it’s made public. Advice and support given, criticism of former partner, scape-goating. More frequent breakdowns for younger people.
- Grave dressing: create private and public account of the relationship - maintain high social credit, different versions to different people. Might reinterpret views of ex-partner
State two advantages of Duck’s phase model of relationship breakdown
- Improvements made - introduced fifth phase, The Resurrection Stage. Personal growth occurs and preparation for the next relationship. Supported by Frazier (2003) - 92 undergraduates experienced emotional distress and evidence of personal growth
- Supported by Social Exchange Theory - model can be analysed from perspective of rewards and costs, would explain why it broke down
State three disadvantages of Duck’s phase model of relationship breakdown
- Akert suggested most important indicator of the breakdown experience was the role each person plays - person who didn’t initiate breakdown was most miserable. Need to consider roles played
- Ignores gender differences - females emphasise lack of emotional support, incompatibility and unhappiness, whereas males emphasise lack of fun/sex. Males want clean slate, females want to stay friends.
- Reductionist/inaccurate - can’t reduce complex relationship to 4 set stages, very unpredictable
- Ethical issues could arise in research - invasion of privacy, confidentiality
Outline Duck’s 1992 findings from the study into relationship breakdown
Researched factors that can lead to an unhappy marriage and divorce:
- Marry when young
- Become parents when young - financial stressors
- Low socioeconomic background
- Different social and demographic backgrounds
- Parents are divorced
- Many sexual partners before marriage
Evaluate the research conducted by Duck
Advantages:
- Supported by Filter Theory - important of social and demographic factors
- Supported by Bowlby’s Internal Working Model - divorced parents affects future expectations
Disadvantages:
- Doesn’t consider all factors that could lead to relationship breakdown e.g quality of conflict resolution
- Doesn’t consider gender differences - females seem to report more dissatisfaction than males, best predictor of whether the relationship will breakdown
How is self-disclosure different in virtual and face-to-face relationships?
Occurs much faster in virtual because of anonymity and less fear of rejection/ridicule. Less risk of negative consequences. Physical attractiveness less important online, self-disclosure more essential
Describe the Hyper-Personal Model by Walther (2011)
As self-disclosure occurs faster, the relationships could become intense and intimate quickly, but also end quickly (difficult to sustain intense self-disclosure). People has more time to edit responses and images to present themselves - selective self presentation.
Describe the Reduced Cues Theory by Sproull and Kiesler (1986)
Virtual relationships are less open/honest as they lack cues, such as facial expressions and tonality. Leads to de-individuation - reduced sense of identity, engage in more negative and hurtful comments, leading to less self-disclosure.
Evaluate the Reduced Cues Theory by Sproull and Kiesler (1986)
- Cues aren’t absent, but different. Subtle cues, such as time to respond or emoticons, are used
- Rosenfield and Thomas (2012) found no evidence to support claims of a difference in quality/fragility of online and offline relationships
- Majority of relationships don’t occur exclusively online or offline, reduces the claims of de-individuation
- Relevance of research into virtual relationships changes as technology advances - virtual interactions different to those around time of theories
Evaluate the Hyper-Personal Model
Advantage:
1. Supported by Joinson (2001) study - pps had to discuss a dilemma either FtF or virtually - more self-disclosure when not FtF (even if using computer but with video chat)
Disadvantages:
1. Majority of relationships don’t occur exclusively online or offline, may need to consider the balance between online and offline on the intensity of the relationship
2. Relevance of research into virtual relationships changes as technology advances - virtual relationships different, lacks temporal validity
What is gating?
Factors that act as a barrier to attraction, could be compatible if engaged in conversation, but gates prevent this. E.g. physical attractiveness, age, sociability
How is the absence of gating influential in virtual relationships?
Creates more opportunities for less physically attractive and socially inept individuals to develop relationships. People can establish virtual identities they couldn’t create face-to-face - can be their “true self”. Allows for re-focus on self-disclosure.
Outline the research conducted by McKenna (2002)
Pps interact FtF for 20 minutes on two occasions or via internet chat rooms first before meeting FtF. Then interacted with same pps in person and then via internet. Pps liked more if engaged via internet - more intimate.
Evaluate the research by McKenna (2002)
- Supports notion of superficial gating features when FtF
2. Removal of gates allowed bypass of usual obstacles - makes virtual relationships more desirable
State three advantages of absence of gating on virtual relationships
- Allows shy and socially anxious people to develop high quality relationships online, which helps with FtF communication
- Wider potential of people to form relationships with online - absence of gates broadens scope
- Helps relationships grow quicker - lacks gates that prevent intimate disclosure
State two advantages of absence of gating on virtual relationships
- Most studies are based off of self-report - questions validity
- Potential dangers - could be false identities
What is a parasocial relationship?
One-sided relationship where a person expends considerable emotional energy, interest and time, whilst the other person (celebrity) is completely unaware of their existence
Describe attempts taken to strengthen parasocial relationships
Individuals may engage in increased media presentations (repeatedly watching performances), attempt to communicate (fan mail, merch) and move deeper into imagined relationship
State and describe the 3 levels of parasocial relationships, as identified by Giles and Maltby (2006) using the Celebrity Attitude Scale
- Entertainment-Social: celebs viewed as source of entertainment and for social interaction
- Intense-personal: connect aspects of celeb to their identity e.g. intense feelings, obsessive thoughts
- Borderline pathological: uncontrollable fantasies and extreme behaviours e.g. spending lots on them, “cut for bieber”
Why do some people form parasocial relationships?
Could be due to a lack of real relationships. It makes few demands, don’t run risk of criticism/rejection. More likely to occur with attractive people who are perceived as similar
Outline research studies examining parasocial relationships
Thompson (2006) found parasocial relationships satisfy the main needs fulfilled by a real relationship - relatedness, competence and independence.
McCutcheon et al (2002) found correlation of -0.4 between amount of education and amount of celebrity worship - less educated, more intense interest
State two advantages of research into parasocial relationships
- Thompson research study
- Practical application - research recommended media training in schools to highlight dangers of idolising disorderly behaviour - e.g. extreme dieting
State two disadvantages of research into parasocial relationships
- Lots of research uses questionnaires - lacks validity
- Little correlation found between loneliness and strength of TV viewers’ parasocial relationships - criticises idea of a dysfunctional substitute for an inadequate relationship
Describe the Absorption-Addiction Model proposed by McCutcheon (2002) to explain parasocial relationships
Describes when the relationship progresses from simple admiration to an intense delusion. People engage in celebrity worship to compensate for deficiencies in their life - adds sense of purpose and excitement.
First stage is absorption (seeking satisfaction causes intense attachment), and second stage is addiction
What is celebrity worship syndrome?
Fascination with the lives of celebrities that can become obsessive - can develop into mentally disordered behaviour
State two advantages of the absorption addiction model
- Useful applications - Maltby linked types of personality (psychotic, neurotic and extravert) to levels of parasocial relationships. Extraverts - ES level, Neurotics - IP level, Psychotic - BP level. Help people with disorders
- Parasocial relationships can provide models of social behaviour - research found they have a positive effect. Reduces uncertainty about social relationships
State three disadvantages of the absorption-addiction model
- Cause and effect can’t be clearly established as research is correlational - weaker explanation e.g. poor body image
- Research relies heavily on self-report - lacks validity
- Many studies use students - sample bias, can’t generalise
Describe the attachment theory as an explanation for parasocial relationships
People form parasocial relationships due to attachment difficulties in childhood. Didn’t form strong bond, so try to compensate later - continuity hypothesis.
Insecure-resistant most likely to form parasocial relationships - unfulfilled needs w/out threat of rejection. Insecure-avoidant have trust difficulties - try to avoid rejection also. Securely attached can form loving, real relationships
State two advantages of the attachment theory to explain parasocial relationships
- Cole and Leets found that insecure-resistant teenagers were most likely to form a parasocial relationship with a TV personality
- Research support showijng disturbed attachment can lead to BP level of PS relationships - found 63% of stalkers experienced loss of caregiver and 50% experienced emotional/physical abuse
State three disadvantages of the attachment theory as an explanation for parasocial relationships
- McCutcheon et al found no correlation between insecure-resistance and intense levels of PS relationships
- Research relies heavily on self report - lacks validity
- Purely correlational, can’t determine causation
