Relationships. Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Explain inter-sexual selection.

A

This is the selection of mates between sexes, eg females selecting males or males selecting females.

  • Females make a greater investment of time, commitment and other resources before, during and after birth. - They need to be choosier than males so seek a male who will provide healthy offspring and support them with resources.
  • Impact on mating behaviour = prefered characteristics are chosen eg tallest males.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Explain intra-sexual selection.

A

This is the selection of mates within sexes, eg males competing with other males for mates.
Males do best if they produce as frequently as possible. Competition is necessary as females are a limited resource and are choosy.
Males who compete successfully pass on their genes to the next generation and therefore those traits are favoured.
Intra-sexual selection leads to patterns of behaviour-
- Male aggression = most aggressive are more likely to reproduce.
- Male preference for youthful and fertile women because these are signs of fertility leading to reproductive success.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Evaluation of sexual selection and reproductive behaviour.

A

+ support for intra-sexual - Buss surveyed 10,000 adults in 33 countries asking about partner preferences. He found that females valued resource related characteristics eg good job, whereas males valued reproductive capacity eg good looks and youth.
+support for inter-sexual - Clark and Hatfield sent students to approach other students and say “I have seen you around… you wanna shag” No female students agreed, but 75% of males did. Supports the theory of females choosiness and how males want to ensure reproductive success.
– ignores social and cultural influences - Chang found that some preferences have changed, and others have remained the same over 25 years in China <3.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Factors affecting attraction: self-disclosure - explain what this is.

A

Self-disclosure refers to revealing intimate information to another person. eg fears, beliefs etc. Some people are careful about disclosing too much too soon. It plays an important role in the development of a relationship.

  • it is a gradual process of revealing your inner self to someone else. - the partner has to RECIPROCATE.
  • as relations develope, more is revealed. they gain a better understanding of one another.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Factors affecting attraction: Why is reciprocity important in self-disclosure?

A

Reis and Shaver suggest that, in addition to a deepening self-disclosure, there must be reciprocity.
Successful relationships will involve disclosure from one partner which is received sensitively by the other partner. In turn, this should lead to further self-disclosure from the other partner.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Evaluation of self-disclosure.

A

+ men and women who used self-disclosure and those who believed their partners also disclosed were more satisfied and committed to their relationship
+ Sprecher study - 156 undergrad US/ split into pairs/ reciprocal condition/ one-sided disclosure/ after each interaction researchers asked likeness, closeness and enjoyment/ reciprocal condition = better liking. eg strong correlation.
– cannot be generalised - different cultures have different views on self-disclosure (Tang) - the US discloses more sexual shit than China.
– There are other reasons for a breakdown of a relationship - not just a reduction of self-disclosure as Duck’s relationship breakdown recognises that couples talk to each other during the breakdown and this may not be enough to save the relationship.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Factors affecting attraction: physical attractiveness.

A

Larsen found that people with symmetrical faces are rated as more attractive.
McNulty found that attractiveness is as important after marriage as well as before.
Halo effect: Dion found that physically attractive people are consistently rated as kind, strong, sociable and successful compared with unattractive people.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Factors affecting attraction: physical attractiveness. Explain the matching hypothesis.

A

Walster et al;
States that we choose partners that are of the same level of attractiveness to ourselves.
To do this we assess out own potential value, if we see ourselves as 7/10 then we find someone who matches.
Evolutionary theories suggest we should seek the most attractive, however, we also need to balance the potential for being rejected, thus we compromise.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Factors affecting attraction: Evaluation.

A

+ support for the halo effect - Palmer and Peterson found that physically attractive people were rated more politically knowledgeable than the unattractive.
– mixed support for matching hypothesis - Walster’s initial study failed to support the theory as they found that people preferred partners who were more physically attractive than themselves.
+ however, Feingold found a significant correlation between actual partners attractiveness.
+ can be generalised as it is not culturally biased. Cunningham found similar desires in countries.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Factors affecting attraction: Filter theory. Explain.

A

Kerckhoff and Davis explained attraction in terms of attitudes and personalities.

  1. first we consider the ‘field of availables’ which is the selection of potential partners accessible to us.
  2. from this we select the ‘field of desirables’ via three filters of varying importance at different stages of a relationship.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Factors affecting attraction: filter theory. Explain the first filter.

A

SOCIAL DEMOGRAPHY:
This can be social class or education. You are more likely to meet and have meaningful encounters with people who are physically close and share other feature eg social class.
Anyone who is too different is not a potential partner and is filtered out before the next stage.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Factors affecting attraction: filter theory. Explain the second filter.

A

SIMILARITY IN ATTITUDES:
Important to the development of romantic relationships only for couples who had been together less than 18 months.
In eary stages of a relationship agreeing on basic values promotes better communication and self-disclosure.
Bryne found that similarity in attitudes causes a mutual attraction.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Factors affecting attraction: filter theory. Explain the third filter.

A

COMPLEMENTARITY:
Partners complement each other when they have traits that the other lacks.
Complementarity is thought to give the romantic partners a feeling of togetherness. - partners will feel like they are meeting each other’s needs.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Evaluation of filter theory.

A

+ support from research gives the theory validity - winch found that the first two filters are typical of an early relationship, but complementarity increases in importance and the relationship does.

    • the lack of replicability - Kerckhoff and Davis assumed that partners over 18 months were more committed, but this is not the case in all cultures or cases today. - questions whether it can be generalised.
    • questions about cause and effect - Davis and Rusbult suggest that attitude alignment takes place ie their attitudes change to become more similar to the others - therefore suggests that similarities are the effect of having a relationship rather than the cause.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Social exchange theory - SET. Explain.

A

SET assumes relationships are guided by the minimax principle.
Thibault and Kelley proposed relationships could be explained in terms of economics - it is an exchange of goods, such a doing a favour.
Satisfaction is judged in terms of profit - perceived value of the cost, minus the value of rewards.
Partners are motivated to minimise the costs while maximising the rewards.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Social exchange theory - SET. Explain the types of costs.

A

Costs may include loss of time or stress.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Social exchange theory - SET. Explain the types of rewards.

A

Rewards may include sex, praise or companionship.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are the two measures of profit? in SET

A
  1. Comparison level

2. Comparison level for alternatives

19
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Social exchange theory - SET. Explain comparison level.

A

CL is the judgement of reward level we expect in a relationship, determined by relationship experiences and social norms.

20
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Social exchange theory - SET. Explain comparison level for alternatives.

A

CLalt involves considering whether we might gain more rewards and endure fewer costs in a different relationship. We will remain in a relationship when the alternatives are low and the rewards are high.

21
Q

Evaluation of social exchange theory.

A
    • it assumes that all relationships are exchanged based, most partners will give and receive rewards without thinking of possible profit that might be gained.
    • concerns the direction of effect - it assumed dissatisfaction occurs when costs outweigh rewards, however, it can be argued that we do not consider profit until after we become dissatisfied.
22
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: equity theory explain. the role of it in a relationship.

A

Social exchange theory suggests that partners seek equality or a balance between costs and benefits.
Therefore, under benefiting and over benefiting can lead to dissatisfaction. The under benefitted partner = anger and resentment. Over benefitted = discomfort and shame.
It’s not the size or amount of the rewards and costs that matters - it’s the ratio of the two to each other. You put a lot in and get a lot out then it’s fair.

23
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: equity theory - explain the consequences of inequity.

A

The greater the perceived inequity, the greater the dissatisfaction. - strong correlation.
Changes in equity occur during a relationship - if one person continues to put more into the relationship and get less out of it, then satisfaction with the relationship may fail.
The greater the inequity, the more work is required to restore equity.

24
Q

Evaluation of equity theory.

A

+ it has research support - Utne found that newly-weds who considered their relationship more equitable were more satisfied than those who considered themselves as over or under benefitting.

    • may not be valid in all cultures - those in collectivist countries such as China were most satisfied when over benefitting, rather than in the west where equity was key.
    • there are individual differences - Huseman suggested there are some people who are less sensitive to equity than others. - some are happy to contribute more than what they receive.
25
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Rusbult’s model, explain.

A

His model is an extension of SET, suggesting that commitment depends on satisfaction level, comparison with alternatives and investment size.

26
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Rusbult’s model, explain the factors that determine commitment.

A

INVESTMENT - the resources associated with a romantic relationship which would be lost if the relationship ended.
SATISFACTION LEVEL - the extent to which partners feel the rewards of the romantic relationship exceeding the costs.
COMPARISON WITH ALTERNATIVES - a judgement about whether a relationship with a different partner would reduce costs and increase rewards.

27
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Rusbult’s model, explain the two types of investment.

A

INTRINSIC - any resource put directly into the relationship eg money, energy and self-disclosure.
EXTRINSIC - investments that previously did not feature in the relationship which are now closely associated with it eg children, a house, shared memories.

28
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Rusbult’s model, explain how satisfaction, alternatives and investment link together to determine commitment.

A

High levels of satisfaction + the alternatives are less attractive + the size of their investment is increasing = partners will be committed to their relationship.

29
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Rusbult’s model, explain why commitment matter more than satisfaction.

A

a dissatisfied partner stays in a relationship when their level of investment is high. They will be willing to work hard to repair problems in the relationship so their investment is not wasted.

30
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: Rusbult’s model - evaluation.

A

+ there is research support - Le and Agnew found that where commitment was greatest, relationships were most stable and lasted longest.
+ can be universally applied as research (look above) is true for both heterosexual and homosexual relationships.
– it oversimplifies investment - Agnew and Goodfriend - early in relationships partners make very few actual investments but they do invest in future plans, it is these future plans that motivate partners to commit so that plans can become a reality.

31
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: duck’s phase model - explain the basic aim.

A

Duck proposed a phase model of relationship breakdown. He argued that relationships are not just one event, but a process that takes time and goes through four distinct phases.

32
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: explain the first phase in Duck’s phase model.

A

INTRA-PSYCHIC PHASE - a partner has become dissatisfied with the relationship in its current form. They will then think about this, usually focusing on their partner’s downfalls.
They will usually keep this to themselves or tell a close friend to way up the pros and cons.

33
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: explain the second phase in Duck’s phase model.

A

DYADIC PHASE - once the partner concluded that they are justified in ending the relationship, they have to discuss this with their partner.
The phase may vary in length and in intensity of hostility and anxiety.

34
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: explain the third phase in Duck’s phase model.

A

SOCIAL PHASE - once a partner wants to end the relationship they will seek support from joint friends. These friends may be encouraged to choose a side but others may try and prevent the breakup by acting as the middle man.
Once the news has gone public, it usually cannot be fixed.

35
Q

Theories of romantic relationships: explain the fourth phase in Duck’s phase model.

A

GRAVE-DRESSING PHASE - once the end becomes inevitable then a suitable story of the relationship and how it ended is prepared for everyone to hear.
This is likely to include an attempt to make the story teller sound better - judged more favourably.
This helps people move on.

36
Q

Evaluation of Duck’s phase model of relationships.

A

– it is incomplete - Duck added a fifth stage in where ex-partners learn from past mistakes for new relationships. The redefined version clarifies the point that movement through the stages is neither linear nor inevitable. It is only a partial explanation.
+ there are application to help people reverse and heal the process - in the intra-psychic stage, they could think about their partner in positive ways also to give a balanced opinion.
– the evidence is based on retrospective data - it is impossible to study breakdowns in the earlier stages without interfering with the process.

37
Q

Virtual relationships in social media - explain self-disclosure for this explanation.

A
  • Self-disclosure is crucial in FtF relationships, so what is it’s role in virtual relationships, also known as computer-mediated communication (CMC).
  • Reduced cues in CMC may lead to less SD - Sproull suggests that CMC relationships are less effective due to the lack of non-verbal cues eg physical appearance, emotional responses, that FtF relies on these cues.
  • However, CMC may involve too much self-disclosure. - Walther suggests that early SD means that CMC relationships develop quickly - can become more intense and intimate. - they can end more quickly because of high excitement and low levels of trust.
  • The feeling of anonymity can lead to more SD as people feel less accountable for their behaviour in CMC and disclose way more than they would FtF.
38
Q

Virtual relationships in social media - the absence of gating explain.

A

CMC allows relationships to start where they may not have in FtF. McKenna argued that facial abnormalities and stammars may be obstacles in FtF, however, online the ‘gates’ are not there. - thus a relationship can develop and once SD becomes deeper, these gates become less of an issue.

39
Q

Virtual relationships in social media - evaluation.

A

– lack of research - emoticons are considered effective substitutes in CMC’s for the lack of usual nonverbal cues, so the proposal that there are reduced cues seems unfounded.
+ support for the absence of gating - McKenna found that anxious people were more able to express their true selves more in CMC than in FtF. - of these romantic relationships, 70% survived more than two years.
– cannot explain all CMC’s in the same way, and those that try have low validity. This is because people disclose more in areas which they deem more private online, thus not all areas with have the same level of SD. eg fb status vs private message.

40
Q

Parasocial relationships - what are the levels of parasocial relationships?

A

The celebrity attitude scale was developed by Maltby to identify the three levels:
1st = ENTERTAINMENT-SOCIAL LEVEL - the least intense where celebrities are viewed as sources of entertainment.
2nd = INTENSE-PERSONAL LEVEL - an intermediate level where someone becomes more personally involved with a celebrity - can include obsessive thoughts.
3rd = BORDERLINE PATHOLOGICAL - the strongest levels of celebrity worship where fantasies are uncontrollable and behaviour is more extreme.

41
Q

Explain the absorption-addiction model for parasocial relationships.

A

McCutcheon suggests that parasocial relationships can make up for personal deficiencies.
They can provide an escape from mundane lives.
People may be triggered by towards higher levels due to events such as loosing a loved one.
The model has two components:
ABSORPTION - seeking fulfilment in celebrity worship motivates an individual to focus their attention on the celebrity, to become absorbed in their existence and identify with them.
ADDICTION - the individual needs to increase their ‘dose’ of involvement to gain satisfaction. This may lead to extreme behaviours and delusional thinking.

42
Q

Explain the attachment theory explanation for parasocial relationships.

A

Bowlby’s attachment theory suggests that early difficulties in attachment may lead to difficulties in forming successful relationships in later life. Such difficulties may lead to a preference for parasocial relationships.
Ainsworth found two unhealthy emotional attachments.
INSECURE RESISTANT - most likely to form these relationships because they have unfulfilled needs and they don’t want a fear of rejection.
INSECURE AVOIDANT - wants to avoid any pain and rejection with any type of relationship, so will choose a parasocial one instead.

43
Q

Evaluation of parasocial relationships.

A

+ Maltby studied female teenagers who reported an intense personal relationship with a female whose body shape they desired. These tended to have poor body image themselves. This shows a correlation between the level of celebrity worship and different psychological traits.
– lacks explanatory power - model describes the characteristics of people at different levels but not why the different forms develop. This does not help s prevent the most dangerous cases of parasocial relationships.
+ there is cross-cultural support and so the model can be generalised to other cultures. - schmid found similar levels of parasocial attachment to harry potter in western and eastern countries.
– lacks support - McCutcheon found that people with insecure attachments were no more likely to form parasocial relationships than somone with a secure attachment. This is a key assumption of this explanatio, so it raises questions of the validity.