Relationships: evaluation

Question 1

What is a weakness of the sexual selection theory?

Answer 1

Research Critique: More complex
mate choice may be more complicated than suggested by this approach

Research by Penton-Voak et al (1999) suggests that female mate prefrences change across the menstrual cycle

• They found that females preferred a partner with strong masculine features during their most fertile period whereas they showed prefernece for a partner with slightly feminised features as a long term mate.
• masculine appearance preferred - healthier immune system, advantageous and could pass to offspring
• feminine features - suggest kindess and parental cooperation - very desirable traits in a long term partner!

These findings suggest that mate choice may actually be based on a range of factors; rather than simply indicators of gentic fitness

Question 2

What is a strength of the theory of sexual selection?

Answer 2

Reserach support: Prefrences based on Anisgomy
Partner prefernce was supported by research conducted byBuss(1989)

• He conducted surveys in over 33 countries and 10,000 adults and asked questions relating to ages and attributes that evolutionary theory predicts should be important for partner prefrence
• He found that women placed a greater value on resource related characteristics such as good finacial prospects, ambition and industriouness than men did.
• Whereas males valued reproductive capacity in terms of good looks, chastity and preferred younger mates.

These findings reflect sex differences in mate strategies due to anisgomy. They support predictions about partner prefence derived from sexual selection theory. Futhermore, the findings can be applied across a vastity of different cultures, relfecting fundamental human prefernces which are not primarily dependant on cultural influences.

Question 3

What is a weakness of the sexual selection theory?

Answer 3

Weakness : Social and Cultural Influences Underestimated
One limitation of sexual selection theory is that evolutionary theories overlook the influences of social and cultural factors on partner preference.

• Partner preference over the past century have been undoubtedly been influenced by rapidly changing social norms of behaviour. These develop much faster than evolutionary timescales imply and have instead come about due to cultural factors (eg. the introduction of contraception)
• Furthermore womens greater involvement in the workplace means they are no longer dependent on men to provide for them (despite the ongoing inequality in earning). Bereczkei et al (1997) argues that this social change has consequences for women’s mate preference, which may no longer be resource-oriented.

Therefore, partner preference is more likely to be the outcome of a combination of evolutionary and cultural influences, and any theory that fails to account for both is limited

Question 4

What is a weakness of the sexual selection theory?

Answer 4

Weakness: Sexual Selection and Homosexuality

• A criticism often made of sexual selection theory is that it cannot explain partner preferences of gay men and lesbian women. This mainly because in homosexual relationship partners are not assessing genetic fitness.
• To investigate this, Lawson et al. (2014) looked at personal ads placed by heterosexual and homosexual men and women and found the prefererences of homosexual men and women differ just as they do in heterosexual men and women

This similarity in selection strategies may exist because all people, whether homosexual or heterosexual, assess genetically-related qualities that are relevant to raising offspring (e.g. kindness, protectiveness, etc.)

Question 5

What is a strength of self-discloure?

Answer 5

Strength: Research support

• Sprecher and Hendrick (2004) studied heterosexual couples who were dating, and found that as self-disclosure increased, so did relationship satisfaction.
• Laurenceau et al. (2005). found that self-disclosure and perception of disclosure in a partner led to greater feelings of intimacy in a couple and vice versa.

Such supporting research increases our confidence in the validity of self-disclosure as a factor leading to more satisfying relationships.

Question 6

What is a weakness of self-discloure?

Answer 6

Weakness: Correlation vs Causation
While there is undoubtedly a link between self-disclosure and greater relationship satisfaction, cause and effect cannot be established, reducing the validity of the concept.

Direction of causality could be reversed…

A third variable could be causing both self-disclosure and satisfaction…

Question 7

What is a weakness of research into self-discloure?

Answer 7

Weakness : Issues Vs Debates
* Tang et al. (2013) found that men and women in the USA tended to disclose more sexual thoughts and feelings than romantic partners in China;

• However, despite this the level of relationship satisfaction was high in both cultures.

This shows that self-disclosure is not a requirement for successful relationships in all cultures suggesting that other factors e.g physical attractiveness could have an equal if not greater impact,, making Social Penetration Theory culturally biased.

Question 8

What is a strength of self-discloure?

Answer 8

Strength : Real world Application
The concept of self-disclosure has strong everyday life applications.

For example, it could be used in relationship counselling to help people improve their communication skills.

Question 9

What is the ‘Halo’ effect?

Answer 9

The tendency to allow one specific trait or our overall impression of a person, company or product to positively influence our judgment of their other related traits.

Question 10

How does the halo effect, affect our view of physically attractive people?

Answer 10

Dion et al (1972), found that physically attractive people are consistently rated as kind, strong, sociable and successful compared to unattractive people.

The belief that attractive people have these qualities make them more attractive to us, so we behave positively towards them.

This can lead to self-fulfilling prophecies.

Question 11

What is a strength of the halo effect?

Answer 11

Strength: Research support for Halo effect
Palmer and Peterson (2012) found that physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people.

Even when participants knew that these ‘knowledgeable’ people had no particular expertise.

This is important because it indicates the importance of physical attractiveness as an important factor in the initial formation of relationships.

Question 12

What is a strength of the evolutionary explanation?

Answer 12

Strength : Research support
Cunningham et at (1995) found that women who had big eyes, prominent cheekbones, small noses and high eyebrows were considered attractive

Cunningham found evidence for symmetry being considered attractive also

What is important was the fact that this was true cross-culturally, suggesting that it’s more than just cultural, it suggests it is evolutionarily advantageous

Question 13

What is a weakness of the matching hypothesis?

Answer 13

Weakness : contradicting research
Taylor et al (2001) studied the activity logs of a popular online dating site.

• This was a real-life test of the matching hypothesis because it measured actual date choices and not just preferences.
• Taylor found that people did not match based on their own attractiveness when online, compared to what the matching hypothesis would suggest

These findings challenge the concept that people choose romantic partners who are roughly of similar physical attractiveness to each other

Question 14

What is a strength of the matching hypothesis?

Answer 14

Counterpoint : meta-analysis
Feingold (1998) carried out a meta-analysis of 17 studies and found a significant correlation in ratings of attractiveness between romantic partners.

• Also Feingold suggests that although people in Taylor’s research seek more attractive partners, doesn’t mean that they get them, so selection may be the fantasy as it is a lab experiment (and not like real life)

This is even more of a strength because the studies looked at actual partners making it more realistic

Question 15

What is a strength of Filter theory?

Answer 15

Strength : Research Support
* Kerkhoff and Davis’s orignal study
* The researchers conducted a longitudinal study in which it was found that rekationship closeness was assocoiated with similarity of values in couples who has been together less than 18 months, whereas complementraity of needs predicted closeness in couples who were in long term relationship
This provides evidence for the central predictions for the theory; similarity is important early in the relationship and complementarity in more important long term

Question 16

What is a problem of the filter theory?

Answer 16

• Point : However some studies have failed to replicate these findings
• Evidence/Explain: Psychologists such as levenger(1974) claim that this may be due to the difficulty of correlating length of relationships and depth of relationships and fo determining what constitutes a long term relationhsip or short tterm relationship.
• Elaboration: Some couples take much longer than 18 months to establsih as similarity of attitudes and complimentarity, while others feel they are ready to commit to long term relationships earlier than 18 month cut-off point.
• Why this important? : This can’t be explained by the filter theory, which undermines its credibility and validity.

Question 17

What is a problem with filter theory?

Answer 17

Point: Direction of casuality
* Filter theory suggests that people are intially attracted to each other because they are similar but there is evidence that this direction of causality is wrong
* Anderson et al ( 2003) found in a longitudinal study that cohabiting partners became more simialr in their environmental repsonses overtime, a phenomenon they called emotional convergence
* Furthermore davis and rusbult (2001) discovered attitude alignment affect in longer term relationships. Romantic partners over a time bring their attitudes into line again suggesting that similarity is an effect for intial attraction and not the cause.
This limits the filter theory as the predictions are not in line with the theory

Question 18

What is a weakness of filter theory?

Answer 18

Point: Finally,the role of filters may have changed over time. For instance, technological developments may have reduced the role of the 1st level filter
* Online dating and apps have increased the field of availablities beyond the limits of physical location and demographic variables.
* Furthermore, concepts such as ‘swiping’ means that physical appearance has become important than physical location as a filter, which was resulted in many more relationships between partners from differing/ cultural backgrounds
Why is this important: Filter theory needs to be adapted to the realitues of modern-day relationship formation by completely revising the features of the 1st level filter

Question 19

What is a strength of social exchange theory?

Answer 19

Point : One strength is suport of SET from research studies
* Sprecher (2001) comparisson levels for alternativves were stronger predictor of commitment in a relationship and that rewards were an important as a predictor of satisfaction especially for women
Why is this important: Therefore it would appear that some people do stay in their current relationship until it remains more profitable than alternatives.

Question 20

What is a weakness of SET?

Answer 20

Weakness : Issues with cause and effect
* Argyle (1987) argues that people rarely start assessing their relationships before they feel unsatisfied with them
* For example, being unahppy in relationships may lead a person to start questioning whether there are more rewards than costs in their relationships and the potential alternatives, but these thoughts only occur only after dissatisfaction is discovered.
Why is this important : This contradicts SET which assumes that assessing profit and loss is the way in which all relationships are maintained, even happy ones

Question 21

What is a problem of SET?

Answer 21

Point : A final limitation is that SET deals in concepts that are vague and hard to quantify
* Basing it on costs and rewards limits the range of real life romatic experineces it can explain making it highly reductionist
* SET doesn’t explain why many people stay in abusive relationships despite the lack of rewards and overwhelming costs
Why is this important : This suggests that a hollistic approach is swaying romantic relationship may be better suited to explaining the complexity of relationships maintenance

Question 22

What is a strength of equity theory?

Answer 22

Point: one strength of equity theory is that there is evdicence from research studies of real-world relationships that confirm equity theory as more valid explanation than SET
* Utne (1984) found that couples who consdiered their relationship equitable were more satisfied than those who saw themselves benefitting
* Husbands and wives age 16-45 years had been together more than 2 years before marrying. The researchers found that couples who considered their relationship equitable were more satisfied.
Why is this important : Such resarchers confirms the central prediction of equity theory, increasing its validity as an explanation of romantic relationships

Question 23

What is problem with equity theory?

Answer 23

Point: There is research that contradicts equity theory
* For example, Berg and MCquin (1986), conducted a longitudinal on 38 dating couples found that percieved fairness is either present or not in the relationship from the start and does not develop with time, contary to the prediction equity theory.
Why is this important : These findings oppose the central idea of the theory and contradicts the idea that equity increases over time, after the inflation of the relationship. It also suggests that pther factors such as self discloure may play more important role.

Question 24

What is problem of equity theory?

Answer 24

Point : It may not apply to all cultures
* Auther-ryan et al ( 2007) found that cultural differences in the link between equity and satsifaction, couples from the us (individualistic) partners consdiered most satisfied when equity was present in relationships, but when compared to Jamaica ( collectivist) satisfaction was highest when both men and women felt that they were both overbenfitting.
Why is this important : Due to the fact that the concept of equity being something is strived for by both parties, and under or over benfitting should cause dissatisfcation is a central claim of the theory, this cultural contradiction suggests that it is limited as it only applies within certain cultures.

Question 25

What is another problem of equity theory?

Answer 25

Point : A final limitation is that not all partners in romatic relationships are equally concerned about achiveing equity
* Hussman (1987)- There are people who are less sensitive to the inequity and are prepared to give more in the relationship (benevlent) other people entitleds, believe they deserve to overbenefit and don’t feel to guilty
* In both these cases, neither of the individual types identified by Hussman are concerned about striving for equity in the relationship let alone idenitify as a measure of relationship satisfaction
Why is this important : This shows that a desire for equity varies from one individual to another, and therefore cannot be universal feature of maintaining romantic relationship

Question 26

What is a strength of Rusbults Investment model?

Answer 26

Point : Le and Agnew’s (2003)
* They conducted a meta-analysis of 52 studies from the late 1970s to 1999, featuring 11,000 particpants in total, from five different
* Satisfaction, and comparisson with alternatives and investment greatly contributed to commitment; and that commitment was a defining feature of long lasting relationships Commitment = stable and long-term relationships , multiple genders, cultures and sexuality
Why is this important : Adds validity to Rusbult’s claim that these factors are universally important features of romatic relationships

Question 27

What is a limitation of Rusbult’s investment model?

Answer 27

Point : However a limitation of research into the investment model is that a lot of the findings demonstrating the importance of investment, satisfaction and quality of alternatives have been correlational
* It could be that the more commited you feel towards your partner, the more invested you are willing to make in the relationship, so the direction of casuality may be reversed of that suggested by the model.
Why is this important : Its not a clear that the model has identified the cause of commitment rather than factors that are associated with it

Question 28

What is a strength of Rusbult’s Investment model?

Answer 28

Point : Another strength of the investment model is its ability to explain why people stay in abusive relationships
* Rusbult (1955) studied ‘battered’ women at shelter and found that those most likely to return to abusve partners reported having made the greates investment and having few alternatives
* These women were dissatisfied with their relationships but still commited to them
Why is this important : Therefore the model shows the satisfaction on its own can’t explain where people stay in relationships - commitment and investment are important!

Question 29

What is a limiation of Rusbult’s Investment model?

Answer 29

Point : The investment model oversimplifies the investment
* Goofriend and Agnew (2008) pointed out that there is more to investment than just the resources you have already put in the relationship. In the first stage partners will have made very few vital investments
* The model therefore has been extended to include the investement partners make future plans. They are motivated to commit to each other beacuse they want to see the cherished plans for the future work out
Why is this important : This means the original model is limited because it fails to recognise the true complexity of the investment, especially how planning for the future influences future commitment

Question 30

What is a strength of Duck’s phase model?

Answer 30

Point : Practical application in counselling ie, reverse breakdown
* Different repair strategies are more effective at different stages of breakdown
* Intra-psychic phase = Focus on their brooding on the positive aspects of their partner
Dyadic phase = improve communication and wider social skills
Why is this important : This shows that Duck’s model of relationship breakdown can be used successfully to help couples contemplting relationships stay together

Question 31

What is a limiation of Duck’s phase model?

Answer 31

Point : The model is based on research into relationship breakdown in indvidualistic cultures
* This is not the case in collectivist culture> In such cultures, relationships, are sometimes arranged by wider family members, and chracterised by greater family involvement. This makes the relationship difficult to end which means the break up porcess will not follow the phase proposed by duck.
Why is this important : As a result, Duck’s model is culturally biased as it suggests that the breakup process is universal, which is clearly not the case

Question 32

What is a limitation Ducks phase model?

Answer 32

Point: There is research to suggest that the phase model is incomplete
* Rollie and Duck (2006). They modifiied the model to add the 5th phase the resurrection phase, in which ex partners from their different future relationships, use experiences gained from their recently ended one
* Existence of the resurrection stage was supported by Tashiro and frazier, who found that participants ( undergraduates who had recently experienced a breakup) reported experiencing personal growth as a result of it as a result of it as well as emotional distress Futhermore, they made it clear that progression through the stages is not inevitable and it is possible to return to an earlier stage at any point rather than assuming linear progression from phase 1 to the next.
Why is this important : These changes overcame the original weakness of the model including the fact that it does not account for the dynamic nature of breakups with all the inherent complexity and uncertainity

Question 33

What is a limitation of Duck’s phase model?

Answer 33

Point: The frequent use of retrospective data
* It uses questionaires or interviews to ask particpants about the breakup. People’s memories of an event may not be accurate and also may be coloured by their current stage, which means that their answers are not reliable. It is usually the first stages of breakdown that tends to be disorted/ignored.
* Unfortunatley, it is almost impossible to study the point at which problems 1st appear. researchers are very reluctant to study relationships at this early point because their involvement could make things worse and even hasten the end of the relationship that otherwise could have been rescued
Why is this important : This means pairs of Duck’s model is based on research that ignores this early part of the process so this is an incomplete description of how relationships end

Question 34

what is a weakness of research into virtual relationships?

Answer 34

Point : One limitation of the reduced cues theory is that research has suggested that online non-verbal cues are not absent, but simply different
* Walter and Tidwell (1995) point out that people in online interactions use other cues such as style and intimacy of their messages. For example, It is thought that taking time to reply is often interpreted as a more intimate act than an immediate response, But not too much time as this is seen as a snub
* Additionally, acrostics such as LOL, emoticons and emojis are also used as effective subsitutes for facial epxressions and tone of voice
Why is this important : Therefore the success of such online communication is difficult for the reduced cues theory to explain because it shows CMC interactions can be just as personal as FTF ones and that it is possible to emotional states in virtual relationships

Question 35

What is a strength of research into virtual relationships?

Answer 35

Point : One positive element is the lack of gates in CMC relationships is that shy, lonely and sociallly anxious people find virtual relationships valuble
* Mckenna and Bargh (2000) looked at online communication by shy, lonely and socially anxious people and found that these people were able to express their true selves than in FtF interactions of the romantic relationships formed by shy people online; 71% survived for at least 2 years compared to only 49% for relationships formed by shy people in FtF relationships.
* Not only does this show the positive impact that virtual relationships can have on romantic relationships that shy people form online
Why is this important : It also shows that CMC provides an oppurtunity for lonely and socially anxious people to connect with others, which would have made a positive impact on their wellbeing and mental health on a grand scale

Question 36

What is a weaknes of research into virtual relationships?

Answer 36

Point : The hyperpersonal model has also been challenged by findings from a meta-analysis
* Rupel et al carried out a meta-analysis of 25 studies and compared self disclosures in FtF and virtual relationships. They found that self report studies showed that the frequency, Breadth and depth of self disclousres were all greater in FtF relationships
Why is this important : This contradicts the hyperpersonal model’s predictions that the greater intimacy of virtual relationshops should lead to more and deeper self discloures than FtF interactions

Question 37

What is a strength of research into virtual relationships?

Answer 37

Point: There is some support for the idea that FtF and virtual relationships differ in the type of self discolure used, Whitty and Joinson (2009) summarise evidence how self presentation is manipulated in virtual relationships
* For example, questions asked in online disscussions tend to be very direct, probing and intimate. Equally people will often invent attractive qualities for their online dating profiles. This is quite different from FtF conversations which generally involve features such as ‘small talk’ rather than hyper-honesty or hyper-dishonesty
Why is this important : This supports the model’s claim about hyper-dishonesty and hyper-honest self discolures and shows there are differences between FtF and virtual relationships