Theories Of Romantic Relationships: Duck's Phase Model Flashcards
What is breakdown
Duck proposed a phase model of relationship breakdown. He argued that the ending of a relationship is not a one-off event but a process that takes time and goes through four distinct phases.
What threshold are there on the phases?
Each phase is characterised by a partner reaching a threshold where their perception of the relationship changes. The partner may reassess and decide the relationship isn’t so bad, halting the process of breakdown. Or they cross the threshold and move onto the next stage of the model.
What are the four stages of a breakdown of a relationship?
- Intra-psychic
- Dyadic
- Social
- Grave-dressing
What is the intra psychic phase?
Theshold - ‘I can’t stand this anymore’, indicating a determination that something has to change. A partner becomes dissatisfied with the relationship in its current form. They can brood on the reasons for his and this will usually focus on their partners shortcomings. The dissatisfied partner tends to keep this to themselves, but may share their thoughts with a trusted friend, weighing up the pros and cons of continuing.
What is the dyadic phase?
Threshold - ‘I would be justified with withdrawing’. Once a partner concludes that they are justified in ending the relationship they have to discuss this with their partner. Dissatisfactions about equity, commitment, etc. are aired. The phase may vary in length and in intensity of hostility or anxiety.
What is the social phase?
Threshold - the dissatisfied partner concludes, ‘I mean it’. Once a partner wants to end the relationship they will seek support particularly from joint friends. These friends may be encouraged to choose a side but others may try and prevent the break-up by acting as a go-between. Once the news is public though this is usually the point of no return.
What is the grave-dressing phase?
Threshold - ‘it’s now inevitable’. Once the end becomes inevitable then a suitable story of the relationship and its end is prepared for wider consumption. This is likely to include an attempt to ensure that the storyteller will be judged most favourably. This creation of a personal story in addition to the public one is necessary so the partner can ‘move on’.
Limitation - it is incomplete
Dollie and Duck added a fifth resurrection phase in which ex-partners begin to use what they have learned from the last relationship to prepare for a future one. The refined version also clarifies that point that movement through the stages is neither linear nor inevitable and partners may return to an earlier phase. This suggests that the original phase model is therefore only a partial explanation of the process of relationship breakdown.
Limitation - supporting evidence is based on retrospective data.
Interviews about the process tend to take place after the breakdown, not during it. Such retrospective data may not be reliable. It is almost impossible to study breakdown in the earlier stages without potentially interfering with the ongoing process. This means that the model is based on limited information about the start of the breakdown process and so is incomplete as a description.
Strength - application to helping people reverse the process.
The model suggests that some repair strategies might be more effective at one stage rather than another. For example, in the intra-psychic stage partners could brood more positively. It would be less helpful to encourage brooding if a person had already reached a social phase. This suggests that the model can lead to supportive suggestions that may help people through this difficult time in our lives.
Limitation - focuses on how rather than why breakup occurs.
Flemlee suggests that a ‘fatal attraction’ theory stating that the attributes that partners found attractive at the start of a relationship can often become too much. For example, someone who was attracted to ‘so funny’ partner may then decide to end the relationship because the other ‘fails to take life seriously’. This highlights the fact that Duck’s model only tells us what happens and not why.
Limitation - based on individualist cultures.
Moghaddam et al. propose relationships in individualist cultures are mostly voluntary and end quite often, while in collectivist cultures relationships are more frequently ‘obligatory’ and less easy to end. The whole concept of a relationship differs between cultures and therefore the process of relationship breakdown is likely to differ. This is a limitation because it means that the model can only be applied to some cultures and types of relationship.
