Theories of romantic relationships: Relationship Breakdown Flashcards
Duck’s Phase Model of Relationship Dissolution
Many people view relationship breakdown as a one-off event that just happens when one partner decides to leave a relationship. However, social psychologist Steven Duck suggested that relationship dissolution is a process that consists of several distinct stages. Although each break up is different, he identified a general pattern.
What are the 5 phases of dissolution?
- Intrapsychic Phase
- Dyadic Phase
- Social Phase
- Grave-dressing Phase
- Resurrection Phase
Intrapsychic Phase
In this phase, at least one of the partners is dissatisfied with the relationship, and they spend a lot of time thinking about the reasons for this dissatisfaction as well as possible ways forward. This stage focuses on the individual’s internal thought process that occurs before confronting the partner, essentially they are brooding over the relationship, but keeps it to themselves. This phase ends when they start to complain openly, not to their partner, but to other people.
Dyadic Phase
This phase involves the difficult task of confronting the partner with their dissatisfactions and raising the question of the future of the relationship, usually leading to hostility. Over this period, the discussions will often focus on the equity in the relationship and will either culminate in a renewed resolution to invest in the relationship or the realisation that the relationship has broken down. The dissatisfied partner also considers the possibility of resorting to other alternatives.
Social Phase
This is when other people are involved in the process; family and friends are told about the break up and the social network changes. Friends are encouraged to choose a side, and may urge for reconciliation with their partner, or may encourage the breakdown, through expression of their opinion or hidden facts. Each partner will seek approval from their family and friends at the expense of their previous romantic partner. At this point, the relationship is unlikely to be repaired. Duck claimed that once the conflict has reached this stage; it is more difficult for a couple to mend their relationship. The social phase usually leads to the dissolution of the relationship.
Grave-dressing Phase
This is where the relationship has officially ended and is considered history (the partner becomes an ‘ex’). When the relationship has completely ended, each partner will seek to create a favourable narrative of the events, justifying to themselves and to others why the relationship breakdown was not their fault, thus retaining their social value and not lowering their chances of future relationships. This phase signifies the closure of the previous relationship and readiness to start a new one.
Resurrection Phase
Duck and Colleagues added a 5th stage in 2006 to this model; the resurrection phase, where people take the experiences and knowledge gained from the previous relationships and apply it to future relationships. They suggested that at this stage, people move beyond the pain and distress associated with ending the relationship, and experience personal growth. When Duck et al. revisited the model, they also emphasised that progression from one stage to the next is not inevitable and effective interventions can prevent this.
Strength
point: A strength of Duck’s Model of relationship breakdown is its practical applications in the field of marital counselling.
evidence: For example, if a therapist identifies that a partner is in the intrapsychic phase, they may encourage them to focus on their partner’s positive qualities rather than dwelling on their negative aspects. In contrast, if a couple is in the dyadic phase, counselling may focus on improving communication and addressing dissatisfaction. By tailoring therapy to the specific phase of breakdown, interventions may be more effective.
justification: This increases the ecological validity of this theory as it suggests how understanding the process of relationship breakdown can have significant real-world benefits through providing a framework for intervention at different stages of relationship dissolution.
Strength
point: There is research supporting Duck’s Model of relationship dissolution.
evidence: Tashiro and Frazier surveyed undergraduate students who had recently experienced a breakup. They found that participants reported emotional distress but also personal growth, as they had learned from their experiences and gained a clearer understanding of what they wanted in their future relationships. This aligns with Duck’s claim that people engage in a resurrection phase as a part of relationship dissolution, whereby they move beyond the pain and distress associated with ending the relationship, and experience personal growth.
justification: This increases the credibility of Duck’s model as it provides empirical support for the demonstration of relationship breakdown, portraying it as not only a negative experience but also an opportunity for emotional and psychological growth.
Weakness
point: Duck’s model has been criticised for failing to explain the underlying causes of relationship dissolution.
evidence: Felmlee’s Fatal Attraction Model suggests that the very traits that primarily attract individuals to a partner can later become the reasons for dissatisfaction. For instance, a partner perceived as exciting at the beginning of a relationship may later be seen as impulsive and unreliable and a partner initially perceived as caring may later be seen as overbearing and clingy. This demonstrates that whilst Duck’s Model considers how the process of relationship dissolution occurs, it is also important to consider why it occurs to begin with.
justification: Consequently, this limits the explanatory power of this model as it does not address the factors that cause a relationship to deteriorate in the first place. Without understanding the root causes of the cessation of a relationship, this model lacks the ability to predict which relationships are most at risk, therefore emphasising the need for a more holistic approach that incorporates elements of other theories like Felmlee’s.
Weakness
point: A limitation of Duck’s phase model is that much of the supporting research relies on retrospective data.
evidence: Studies on relationship breakdown typically use questionnaires or interviews, asking participants to recall details about their breakup after it had already occurred. The issue with this is that memory is reconstructive, meaning that individuals may forget, distort, or reinterpret past events based on their current emotions or experiences. This is particularly true for individuals who were a part of a traumatic relationship, for example, involving abuse. As a result, the data collected may not accurately reflect the true sequence of events in the relationship breakdown.
justification: This lowers the internal validity of research supporting this model as findings may not accurately describe real-life relationship breakdowns as it is unclear whether participants’ responses genuinely reflected how the breakup unfolded or if their recollections may have been altered by time and personal bias.
