Relationships v2

Question 1

Outline the social exchange theory of relationships. (AO1)

Answer 1

• This is an economic theory of relationships
• Views relationships as a ‘business’ where you monitor the rewards (fun, gifts, attention) and the costs (emotional strain, time)
• We find people who provide a lot of rewards attractive but those perceived to involve a lot of costs are unattractive
• We aim to get as much rewards as possible out
• Relationships which are balanced in the rewards and costs of each individual are likely to succeed and imbalanced ones are likely to fail
• We compare our current partner to our previous partners and relationships (comparison level)
• We also compare to other potential partners who could provide more rewards (comparison with alternatives especially if our relationship is not satisfactory)

Question 2

Evaluate the social exchange theory of relationships. (AO3)

Answer 2

ADV 1: Gottman (1992)

• he found that individuals in unhappy marriages frequently reported lack of positive BEHAVIOUR exchanges and an excess of negative exchanges
• For a successful marriage the ratio of pos to neg should be 5:1 and in unsuccessful marriages it is typically 1:1

ADV 2: Practical Applications

• There are real life applications to Integrated Couples therapy
• This aims to break negative patterns of behaviour, reduce negative exchanges and increase positive behaviour exchanges
• 66% of couples reported a significant improvement in their relationship with this therapy

DIS 1: Cultural bias

• The perceived rewards and costs of relationships are more applicable to individualistic cultures than collectivist
• In collectivist family values and compatibility may be more valued as rewards but in individualistic is is more common to buy expensive gifts

DIS 2: Behaviourist

• Social exchange theory is rooted in behaviourist approach
• Relationship maintenance is based on rewards and operant conditioning
• However, some relationships have high costs and low rewards yet they continue e.g. violetn or abusive relationships

Question 3

Outline the equity theory of relationships. (AO1)

Answer 3

• This is an economic theory of relationships which emphasises fairness in the relationship
• Each partner must experience a balance between rewards and costs otherwise the relationship will fail
• If someone is over-benefiting, they will feel guilty and if they are under-benefiting, they will feel angry and upset
• Imbalances can still work as long as both parties are satisfied with it e.g. if one lost their job and the other has to contribute more money to the household
• An equitable relationship must have a fair ratio of rewards and costs for each party

Question 4

Evaluate the equity theory of relationships. (AO3)

Answer 4

ADV 1: DeMaris (2007)

• Studied 1500 people in a US Survey and found that when women were under-benefiting in a relationship to a high degree, the the risk of divorce was high
• This shows that equity and unequity influences satisfaction of women in relationships

ADV 2: Monkeys

• In a study with monkeys they found that female monkeys became angry if they were denied a prize for playing a game with the researcher when other monkeys were receiving the prize without having to play the game
• Suggests that ideas of equity are rooted in our ancient origins

DIS 1: Cultural bias

• Equity theory is more applicable to individualistic cultures which focus on striking a balance between rewards and costs to maintain a relationship
• In collectivist cultures they may value family networks and values more to maintain a relationship
• Also in collectivist cultures, relationships may be successful due to cultural expectations and obligation of roles rather than rewards and costs

DIS 2: Difficult to monitor equity

• Criticised because it is not possible to measure equity in a loving relationship as many rewards and costs can be psychological or emotional which are difficult to quantify
• Also if we measure rewards and costs, ti may diminish the quality of love in the relationship which can be damaging

Question 5

Outline Rusbult’s Investment model of relationships. (AO1)

Answer 5

• Rusbult extended the social exchange theory to form the investment model
• He emphasised that commitment is the key factor to sustaining a relationship
• Commitment is dependent on satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investments
• Satisfaction is determined by the quality of alternative partners
• Investments act as a deterrent to ending a relationship
• Intrinsic investments are what you directly put into the relationship e.g. money, time, effort etc. and extrinsic are the benefits that arise out of the relationship e.g. mutual friends, house, children etc.

Question 6

Evaluate Rusbult’s investment model. (AO3)

Answer 6

ADV 1: Taiwan & Netherlands

• Research done with students in Taiwan and the Netherlands found that high levels of commitment were related to high level of satisfaction, low quality of alternatives and large investment size

ADV 2: Infidelity & Abuse

• Model explains infidelity: low level of satisfaction, high quality of alternatives
• These factors lessen the level of commitment and the present relationship is likely to terminate
• Also explains why people stay in abusive relationships: low satisfaction, low quality of alternatives and high investment size e.g. children

DIS 1: Unmeasureable

• Criticised because you cannot measure commitment, satisfaction, investments and quality of alternatives objectively
• Rusbult responded to this with an investment model scale which measures each of the key variables in reliable and valid way
• However, in Rusbult’s research he used self-report data which brings up the issue of social desirability bias

DIS 2: Gender Differences

• Ignores the gender differences
• Lin found that women tend to describe their relationships with higher satisfaction levels, lower quality of alternatives and high investment size compared to men

Question 7

Describe Duck’s Phase model of relationship breakdown. (AO1)

Answer 7

There are four phases of relationship breakdown:

1. Intra-psychic processes:

• The dissatisfied partner privately thinks about their relationships and broods over their partner’s faults and how they are under-benefitting from the relationship
• They may become depressed and withdraw from social interactions with their partner

2. Dyadic processes:

• The dissatisifed partner privately discusses their issues in the relationship with their partner
• They both consider the investments made into the relationship
• Both parties may reconcile and continue their relationship at this stage or attend marital therapy if there are difficulties

3. Social processes:

• If there is a break up it is made public to friends and family so at this stage it is difficult to make up
• Alliances are formed and some may critique their ex-partner “I never liked them from the star” or scapegoat them “it was all her fault”

4. Grave dressing processes:

• Significant duration of time after break up in post-relationship stage
• Each has to have an account of their relationship and why they broke up and typically present their partner in a negative light to maintain social credit; different versions to different people
• Partners may reinterpret their ex-partner’s behaviour or traits e.g. “They were rebellious” to “They were irresponsible”

Question 8

Evaluate Duck’s phase model of relationship breakdown. (AO3)

Answer 8

ADV 1: Social Exchange Theory

• Support comes from social exchange theory
• Duck’s model is based in social exchange theory as it states that if rewards are minimal and costs are high then the relationship with breakdown

ADV 2: 5th Stage

• Was devised by Duck in 1982 but in 2006 he had updated this model with another researcher named Rollie and added a fifth stage of “resurrection” where the individual engages in personal growth to prepare for their next relationship

DIS 1: Initiator or not

• Akert criticised this model because he believed that the role of the partner who chooses to break up or not is the most important predictor of the relationship breakdown experience:
• the initiator felt less upset or angry but more guilty
• Partner who did not initiate felt much more miserable, sad and lonely in the weeks following the break up

DIS 2: Ignores gender differences

• Ignores the gender differences in relationship breakdown experiences
• Females tend to emphasise unhappiness, lack of emotional support and incompatibility as reasons to break up but males emphasise lack of fun or sex
• Women also often wish to stay friends with their ex-partners but men usually want a clean-break from them

Question 9

Briefly outline evolutionary explanation of relationships.

Answer 9

• Partner preferences are driven by sexual selection
• Both males and females choose partners to maximise reproductive success
• Individuals with these traits (e.g. wide hips, strength, height etc.) are more likely to survive and pass on these successful traits
• Anisogamy causes males & females to adopt distinct strategies to choose a partner.
• Men use intra-sexual selection and females use inter-sexual selection

Question 10

Describe intra-sexual selection

Answer 10

• Members of one sex compete amongst each other for access to the other sex
• Mens best evolutionary strategy is to have as many partners as possible due to anisogamy
• Men may engage in mate-guarding (protecting mate from enaging with other males) to avoid cuckoldry (raising another mans child)

Question 11

Describe inter-sexual selection.

Answer 11

• Members of one sex (females) choose from available prospective mates according to attractiveness
• Women’s best strategy is to be selective when choosing partner
• Seeks men who display characteristics of good physical health, high status and resources

Question 12

Evaluate evolutionary explanations of partner preferences.

Answer 12

ADV 1: Buss (1989)

• Survey of over 10,000 adults in 33 countries
• Females reported valuing resource-based characteristics (occupation)
• Males valued good looks and preferred younger partners

ADV 2: Differences in intimacy offers

• Male and female psychology students at Florida Uni had to approach other students of the opposite sex
• Ask them varying levels of intimate questions e.g. go on a date or go to bed with them
• 50% of men and women agreed to date
• 69% of men back to apartment and 75% to bed compared to 6% of women to apartment and 0% for more intimate offer

DIS 1: Deterministic

• Little free will in partner choice
• Everyday experience tells us that we do have some choice over partner preferences

DIS 2: Socially sensitive

• Promotes traditional sexist views of male and female roles
• Women are now more career-oriented and independent so will not look for more resourceful partners
• Availability of contraception means evolutionary pressures are less relevant

Question 13

Outline self-disclosure as a factor affecting attraction.

Answer 13

• Self-disclosure is the revealing of personal information such as thoughts, feelings and experiences to another person
• By gradually revealing emotions and experiences to each other, couples gains greater understanding and display trust
• So self-disclosure increases attraction
• As trust builds, breadth and depth of self-disclosure increases from superficial details e.g. hobbies, interests etc. to family values and difficult experiences
• Too much self-disclosure on a first date reduces attraction
• Reciprocal self-disclosure is where people expect same level of self-disclosure from their partner

Question 14

Evaluate self-disclosure as a factor affecting attraction.

Answer 14

ADV 1: Altman & Taylor (1973):

• Self disclosure on the first data is inappropriate and did not increase attraction levels
• The person self-disclosing was seen as maladjusted and not very likeable

ADV 2: Tal-Or (2015):

• Research on self disclosure being a gradual process
• Analysis of reality TV shows like Big Brother revealed that viewers did not like contestants who self-disclosed early on
• They preferred contestants who did so gradually

ADV 3: Kito (2010):

• Self disclosure across cultures
• Self disclosure was high for Japanese and American students in romantic heterosexual relationships

DIS 1: Sprecher (2013):

• Level of self-disclosure received is a better predictor of liking and loving rather than amount of self-disclosure given
• Goes against reciprocal self-disclosure

DIS 2: Other factors

• SD is important but it is unlikely attraction is based on self-disclosure alone
• Other factors are needed to increase attraction: physical attraction, similarity of attitudes, complementarity of needs

Question 15

Briefly outline physical attractiveness affecting attraction.

Answer 15

• Men place more importance on physical attractiveness for a female partner in the short term and long term
• Females place more importance on it only on short term partners
• What is physically attractive varies across culture and time

Question 16

Describe the halo effect.

Answer 16

• Halo effect is where the general impression of a person is incorrectly formed from their level of physical attractiveness
• They are seen as more sociable, optimistic, successful and trustworthy
• People behave positively towards them which creates a self-fulfilling prophecy where physically attractive person behaves even more positively because of attention they receive

Question 17

Evaluate the halo effect

Answer 17

ADV 1: Palmer & Peterson (2012):

• Physically attractive people are rated as more politically knowledgeable than unattractive people
• Halo effect so powerful it persisted wen pps found out PA person has no expertise in politics

DIS 2: Other factors

• Towhey (1979) asked male and female pps to rate how much they liked someone based on a photo
• Pps also completed MACHO scale which measures sexist attitudes and behaviour
• High on MACHO = more influenced by physical attractiveness
• Influence of physical attractiveness is moderated by other factors e.g. personality

Question 18

Describe the matching hypothesis.

Answer 18

• When initiating romantic relationships, individuals seek partners that have the same social desirability as themselves
• Physical attractiveness is determining factor as it is the most accessible way to assess the other person as a potential partner before forming relationship
• People will also approach others of similar level of attractiveness to themselves to avoid rejection.

Question 19

Evaluate the matching hypothesis.

Answer 19

ADV 1: Meta-analysis

• Fangold (1988) carried out meta-analysis of 17 studies using real-life couples
• Strong positive correlation between partners’ ratings of physical attractiveness as predicted by matching hypothesis

DIS 1: Complex matching

• Sometimes a very physically attractive person forms a relationship with an unattractive person
• Rebalance of traits occurs where less attractive person has other traits such as being rich, high status or great personality to make up for lacking PA
• Called complex matching where very PA person forms relationship with less PA person

Question 20

Outline filter theory.

Answer 20

We use filtering to reduce the field of available partners down to a field of desirable partners. We engage in three levels of filtering:

• social demography
• similarity in attitude
• complementarity of needs

We tend to be attracted to those who pass through all series of filters.

• From outset we screen out people based on age, sex, education and social background etc.
• We are more attracted to people from similar backgrounds to our own
• We choose people who have similar attutudes to our own
• In long term we choose people who complement our needs

Question 21

Evaluate filter theory.

Answer 21

ADV 1: Taylor (2010):

• 85% of Americans who got married in 2008 married within their own ethnic group
• Supports social demography filter
• Individuals choose partners who are similar to them and have similar backgrounds

ADV 2: Actual vs perceived attitudes

• Hoyle (1993) found that perceived attitude similarity can predict attraction more strongly than actual attitude similarity
• In speed-dating event, pps had to make quick decisions about attraction
• Measured actual and perceived similarity of attitudes though a questionnaire
• Perceived similarity predicted romantic liking more than actual similarity

DIS 1: No effect

• Research with 330 couples found no evidence that similarity of attitudes or complementarity of needs was important in permanence of relationship

DIS 2: Emotional convergence

• People are not just attracted to each other because of similar social demography
• Longitudinal study of cohabiting partners shows that they become more similar in attitudes and emotional responses over the years
• This increased attraction
• At the start, attitudes were not so similar (emotional convergence)

DIS 3: Virtual relationships

• Internet means there is a reduction in social demographic variables when we meet someone
• Easier to meet people far away or with different ethnicity, social class or background
• It is more accessible to meet people outside of demographic limits

Question 22

Describe self-disclosure in virtual relationships.

Answer 22

• Self-disclosure occurs much faster in virtual relationships due to anonymity
• In face-to-face relationships we hold off on disclosing because we have the fear or ridicule or rejection
• But in virtual relationships that risk is lowered
• Walther (2011) developed the hyperpersonal model suggesting that because we self-disclose faster in virtual relationships, they quickly become more intense, intimate and meaningful
• They also end faster as we cannot maintain intense self-disclosure
• They also are more intimate because SD is easy to manipulate
• Selective-self presentation is where you project a positive image of yourself so your partner is more inclined to self-disclose, making it more intimate

Question 23

Evaluate self-disclosure in virtual relationships.

Answer 23

ADV 1: Hyperpersonal model research support

• Whitty & Joinson (2009) conducted research into self-disclosure online
• They found that questions and answers on there were much more direct, intimate and probing than those in face-to-face interactions
• As the hyperpersonal model predicts

DIS 1: Evidence against HP model

• Virtual relationships are more durable and long-lasting than other relationships in contrast to HP model
• More self-disclosure early in the relationship builds trust, empathy and understanding

DIS 2: Online context

• Self-disclosure varies dependent on online context
• More likely to SD on gaming sites than dating sites because the latter is more likely to lead to face-to-face interactions

Question 24

Describe the reduced-cue theory of virtual relationships.

Answer 24

• In real life we rely on a lot of subtle cues such as facial expressions and tone of voice which are absent from virtual relationships
• Reduction of non-verbal communication leads to deindividuation as it diminishes people’s feelings of identity and brings on behaviours that people usually restrain themselves from feeling such as aggression
• This may make online communication more aggressive thus self-disclosure is lessened due to fear of verbal aggression from their partner

Question 25

Evaluate reduced cue theory for virtual relationships.

Answer 25

**DIS 1: Lacks temporal validity** - Reduced cue theory was developed when social media lacked face-to-face interaction - Used to be much less rich in non-verbal communication - Advancements in tech allow for live interaction similar to real-life interactions like video calls **DIS 2: Non-verbal isn't absent** - Non-verbal communication is not absent, the cues are just different to voice and facial expressions - Emoticons are used for FE and intonation - Timing of responses is also a form of NVC

Question 26

Outline absence of gating in virtual relationships.

Answer 26

- In real life, out attraction is influenced by many factors such as appearance, age, ethnicity and mannerisms - Being online removes these factors that normally act as a barrier to interaction - More opportunities for less attractive or shy people to develop romantic relationships - Absence of gating also means people create relationships they never would face-to-face

Question 27

Evaluate absence of gating in virtual relationships.

Answer 27

**ADV 1: Social Benefits** - Absence of gating reduces loneliness and makes it easier for people to seek out interaction + company - Rosenfeld & Thomas (2012) conducted a study with 4000 participants into importance of online communication - Found that 72% of people with internet access were married or in committed relationships - Only 36% of people WITHOUT internet access had that - Virtual environments help people establish and maintain relationships **ADV 2: Shy people** - Baker & Oswald (2010) asked 207 male and female pps to complete a questionnaire on shyness, internet use and perception of quality of friends - People who scored highly on shyness and internet use also scored high on perception of friend quality - This correlation disappeared when shyness is low - Online communication helps people overcome their shyness so their face-to-face interactions alsp improve **DIS 1: Lacks temporal validity** - Absence of gating studies have mostly been done in the late 1990s and early 2000s - As technology changes rapidly, so does the nature of virtual relationships - Research into virtual relationships quickly becomes outdated which lowers temporal validity **DIS 2: Ignores offline interactions** - People are usually involved in both not either or - There are fewer differences between online and real life relationships than research suggests - Research fails to take into account the effect of virtual relationships on a person's offline interactions and vice versa

Question 28

Briefly define parasocial relationships.

Answer 28

Parasocial relationships are **one-sided** relationships with a **celebrity, prominent person in the community or a fictional character** whereby the fan knows everything about their **subject of adoration** and **feels close** to them and there is no chance of **reciprocity**

Question 29

Describe the levels of parasocial relationships.

Answer 29

**1. Entertainment-Social:** - Most people engage in parasocial relationships in their life and most stay at this stage - Celebrities are seen as a source of entertainment and topic for light-hearted gossip **2. Intense-Personal:** - Deeper level of parasocial relationship - More intense relationship with celebrity - Sees them as a soulmate and intense interest in their personal life e.g. dress sense, food they like, entertainment they take part in etc. **3. Borderline pathological:** - Most intense level - takes celebrity worship to extreme - Has obsessive fantasies about the celebrity, spends large sum of money to obtain memorabilia, may engage in illegal activities such as stalking - Usual to believe that if they had the chance to meet the celebrity, the feelings would be reciprocated

Question 30

Evaluate the levels of parasocial relationships.

Answer 30

**ADV 1: Schiappa et al. (2007)** - Significant correlation between amount of television participants watched, the degree to which participants perceived the characters as 'real' and the level of parasocial relationship **DIS 1: Ignores education level** - Educational levels of individuals needs to be taken into account. - Highly educated individuals may perceive the majority of celebrities as less educated than themselves, therefore, are less likely to engage in parasocial relationships. **DIS 2: Research lacks validity** - Research into the levels of parasocial relationships was conducted via questionnaires. - These can be affected by socially desirable and idealised answers, thus, lacking validity. **DIS 3: Dangers of parasocial relationships** - It was recommend that training should occur in schools to highlight the dangers of parasocial relationships - It often results in an individual having unrealistic goals to be more similar to celebrities. - For example, one may develop an eating disorder in order to obtain the slim body of a media star.

Question 31

Describe the absorption-addiction model for parasocial relationships.

Answer 31

- Pursuing parasocial relationships makes up for **deficits** in an individual’s **real life relationships.** - Relationships with celebrities are seen as an **attempt to cope** with or **escape from reality** - Parasocial relationships enable individuals to develop a sense of **personal identity** and achieve a sense of **self-fulfilment** - People with an **addictive nature** will escalate through a series of absorption and addiction stages until they are completely **pre-occupied with a celebrity's life** **1. Absorption:** Seeking fulfilment in celebrity worship motivates one to: - Focus all their attention on them - Become pre-occupied with their existence - Identify with them **2. Addiction:** - The individual sustains their commitment to the relationship by feeling a stronger and close involvement with the celebrity. - This leads to more extreme behaviours and delusional thinking - e.g. stalking a celebrity because there is a belief they share mutual feelings

Question 32

Evaluate absorption-addiction model for parasocial relationships.

Answer 32

**ADV 1: Link with loneliness** - Greenwood & Long (2009) research to support the link between loneliness and parasocial relationships - People sometimes develop them to deal with a recent loss or loneliness **ADV 2: Stalking** - Stalkers often have a history of failed sexual relationships at time of stalking - In such cases, stalking is a result of social incompetence, isolation and loneliness **ADV 3: Maltby et al. (2005)** - Measured relationship between parasocial relationships and body image in teenagers - Teenage girls in parasocial relationships have a poor body image - Especially if they admired their physical appearance **DIS 1: Correlational research** - Cause and effect cannot be established - lowers scientific explanatory power - e.g. strong correlation between PR and body image doesn't mean PR causes poor body image - The girls who already have a poor body image may tend to forming intensive PRs to enhance self-esteem

Question 33

Outline attachment theory for parasocial relationships.

Answer 33

- Bowlby's theories of monotropic bond and maternal deprivation can explain parasocial relationships - His theories suggest that if someone fails to form a strong bond with their primary caregiver in early childhood, they are likely to seek out attachment substitutes in adulthood in the form of parasocial relationships - Ainsworth states that you are more likely to engage in parasocial relationships if you had a insecure-resistant attachment style as an infant - Because they are afraid of criticisms and rejections present in real relationships - Hazan and Shaver found that those with early attachment style of insecure-resistant are more likely to become jealous and clingy as adults - Makes it difficult for them to stay in lasting, committed relationships - Intensive relationships allows them to engage in a fantasy about their perfect relationship without risks

Question 34

Evaluate attachment theory for parasocial relationships.

Answer 34

**ADV 1: Cole & Leets (1999)** - People with insecure-resistant early attachment styles were more likely to engage in parasocial relationships with their favourite TV personality - Those with insecure-avoidant were least likely - Shows link between early attachment style and parasocial relationships **ADV 2: Stalkers research evidence** - 63% of stalkers reported loss of primary caregiver in childhood typically due to parent separation - 50% reported emotional, physical or sexual abuse from their primary caregiver - Disturbed attachment in childhood can lead to extreme parasocial relationships **DIS 1: Relies on memory** - Most research into parasocial relationships and early attachment style is reliant on the pps's memories - They can be flawed and unreliable as our memories of early lives aren't always accurate - Lowers validity of studies **DIS 2: Not always negative** - Parasocial relationships can be positive and not just about fulfilling attachment needs - They allow safe exploration of emotions