Duck's phase model

• Duck ( 1992 ) used longitudinal studies to establish dispositional and situational factors threatening a relationship
• Duck ( 1992 ) proposed that the break down of a relationship is not a one off event but a gradual process of distinct phases
• Duck ( 1992 ) phases:

  Breakdown

  Intrapsychic processes

  Dyadic processes

  Social processes

  Grave - dressing
• Duck ( 1992 ) phase one - Intrapsychic phase

  One of the partners becomes more and more dissatisfied with the relationship. They do not yet tell their partner but they disassociate
• Duck ( 1992 ) phase two - dyadic phase

  The other person becomes involved and they discuss the issues that have become apparent in their relationship.

  If the dissatisfaction is not resolved in this phase, the relationship moves on to the next phase
• Duck ( 1992 ) phase 3 - social phase

  Other people are made aware, and the breakup goes public. This is also where social implications such as mutual friends and children are negotiated.
• Duck ( 1992 ) phase 4 - grave dressing

  The ex-partners begin organising their post relationship lives

  They begin publicising their own accounts of they break up and their new relationship with the ex partner
• Duck ( 1992 ) AO3. Duck later revised the model in 2006.

  He acknowledges in his first model he didn’t include relational growth after the breakdown. In his later model he introduced the final stage. This is the opportunity for personal growth this is resurrection process.

  Research support for this comes from Tashiro and Frasier in 2003 who found that undergrads that recently broke up with a partner reported emotional distress and personal growth.
• Duck ( 1992 ) AO3. There is research support for Duck’s phase model.

  Tashiro and Fraiser (2003) showed that people viewing the situation to be blame for the break up rather than an own fault helped them view the break up in a more positive light and move on, as Duck's model predicts.

  This strengthens the model's claims and highlights the application of the theory to every day relationships.
• Duck ( 1992 ) AO3. Duck's phase model has real world application. Couples therapy uses different strategies depending on the phase that the couple are in. For a person in the intrapsychic phase it may be more useful to shift their attention to the positive aspects of their partner's personality, where as for a couple in the dyadic phase, communication about dissatisfaction is crucial.

  This shows that the model has successfully helped couples contemplating breakup to improve their relationships.
• Duck ( 1992 ) AO3. Individual differences are not accounted for in the social phase of Duck's phase model. Dickson found that while friends and relatives usually take teenagers' break ups less seriously and wouldn't put much effort into reconciling them, the break ups of older couples is seen as more distressing for those closer to the couple and more effort is put into bringing them together.

  This means that Duck's phase model won't apply to all couples and it is not entirely accurate.