AO3

• Who conducted research that supports filter theory?

  Kerchkoff and Davis conducted a longitudinal study. Partners in dating couples completed a questionnaire to assess their

  • similarity of attitudes/values
  • Complementarity of needs

  ’Closeness’ was measured 7 months later
• Findings of Kerckhoff and Davis longitudinal study

  Closeness associated with similarity of values for couples who had been together less than 18 months. For couples in longer relationships it was found that complementarity of needs predicted closeness
• Kerckhoff and Davis’s longitudinal study provided evidence that similarity is important in the early stages and that complementarity more important later on.
• What is a counterpoint to the conclusion from the longitudinal study?

  Similarity of attitudes is an effect of attraction rather than a cause. Attractiveness -> similarity of attitudes (attitude alignment) e.g vegetarians. Therefore, direction of causality could be reversed
• Many studies have failed to replicate the original findings of Kerchkhoff and Davis (Levinger)
• Why might the theory lack temporal validity?

  Social changes has meant that social demography has become less important

  • Proximity: online dating and apps, technology
  • Ethnicity: Partners between different ethnic backgrounds becoming more common
• Filter theory: 18 month cut off point to distinguish between short-term and long-term relationships is a questionable assumption. Difficulty defining short-term and long-term: each study may have defined differently
• Problems with complementarity associated with long term relationships

  Markey and Markey found that lesbian couples of equal dominance were the most satisfied. These couples had been together for a mean time of more than 4.5 years. Similarity rather than complementarity may be associated with long-term satisfaction, at least in some couples (contradicts filter theory)