Psychologists

• Darwin


  1871

  Sexual selection, an evolutionary explanation of partner preferrence. Attributes or behaviours that increase reproductive success are passed on and may become exaggerated over succeeding generations of offspring
• Robert Trivers


  1972

  Female makes greater investment of time, commitment and other resources before, during and after the birth of her offspring

  More to lose so especially selective

  Female's optimum partner is genetically fit able to provide resources
• Ronald Fisher


  1930

  Sexy sons hypothesis

  The genes we see today are those that enhanced reproductive success

  Female mates with a male who has a certain characteristic then their sons will inherit this sexy trait

  Sons more likely to be selected by successive generations of females who will mate with their offspring

  Sexy trait perpetuated
• Russell Clark and Elaine Haltfield

  1989

  Male and female psychology students sent across a university campus

  Approached other students individually with 'I have been noticing you around campus. I find you to be very attractive. Would you go to bed with me tonight?'

  No females accepted

  75% of males accepted immediately
• David Buss


  1989

  Survey of over 10,000 adults in 33 countries

  Questions relating to variety of attributes that evolutionary theory predicts are important in partner preference

  Females place greater value on resource-related characteristics than males

  Males valued physical attractiveness and youth
• Tamas Bereczkei et al.

  1997

  Social change has consequences for women's mate preferences which may no longer be resource orientated
• Jamie Lawson et al.

  2014

  Personal ads placed by heterosexual and homosexual men and women describing what they are looking for in a partner and what they are offering

  Preferences of homosexual men and women differ just as they do in heterosexual men and women

  Men emphasised physical attractiveness

  Women emphasised resources
• Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor

  1973

  Social penetration theory, the gradual process of revealing your inner self to someone else
• Harry Reis and Philip Shaver

  1988

  For a relationship to develop as well as increase in breadth and depth there needs to be a reciprocal element to disclosure
• Susan Sprecher and Susan Hendrick

  2004

  Heterosexual dating couples and found strong correlations between several measures of satisfaction and self-disclosure for both partners

  Men and women who used self-disclosure and believed their partners did likewise were more satisfied with and commited to their romantic relationship
• Sprecher


  2013

  Relationships are closer and more satisfying when partners take turns to self-disclose
• Stephen Haas and Laura Stafford

  1998

  57% homosexual men and women said that open and honest self-disclosure was the main way they maintained and deepened their relationships
• Nu Tang et al.

  2013

  Reviewed research into sexual self-disclosure

  Men and women in the US self-disclose significantly more sexual thoughts and feelings than men and women in China

  Lower levels of disclosure in China

  Levels of satisfaction were no different from those in US
• Todd Shackelford and Rodd Larsen

  1997

  People with symmetrical faces are rated more attractive

  Sign of genetic fitness
• Karen Dion and colleagues

  1972

  'What is beautfiul is good'

  Physically attractive people are consistently rated as kind, strong, sociable and successful compared to unattractuce people
• Elaine Walster et al.

  1966

  The Computer Dance
• Carl Palmer and Rolfe Peterson

  2012

  Physically attractive people rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people

  Halo effect persisted even when participants knew they had no particular expertise
• Michael Cunningham et al.

  1995

  Female features of large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small nose and high eyebrows were rated as highly attractive by white, Hispanic and Asian males

  What is considered physically attractive is remarkably consistent across different societies

  Attractive features are a sign of genetic fitness and therefore perpetuated similarly in all cultures
• Lindsay Taylor et al.

  2011

  Activity logs of a popular online dating site

  Actual date choices and not merely preferences

  Online daters sought meetings with potential partners who were more physically attractive than them
• Alan Feingold 


  1988

  Meta-analysis of 17 studies

  Found significant correlation in ratings of physical attractiveness between romantic partners
• John Touhey


  1979

  Measured sexist attitudes of men and women using MACHO scale and found that low scorers were relatively unaffected by physical attractiveness when judging the likeability of potential partners
• Alan Kerckhoff and Keith Davis

  1962

  Compared the attitudes and personalities of student couples in short-term (less than 18 months) relationships

  Filter theory, series of different factors progressively reduces the range of available romantic partners to a much smaller pool of possibilities
• George Levinger 


  1974

  Many studies failed to replicate the original findings of Kerckhoff and Davis

  Social changes over time and problems defining the depth of a relationship in terms of its length

  Assumed partners who had been together longer than 18 months more committed and had deeper relationship
• Patrick Markey and Charlotte Markey

  2013

  Lesbian couples of equal dominance were the most satisfied

  Sample of couples romantically involved for a mean time of more than 4 and 1/2 years
• Matthew Montoya et al.

  2008

  Meta-analysis of 313 studies

  Actual similarity affected attraction only in very short-term lab-based interactions

  Real-world relationships perceived similarity was a stronger predictor of attraction

  Partners may perceive greater similarities as they become more attracted to each other
• John Thibault and Harold Kelley

  1959

  Social exchange theory, romantic partners act out of self-interest in exchanging rewards and costs

  A satisfying and committed relationship is maintained when rewards exceed costs and potential alternatives are less attractive than the current relationship
• Peter Blau 


  1964

  Relationships can be expensive
• Steve Duck


  1994

  CLalt we adopt will depend on the state of our current relationship

  If costs outweigh the rewards then alternatives become more attractive
• Lawrence Kurdek 


  1995

  Asked gay, lesbian and heterosexual couples to complete questionnaires measuring relationship commitment and SET variables

  Partners who were most committed also perceived the most rewards and fewest costs and viewed alternatives as relatively unattractive

  First study to demonstrate the main SET concepts that predict commitment are independent of each other so they individually have an effect
• Michael Argyle 


  1987

  We don't monitor costs and rewards, or consider alternatives, until after we are dissatisfied

  When we are satisfied with a relationship and committed to it, we do not even notice potentially attractive alternatives
• Margaret Clark and Judson Mills

  2011

  Cannot apply SET view relationships are economic to romantic relationships

  Romantic relationships communal based

  Romantic partners do not keep score because if they did it would destroy trust that undermines close emotional relationship
• Elaine Walster et al.

  1978

  Equity

  Both partners' level of profit is roughly the same

  Lack of equity, one partner overbenefits and one underbenefits
• Mary Utne et al.

  1984

  Survey of 118 recently married couples

  Measured equity with two self-report scales

  Participants aged between 16 and 45

  Been together more than 2 years before marrying

  Couples who considered their relationship equitable were more satisfied than those who saw themselves under or over benefiting
• Daniel Berg and Kristen McQuinn

  1986

  Equity did not increase over time as predicted by the theory

  Researchers didn't find that relationships which ended and those that continued differed in terms of equity

  Other variables significantly more important
• Katherine Aumer-Ryan et al.

  2007

  Cultural differences in the link between equity and satisfaction

  Individualist culture (US) considered their relationships to be most satisfying when relationships were equitable

  Partners in collectivist culture (Jamaica) were most satisfied when they were overbenefitting

  True for both men and women
• Richard Huseman et al.

  1987

  Some people less concerned about equity than the norm

  Partners benevolent, prepared to contribute more to the relationship than they get out of it

  Partner entitleds, believe they deserve to overbenefit and accept it without feeling distressed or guilty

  Individuals have less concern about equity than the theory predicts
• Nancy Grote and Margaret Clark

  2001

  As soon as partners start monitoring each other's contributions this is a sign of dissatisfaction

  Once dissatisfaction sets in partners notice inequities and become even more dissatisfied

  Cycle of mysery
• Rusbult et al.


  2011

  Investment Model

  Commitment depends on three factors: satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment

  Relationship maintenance mechanisms: accommodation, willingness to sacrifice, forgiveness, positive illusions, ridiculing alternatives
• Benjamin Le and Christopher Agnew

  2003

  52 studies from the late 1970s to 1999

  11,000 participants from 5 countries

  Satisfaction and comparison with alternatives and investment size all predicted relationship commitment

  Relationships in which commitment was greatest were the most stable and lasted longest

  Outcome true for men, women, across all cultures, homosexuals and heterosexuals
• Caryl Rusbult and John Martz

  1995

  Battered women at a shelter

  Most likely to return to an abusive partner reported having made the greatest investment and having the fewest attractive alternatives