Filter Theory

• Filter Theory:

  • kerckhoff & Davis (1962)
  • The concept that different filters are an important part of partner selection.
  • The theory says that we use filters to narrow down the 'field of availables', ie all potentials partners, to the 'field of desirables', ie people we could realistically form a relationship with.
  • Filters occur chronologically & indicate a phase of relationship information. The further through the filters an individual passes, the more attracted to them we are, and more committed we are to the relationship.
• Filter 1- Social Demography:

  • Refers to the features that define our social group (age, race, geographical location, ethnicity, social background, education etc).
  • These social groupings are already fairly restricted; we are more likely to come into contact with people from our own ethnic, social & educational groups, and those who live geographically close to us.
  • People we feel similar to, we are more at ease with, consequently finding them more attractive purely because we have more in common with them.
  • Attraction has more to do with social rather than individual characteristics.
• Filter 2- Similarity in Attitudes: 1

  • Refers to whether there is an agreement in our attitudes & basic values (religion, politics, career, raising children, use of spare time etc).
  • Kerckhoff & Davis (1962) found that similarity in attitudes & values was of central importance to start a relationship and was the best predictor of the relationship becoming stable- having similar ideas & beliefs means that communication & collaboration is likely to be easier, thus enabling a relationship to progress.
• Filter 2- Similarity in Attitudes: 2

  • Partners who are very different to the individual in terms of attitudes & values are not considered suitable for a continuing relationship.
  • They are 'filtered out' from the field of possible long-term partners.
• Filter 3- Complementarity of Needs:

  • We all have needs & we like someone who meets our needs.
  • But for both parties to feel that the relationship can progress, their needs must be complementary, eg if one individual needs to be cared for, then the other must need to provide care.
  • People who have complementary needs like each other because they provide each other with mutual satisfaction of those opposed needs, ie they balance each others' needs to produce a harmonious relationship- is important because finding a partner who complements them ensures that their own needs are likely to be met.
• Kerckoff & Davis 1962 study:

  • 94 real dating couples at a US university & longitudinal study over 7 months.
  • 2 questionnaires initially- shared attitudes & values, need complementarity.
  • 1 questionnaire at the end- closeness to partner.
  • Findings: in shorter term relationships (less than 18 months), shared attitudes & values were a more important predictor of closeness. Longer term relationships (more than 18 months), complementarity of needs is more indicative of closeness.
  • Filters exist in real relationships & follow chronological order.
• Evaluation of filter theory- strength:

  • There's research support- key study (1962) from Kerckoff & Davis.
  • Indicates the existence of the transition between Filter 2 & 3 in the development of real relationships.
  • Plus, was a longitudinal study- beneficial.
• Evaluation of filter theory- strength:

  • Indication that there's real life value in the filtering process- Duck (1973) suggests that the filtering process allows people to make predictions about their future interactions & so avoid investing in a relationship that 'won't work'.
  • Filtering, therefore, stops people making the wrong choice and then having to live with the consequences in real life.
  • It would make sense that this process was implemented in real relationships- got good face validity.
• Evaluation of filter theory- weakness:

  • There's contradictory research evidence- Levinges et al (1970) failed to replicate Kerckoff & Davis study with 330 PPs, using the same procedure.
  • There was no evidence that either similarity of attitudes & values or complementary of needs influenced progress towards permanence in relationships.
  • This questions the validity of the study & also questions the filter theory as a reliable theory of how relationships are formed.
• Evaluation of filter theory- weakness:

  • Culture bias- most research support for Filter Theory uses PPs from individualist, Western cultures. Individualist cultures value free choice in relationships, (partner choice on individual preference), theory assumes rules of partner choice in Western cultures apply to relationships universally.
  • In W cultures, people can apply criteria by Filter Theory freely, without much influence from others. Is not the case in collectivist cultures, where common for arranged relationships, so partners not free to apply individual filters to select future spouse.