AO3

• A strength is that the theory has real-life application. The model suggests that some repair strategies might be more effective at one stage of relationship breakdown rather than another. For example, in the intrapsychic stage, partners could worry more positively about each other. In the dyadic phase, they can improve their communication skills. This suggests that the model can provide supportive insights to help people through difficult times in their lives.
• A limitation is that the theory may be culture biased. The model is based on breakdown in individualist cultures where relationships are mostly voluntary and often end. Relationships in collectivist cultures are often obligatory and less easy to end. The whole concept of romantic relationship differs between cultures, therefore the model's application to reverse breakdown can only be applied in some cultures
• A limitation is that the model may be incomplete. Rollie and Duck added a resurrection phase in which ex-partners apply to future relationships what they have learnt from the recent past. Partners may return to earlier phases at any point and processes are more important than linear movement through phases. This means the original model does not take account of the complexity of breakdown and its dynamic nature.
• A limitation is that the theory may be a description rather than an explanation. Duck's model describes about the what in the various phases with no consideration of causal factors. In contrast, another explanation by Felmley’s ‘fatal attraction hypothesis’ explains why qualities that are attractive eventually produce dissatisfaction. Therefore, Duck's model might be improved by adding some of Felmley's approach.