Relationships

• Halo effect: preconceived idea about the personality traits Attractive people must have snd they are almost universally positive.

  characteristics include:

  • kind
  • strong
  • sociable
  • successful

  The belief that good- looking people probably have these characteristics make them even more attractive to us, so we behave positively toward them.
• The matching hypothesis: We can’t all form relationships with the most attractive people

  • we have to make an realistic view judgement about our own ‘value’ to a potential partner

  People won’t attempt to peruse relationships with the most attractive person to avoid rejection
• research into physical attraction AO3:

  Palmer and Peterson: Found that physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people.

  The halo effect was so powerful that is persisted even when participants knew that these ‘knowledgeable’ people had no particular expertise. The existence of the Halo Effect has found it apply in many other areas of everyday life. This supports the halo effect
• Self disclosure:

  1. Gradual process of revealing your inner self by sharing our likes and dislikes, our hopes and fears, our interests and attitudes
  2. Reciprocal exchange of information: we share what really matters to us and our partners does the same
  3. Display trust: This helps display trust in each other
  4. By disclosing information gradually this can also lead to a greater understanding of each other and a deeper connection- in turn leading to attraction
• Self disclosure AO3:

  Real- life application: Hass and Stafford found that open and honest self disclosure is the main way to secure a committed relationship.

  This supports the idea that depth in self disclosure leads to satisfaction with a relationship

  This research support further validates self disclosure theory and thus its wider practical application to couples
• Filter theory:

  Kerchhoff and Davis say there are three main factors that act as filters to narrow down our range of partners choice to a ‘field of desirables’

  1. Social Demography: Meet people who are physically close and generally have a preferences with those of similar social class, level of education.
  2. Similarity in attitude: share beliefs and values. Self disclosure operates here
  3. Complementarity of needs: The ability of romantic partners to meet each others needs.
• Filter theory AO3:

  Lacks temporal validity: It fails to account for the rise of online dating in recent years. This has reduced the needs for social demographic filter as we may be more likely to meet someone outside for this filter of needs.

  Lack of research evidence: Levinger examined 330 couples who were classed as ‘Steadily attached’ and found no evidence for similarity of attitudes or complementarity of needs influenced progress towards a long term relationship
• Social exchange theory


  Behaviour in relationships reflects the economic assumptions of exchange. We try to minimise losses and maximise gains. We judge our satisfaction with a relationship in terms of the profit it yields, defined as the rewards minus the costs.
• Comparison level (CL)


  The amount of reward that you believe you deserve to get. It develops out of our experiences of previous relationships which feed into our expectations of the current one. It is also influenced by social norms that determine what is widely considered, within a culture, to be a reasonable level of reward.
• Stages of relationship development in social exchange theory

  1. Sampling stage

  2. Bargaining stage

  3. Commitment stage

  4. Institutionalisation stage
• Sampling stage


  We explore the rewards and costs of social exchange by experimenting with them in our own relationships (not just romantic ones), or by observing others doing so
• Bargaining stage


  This marks the beginning of a relationship, when romantic partners start exchanging various rewards and costs, negotiating and identifying what is most profitable
• Commitment stage


  As time goes on, the sources of costs and rewards become more predictable and the relationship becomes more stable as rewards increase and costs lessen
• Institutionalisation stage


  The partners are now settled down because the nomes of the relationship, in terms of rewards and costs, are firmly established
• Equity theory:

  Suggest that both partners level of profit in a relationship should roughly be the same. However, inequality happens when one person puts in more effort but gets little profit and the person who puts in less effort gets more profit.
• Rusbult‘s investment model:

  Commitment is the key to a successful relationship.

  There are many factors with contribute to commitment, and this includes high investment, high satisfaction (measured by profit levels) and less attractive alternatives.

  In terms of investment they can come in many forms, including Intrinsic and extrinsic.

  Commitment can lead to people staying in relationships where they are not happy. This is because they have made investments which they don’t want to see go to waste
• Equity theory AO3:

  Gender bias- Demarris points out that women tend to perceive themselves are more under-benefitted and less over benefited in relationships compared to men.

  Women are also more disturbed by being under-benefitted than men. Sprecher has also found that women feel more guilt than men in response to being over-benefitted. This theory might be ignoring a gender difference that exist between males and females
• Investment model AO3:

  Cultural bias- Research has supported the importance of and relevance of investment in a variety of relationships across different cultures (US, Netherlands, Taiwan) and different types of relationships. Suggest investment is important in a wide variety of relationships across different cultures
• Social exchange theory AO3:

  Real life application- Integrated Behavioural Couples Therapy has been shown to be successful in restoring problems in couples. The therapy focuses on increasing the number of positive changes between a couple thus making couples happier. Shows that maximising profit can benefit couples to be happier in their relationship
• Duck’s phase model:

  Duck proposed a phase model of relationship breakdown. He argued that the ending of a relationship is not a one-off event but a process that takes time and goes through four distinct phases.

  1. Breakdown: ‘There is a problem’
  2. Intra-psychic phase: ‘I can’t stand this anymore’ focuses on the cognitive processes
  3. Dyadic phase: ‘we need to talk’ Focuses on the interpersonal processes between two partners
  4. social processes: ‘I need to speak to someone’ involving social networks
  5. Grave-dressing: ‘I knew it wasn’t right’ focuses on the aftermath
• Duck’s model AO3:

  Practical application- Duck recommends that people in the intra-psychic phase could be encouraged to focus on the positive aspects of their partner. Such insight can be used in counselling to prevent breakdowns- further validating Ducks models of breakdowns
• Ducks model AO3:

  Ethical concerns- Carrying out research into breakdown could be considered too sensitive for some participants. This suggest the issue of ethics as researching breakdown of relationships could be considered as socially sensitive, particularly as some participants may find such issues too personal
• Reduced cue theory: self disclosure is lower

  Computer mediated communication relationships are less effective then face to face ones because they lack many of the cues we normally depend on in face to face interaction. E.g Physical appearance, facial expressions

  This leads to de-individuation because it reduces peoples sense of individual identity.
• The hyper personal model:

  online relationships can be more personal and involve greater self-disclosure than Ft ones. This is because CMC relationships can develop very quickly as self-disclosure happens earlier, and once established they are more intense and intimate.

  According to the hyperpersonal model, a key feature of self-disclosure in virtual relationships is that the sender of a message has more time to manipulate their online image than they would in an FtF situation.
• Absence of gating: is any obstacle to the formation of a relationship. Ft interaction is said to be gated, in that it involves many features that can interfere with the early development of a relationship. Examples of such gates include physical unattractiveness.

  Pro’s for a relationship:

  • self-disclosure become more frequent and deeper
  • An introvert can become an extrovert

  Con’s for a relationship:

  • people can create online identities they could never manage face to face
• Attachment theory explanation:

  To form parasocial relationships in adolescence and adulthood because of attachment difficulties in early childhood.

  Insecure resistance lead to parasocial relationship because they seek greater proximity
• Absorption addiction model:

  Absorption- Seeking fulfilment in celebrity worship motivates the individual to focus their attention as far as possible on the celebrity, to become pre-occupied in their existence and identify with them.

  Examples:

  • stalking social media
  • copying styles
  • buying products they buy
• Levels of parasocial relationships:

  • Entertainment- social: This is the least intense level of celebrity worship. Celebrities are viewed as sources of entertainment and fuel for social interaction.
  • Intense-personal: This is an intermediate level which reflects a greater personal involvement in a parasocial relationship with a celebrity.
  • Borderline pathological: This is the strongest level of celebrity worship, featuring uncontrollable fantasies and extreme behaviours.
• Parasocial relationships AO3:

  link between parasocial and eating disorder: Matlby- young female who had intense personal parasocial relationship with a female celeb tended to also have a poor body image. This suggest that they are seeking fulfilment in a celebrity because what they lack