Ducks Phase model of relationship breakdown

• Two categories of cause in relationship breakdown 

  Predisposing factors - internal factors such as emotional instability, irritating habits etc

  Precipitating factors- external such as reduced proximity, other people, money
• intrapsychic phase

  threshold: 'i cant stand this anymore'

  this indicates a detmination that something has to change

  the focus of this phase is on cognitive processes occuring within the individual. the dissatisfied partner broods on the reasons for this and this is centered on their partners shortcomings. the partner mulls their thoughts over privately and may share them with a trusted friend. they weigh upp the pros and cons of the relationship and evaluate these against the alternatives to begin making plans for the future
• dyadic phase

  threshold: 'i would be justified in withdrawing'

  the focus here is on interpersonal processes between the two partners. they can no longer avoid talking about their relationship. there is a series of confrontations over a period of time, in which the relationship is discussed and dissatisfcations are aired. these are characterised by anxiety, hostility, usually complaints about lack of equity. resentment over imbalanced roles and a rethinking of the commitment. there are two outcomes - a determinination to continue breaking up, or a renewed desire to repair it
• social phase

  threshold: 'i mean it'

  the focus is now on wider processes involving the couple's social networks. the break up is made public. partners will seek support. mutual friends find they are expected to choose a side. 'gossip' is traded and encouraged. some friends will provide reinforcement and reassurance and others will be judgemental and place the blame on one partner. some may hasten the end of the relationship by providing secret information. others may try to repair the relationship. this is usually the point of no return
• grave dressing phase


  threshold: 'its now inevitable'

  this focuses on the aftermath. once the breakup has occured, a favourable story is written about the breakdown for public consumption. this allows the partners to save face and maintain a positive reputation, usually at the expense of the other partner by showing them in a bad light. gossip plays an important role. each partner tries to maintain some social credit. grave dressing also involves creating a personal story where memories are viewed differently.
• according to Rollie & Duck, the original model is oversimplified. they modified it to aadd a fifth phase after grave dressing, the resurrection phase. ex partners turn their attention to future relationships using the experiences gained from their recently ended one. Rollie & Duck also make it clear that progression from one phase to the next is not inevitable. it is possible to return to an earlier point in the process in any phase. the new model also emphasises the processes that occur in relationship breakdown rather than linear movement from one phase to the next. dynamic nature of breakup
• most of the research relating to Ducks model is retrospective. this means that what they can recall might not always be accurate or reliable. its the very early stages of breakdown that understandably tend to be distorted or perhaps even ignored altogether
• its useful to help identify and understand the stages of relationship breakdown and suggest various ways of reversing it. Duck recommends that people in the intra psychic phase could be encouraged to focus their brooding on the positive aspects of their partner
• it doesn't explain why breakdown occurs
• Flemlee


  fatal attraction hypothesis argues that the causes of relationship breakdown can be found in the attractive qualities that brought the romantic partners together. effectively the relationship is threatened by the partners getting too much of what they were looking for. positive features becoming negative
• Moghaddam et al


  relationships in individualistic cultures are generally voluntary and frequently come to an end. relationships in collectivist cultures are more likely to be obligatory, less easy to end, involve the wider family, and in some cases even arranged with little involvement of the partners. in fact the whole conception of a romantic relationship differs between cultures. it is therefore very unlikely that the process of relationship breakdown is identical across different cultures