A03 Filter Theory: Factors Affecting Attraction

• Support from research evidence


  Filter theory assumes that the key factors in a relationship change over time. This makes sense and agrees with most people's experiences of romantic relationship-the theory has face validity.
• Winch et al (Support from research evidence)


  Found evidence that similarities of personality, interests and attitudes between partrners are typical of the earliest stages of a relationship. This echoes the matching hypthothesis, but not in terms of physical attractiveness. Between partners happily married for several years, complementarity of needs is more important than similarity.
• Failure to replicate


  Levinger pointed out that many studies have failed to replicate the original findings that formed the basis of the filter theory. He blames social change overtime and also the difficulties inherent in defining the depth of a relationship in terms of its length.
• Problems with application (Failure to replicate)


  Kerckhoff and Davis chose an 18-month cut-off point to distinguish between short-term and long-term relationships. They assumed that partners who had been together longer than this were more commited. Highlights the problem in applying filter theory to other heterosexual couples in individualist cultures, not to mention homosexual couuples/other cultures.
• Direction of cause and effect


  Filter theory suggests that people are intially attracted to eachother as they are similar but Anderson found in a longitudinal study that cohabiting partners become more similar in their emotional responses over time which is called emotional convergence.
• Davis and Rusbult (Direction of cause and effect)


  Discovered an attitude alignement effect in longer-term relationships. Romantic partners, over time, bring their attitudes onto line with eachothers suggesting similarity is an effect of initial attraction and not the cause.
• Lack of temporal validity


  Rise of online dating in recent years has changed the process of beginning romantic relationships. This has reduced the importance of social demographic variables. Technology like the internet and mobile apps like Tinder have made meeting potential partners easier than ever, to the extent we may as well pursue a date with someone outside the usual social demographic limits, very different than it would've been 30 years ago. The first filter of social demographics is no longer as influential a factor on initial attractiveness as it was when the theory was formulated.
• Similarity or complementarity


  Some research has challenged the claim of filter theory that complementarity becomes more important than similarity later in the relationship. The fact that Anderson found similarity increases over time suggests that complementarity is not necessarily a common-feature of long-term relationships. Gruber-Baldini et al carried out longitudnal stidy of married couples. They found that the similarity between spouses in terms of intellectual abilities and attitudinal flexibility increases over a 14-year period.
• Consequences of the lack of clarity (Similarity or complementarity)


  This is a significant limitation because not only does it have an impact on the validity of the third filter, but it also has implications for the role of the second filter. If similarity increases as a relationship develops in the longer-term, then this casts doubt on the claim of filter theory that similarity is a cause of attraction - it is more likely to be a result of it.Combined with the research into online dating that questions the validity of the first filter, the whole theory is challenged by the findings of these studies.