Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

relationships - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Connections with the personality gets stronger and thoughts of links get stronger
        
        Feelings of ‘soul mates’ progress to obsessions and fantasies which are separate from reality
  - - - Maltby - used EPS to find those on entertainment-social levels were highly extrovert but those on intense-personal were high in neuroticism
  - - - :red_cross: The research is correlational ad so shows a cause and effect but does not show causation
- - - - Male partners ~ Muscularity, Symmetry
      - Female partners ~ Youth, Slimness and fertility
      - The halo effect suggests that we have a tendency to associate highly attractive people with preconceived disproportionately positive characteristics, including personality and wealth, even though these factors may not be linked. Therefore, we are more likely to view attractive people as trustworthy, honest, successful and more sociable compared to their unattractive counterparts
      - The key to a successful relationship, according to the Matching Hypothesis, is striking a balance
        between the attractiveness of a mate and the realistic chances of attaining such a mate. This relies on an accurate assessment of one’s own attractiveness and ‘value’, meaning that we are more likely to have a mate who is of a similar attractiveness level to us
      - The idea of physical attractiveness being important to a relationship is not restricted to the ‘early’ stages. For example, McNully et al (2008) found that physical attractiveness was still an important determinant of a successful relationship, even after marriage.
    - - Physical attraction is not affected extensively by cultural relativism, with both individualist and collectivist cultures finding similar features attractive, as suggested by Cunningham et al (1995). These features include large eyes, high eyebrows and sharp cheekbones, and this is applicable across both Asian and Western male respondents Relatively consistent
        
        There are important real-life, practical applications associated with an increased understanding of the halo effect and its influence on individual perceptions of others. For example, Palmer and Peterson (2012) found that even when participants were informed that the images of physically attractive people represented those of people with little knowledge of political matters, respondents still judged these images as representative of people who were highly politically-skilled, mature and trustworthy. This has important implications on the state of politics, where the success of some politicians or political parties may be more easily or accurately explained as a result of the halo effect, rather than actual political expertise. Therefore, this knowledge could be used to the advantage of some parties when selecting candidates!
  - - - Similarity of attitudes ( particularly important in short-term relationships)
        
        This describes basic similarities in terms of core beliefs about significant topics, such as love, sex and religion. Large dissimilarities in the attitudes expressed between two partners may cause the relationship to end
      - Complementarity ( particularly important in long-term relationships)
        
        A relationship is more likely to be successful if two people feel that they ‘complete’ each other to form a ‘whole’, therefore supporting the common belief that opposites attract
      - Socio demographic variables
        
        the factors which can make potential partners
        attractive to us.
        
        Factors include: religion, sexuality, ethnicity, social class, educational attainment and proximity. Two people sharing similar social demographic features are more likely to find each other attractive
      - Evaluation:
        
        :red_cross: Temporal validity increased use of the Internet and online dating. Such technological advances mean that our ‘field of desirables’ is further increased because we are not restricted by certain social demographics, such as proximity and social class or culture, because we have the ability to communicate with potential partners before meeting them and potentially starting a relationship. This means that filter theory may lack temporal validity because it can only explain dating phenomena which have been restricted to the era before the Internet.
        
        :check: filter theory is consistent with the matching hypothesis
        
        :red_cross: cannot establish causality – maybe similarity of partners increases over time
        
        idea of emotional convergence (where over time, a couple’s emotional responses and attitudes will become more similar, and so can be considered as a type of adaptation in response to living together), whilst the ‘attitude alignment effect’ (where over time, a couple’s attitudes will become more similar) was demonstrated by David and Rusbult (2001).
        
        :check:Taylor (2010) – people tend to marry someone
        from their own ethnic group
  - - - Appropriateness > Over sharing can reduce attraction
        
        (For example talking about previous sexual partners on the first date)
      - Attributions (Reasons) > Disclosing info through trust makes women feel more attracted
      - Gender > Males less bothered about things like trust whereas females see disclosure as more of a sign of intimacy
        
        Gradual disclosure overtime strengthens relationships as it makes desire more intimate
      - Content (Social norms) > Content within social more attractive
      - Evaluation:
        
        An increased understanding of the importance of self-disclosure in building and maintaining intimacy within relationships can have a real-life practical advantage,
        
        simply because there is a correlation between satisfaction and self-disclosure does not necessarily mean that the former causes the latter Correlational studies can never establish ‘cause and effect’ relationships between two variables because they may also be affected by the ‘third variable problem’.
      - Altman and Taylor have proposed the ‘social penetration’ theory, which suggests that the process of self-disclosure allows one person to penetrate deeper into the life of their partner, thus increasing intimacy and trust. However, it is important to be selective with what one chooses to disclose.
  - - - Walster - Ideal partners at a dance, those at the same level of attractiveness were happier ~ WEAKNESS: only looks at physical attractiveness
- - - - This relates to the opportunity cost, which suggests that we must choose whether to invest these resources into our current relationship, or in other opportunities.
      - In order to assess the potential profits we gain from a relationship (i.e. rewards — cost), we can use comparison levels and comparison of alternatives.
        
        Comparison levels (CL) refer to our perception of what we are worth and so what we can get out of a relationship.
        
        This perception becomes more sophisticated, and potentially more accurate, with experience because we can base our CL off of a larger number of relationships and experiences. Our CL is also influenced by social and cultural factors, such as what novels and TV programs depict as a good or bad relationship.
        
        CL determine the level of relationship we are looking for. This explains why in time of feeling 'worthless' we settle for relationships yielding 'little profit'
        
        The second method of assessing profit - comparison of alternatives. Individuals may consider ending a relationship if they can see that there are other alternatives which would give them a larger return on the investment they are making towards their current relationship. However,
        this is a sign of an unstable relationship, and a couple who are satisfied will not be looking for alternatives.
        
        4 stages of assessing quality and profit
        
        sampling (rewards and costs are determined through trial and error)
        
        bargaining (as a couple become more committed, compromises are made in terms of cost and rewards)
        
        commitment (such standards of cost and rewards are known to both parties)
        
        institutionalisation (these standards and expectations are well-established).
      - Evaluation
        
        SET may be more useful as a retrospective explanation as to why relationships break down, rather than an explanation of their initial development. This is because many of the concepts in SET cannot be objectively and quantitatively measured, such as comparison levels and the comparison levels of alternatives. It is for this reason that it is difficult to establish ‘thresholds’ for each of these concepts, such as how large the discrepancy has to be before breakup.
        
        The overemphasis of SET on the role of comparison levels ignores the importance of equity - even if the benefits of a relationship exceed the costs for an individual, if this excess is not equal to that of their partner’s, then this inequity is likely to be a major cause of dissatisfaction in the relationship, even if the two partners have similar perceptions of their comparison levels. This idea has been supported
  - - - Rewards may include feelings of intimacy, love, sex, support and encouragement, whereas costs
        may include infidelity and even abuse.
      - equity is largely a subjective perception. However, differences in these perceptions can lead to one person being overbenefitted, whilst the second is underbenefitted. This disparity causes the overbenefitted individual to feel guilty and not worthy of the other, whereas the underbenefitted individual feels envious and disappointed that their input into the relationship is not reciprocal.
        
        Evaluation:
        
        Evidence contradicting the idea that the idea of equity is universal across all relationships and crucial to upholding the quality of all relationships, as suggested by Huseman et al (1987). This influence varies depending on the individual and whether they are happy to disproportionately give to the relationship (‘benevolents’) or disproportionately thrive off of the relationship (‘entitleds’). In both cases, individuals do so without worry and are aware of their actions, as well as their partner’s attitudes. This means that equity is essentially a perception and is not universal across all people.
        
        Utne et al. study on Satisfied couples (out of a sample of 118, and who’d been dating for 2 or more years before marriage) valued equity as a key component of the success of their relationship, and preferred this balance compared to one or both members being benevolents or entitleds. Therefore, this suggests that equity has greater ecological validity than SET because it can explain the quality and satisfaction associated with real-life couples, as opposed to simply being theoretical.
  - - - Stages
        
        Intrapsychic stage
        ~ which focuses upon cognitive elements. One or both partners have reached the point /threshold that they are evaluating the costs and rewards of their relationship, and reconsidering the profitability as compared to the investments. However, most of these processes are private, and are unlikely to be shared, unless potentially with a trusted friend.
        
        dyadic phase
        ~ The previously private thoughts about the future of the relationship are now openly discussed between the partners, who may voice concerns over inequity, jealousy, increasing costs of the relationship etc. This may either provoke the partners to work to salvage the relationship, or may trigger the beginning of a public breakdown.
        
        social phase
        ~ where the break-up has been made public. This triggers friends of the couple to evaluate the relationship to either give reassurance/support or place blame on one of the partners, which inevitably results in the majority of the mutual friends having to take sides. A final attempt at salvaging the relationship may be made by these friends, perhaps by offering their advice or helping resolve equity issues etc.
        
        grave-dressing stage
        ~ confirms the end of the relationship and signifies both members to ‘move on’. Key to this face is ‘keeping good face’ and maintaining a positive social image. This may involve fabricating false stories about the cause of the end of the relationship to make it more socially-acceptable (e.g. the infidelity of one partner may be blamed on the unattractiveness of the other). Both partners make new plans to carry on with their lives, taking with them valuable lessons learnt from the previous relationship.
      - Evaluation
        
        There may be a fifth stage of the model, as suggested by Rollie and Duck (2006), called the
        resurrection phase where individuals learn from the experiences of their previous relationships. However, these researchers also suggest that a relationship breakdown model should be a dynamic progression as opposed to a set sequence of stages through which all people pass through.
        
        Could be influenced by previous partners etc and so could be viewed as oversimplified.
        
        Flemlee’s ‘fatal attraction hypothesis’ (1995) may be a better and more valid explanation of
        relationship breakdown compared to the Phase Model. This is because the fatal attraction hypothesis, which suggests that the initially desirable characteristics become less so as the relationship progresses, actually explains the cause of relationship breakdown as opposed to simply the progression of the breakdown
        
        methodological issues associated with the research upon which Duck’s Phase Model was based upon. For example, much of the research features self-report measures which are completed retrospectively after the end of the relationship. This means that the data may rely too much on the respondents’ accuracy of memory and a realistic perception of the relationship In addition, since researchers are unwilling to intervene at the early stages of relationship breakdown,
        this means that these early stages are mostly speculative and their workings inferred from the later stages ~ Reduces validity
- - - - The theories of self-disclosure and absence of gating in virtual relationships may lack ecological
        validity because they may not be able to explain all the course of modern-age relationships, which is often a mixture of virtual and face-to-face elements, as suggested by Walther (2011). Individuals often
        feel the pressure to portray themselves in the same way as they have online as in real-life, and so this interaction may offset the effects of fewer gates and self-disclosure in virtual relationships.
        
        Non verbal cues may actually feature in online relationships through the use of emojis and such
- - - - Inter-sexual selection describes the strategies that each sex uses to attract the other. This is the
        ‘quality over quantity’ approach and is favoured by females because they invest more energy into the development of ova.
        
        Therefore, a female will be more ‘choosy’ as to who she mates with, due to her limited reproductive resources.
        
        Enables the high quality of her offspring.
        
        An example of inter-sexual selection would be Fisher’s ‘sexy sons hypothesis’. This suggests that,
        through a female choosing to mate with an attractive male, her offspring will also grow up to be attractive or ‘sexy’, and so are themselves likely to attract females to mate with. This ensures that the female’s genes are passed on through several generations, thus increasing the likelihood that these genes will remain in the gene pool.
    - - Intra-sexual selection describes the strategies used within sexes to attract males. This is the ‘quantity over quality’ approach and is favoured by males because they produce sperm continuously throughout their lifetime, with little energy investment and limited post-coital responsibility. Therefore, from an evolutionary perspective, it is most effective to impregnate as many women as possible, in order to ensure the survival of their genes.
        
        Examples of intra-sexual selection strategies would be males behaving aggressively and being protective of their female (reducing the likelihood that she will be impregnated by another competing male), being larger (and so more sexually desirable to women), as well as possessing certain facial and physical characteristics (e.g. strong jawlines and broad shoulders).
  - - - research has suggested that there are some sexual selection pressures which have been
        constant in terms of evolution and in terms of modern times, such as the hip to waist ratio, as suggested by Singh (1993). If this ratio is around 0.7, then this demonstrates to potential mates that the female is fertile and able to carry children over a long period of time, with birth being easier when the female has larger hips and a narrower waist. Therefore, this suggests that some evolutionary pressures are still relevant in modern times.
        
        There is also evidence supporting the idea that females are more selective when it comes to
        potential mates, due to their greater energy and genetic input into the pregnancy and care for the child, as suggested by Clark and Hatfield (1989). These researchers found that 75% of college
        males, compared to 0% of females, would be willing to sleep with a stranger if this stranger had approached them and complimented them! This supports the idea that men have an evolutionary predisposition to want to impregnate as many women as possible, due to the high rates of sperm
        production and little energy/resources required to do so. Also supports intra and inter sexual idea.
- - - - Personal factors → Personality, views
        
        Precipitating factors → Always there but become more apparent
        
        Lack of skills → Sexual experience
        
        Lack of motivation → Efforts
        
        Lack of maintenance → Input