The Formation of Romantic Relationships PDF

Preview

Summary

Download The Formation of Romantic Relationships PDF

Description

The Formation of Romantic Relationships Filter Theory: Kerckhoff and Davis, 1963 (A01) They argue that relationships go through stages in which different things are important at different times. Relationships develop in three stages. At each stage people are filtered out as unsuitable, leaving a smaller group of ‘derisible’ potential partners. Filter One: Social Demographic filter Most people meet each other similar to them:  

Live nearby Same school/college/work

These people tend to have similar educational level, economic background and age. Those from different social backgrounds are less likely to be encountered. Social Sorting=important + subtle filter. This group makes up ‘field of availables’. Filter two: Similarity of attitudes and beliefs Once people start to get to know each other, similarity becomes important.  

People who share same attitudes/beliefs/interests = easier communication Dissimilar people filtered out as not much in common

This group makes up ‘field of desirables’. Filter three: Complementary of emotional needs   

This filter relates to how well two people fit together and meet each other’s needs Becomes important after 18 months Relationship established

(AO2/3)Research support/ Contradictory Evidence: Sprecher (1988): found that couples who matched with physical attractiveness, social background and interests were more likely to develop a long term relationship. Kerckhoff and Davis (1962): Conducted a longitudinal study by using aquestionnaire over several months on attitude similarity and personality traits with their partner. Found that student couples who shared similar attitudes were likely to stay together for up to about 18 months, but after that similarity became less important and complementary needs became more important. However, Gruber-Baldini et al (1995) found that couples who were similar were more likely to be together 20 years later, suggesting that similarity continues to be important.

(A02/3)Evaluation of studies : Kurckhoff theory/study: 

  

Study is dated, conducted 1962- This means that there is low historical validity as the research was conducted at a more conservative time when western ideals based on love were dominant and an imposed etic was also present- Ignores important differences or variations in relationships, for example between cultures or in same-sex couples As a result, this research can’t be applied to modern relationships. Therefore more research needs to be conducted as the explanation for modern relationships are still questionable Kerchkoff used a student population in his study- therefore this research can’t be generalised to older members of society and adult relationship formation. Students rarely know what they’re looking for in a relationship and are quite notorious for having lots of short term relationships. As a result, a wider population sample should be used to explain the formation of relationships.

The Filter theory fails to take into account individual differences. In real life, people give importance to different factors. The filter model is a 3-stage theory which makes it quite artificial and fails to capture the dynamics and fluency of relationships. In real life, relationships change and develop, some flow faster/slower and these factors cannot fit neatly into stages. Therefore the filter theory can’t be applied to all relationships and is an incomplete explanation for relationship formation. The filter model is reductionist as it simplifies complex relationships down to three stages. There is more to relationships than the theory states as the filter theory fails to explain love and other factors that may lead to the formation of relationships. The social demographic filter may be less important today as we have greater mobility and the ability to make contact and stay in touch electronically with people who live further away. Social networking and texting allow us to get to know and stay in touch with people from more diverse social backgrounds. Reward/Need Satisfaction Theory: Bryne and Clore, 1970 (A01) We are attracted to people who we find satisfying or gratifying to be with. People come into relations with their own personal needs (e.g dependency, sexual needs or self-esteem). Relationships are formed when each partner meets the other person’s social needs, subsequently rewarding them. Rewards/Punishments: Most stimuli in life either viewed as rewarding or punishing in some way. We are motivated to receive rewarding stimuli and avoid punishing stimuli. Rewarding stimuli produce positive feelings in us, negative stimuli the opposite. So people could be stimuli, following that some people make us happy and others do not. OPERANT CONDITIONING- We are likely to repeat any behaviour that leads to a desirable outcome and avoid behaviours that lead to undesirable outcomes. Thus Bryne and Clore’s theory suggest we

enter relationships because the presence of some individuals is directly linked with reinforcement, which makes them more attractive to us. CLASSICAL CONDITIONING- We also like people who are associated with pleasant events. If we meet someone in a good mood, we’re much more inclined to like them than if we met them when we’re felling unhappy. In this way, a previous neutral stimulus can be positively valued because of their association with a pleasant event. Byrne and Clore believed that the balance of positive and negative feelings is crucial in maintaining relationships: more positive than negative means that the relationship is more likely to succeed, and vice versa. (AO2/3)Research Support/Contradictory Evidence Griffitt and Guay (1969)-provides support for the importance of rewards (direct reinforcement). Participants were judged on a creative task by an evaluator and then asked to rate the evaluator and those who had received positive ratings gave positive ratings. Cate et al. (1982) asked 337 individuals to assess their current relationships in terms of reward level and satisfaction. Found that reward level was the most important factor in determining relationship satisfaction. However, Hays (1985), suggested that a problem with the reward/need satisfaction theory is that it only concentrates on receiving rewards, when it has been shown that some people gain satisfaction from giving as well as receiving. Aron et al (2005)-found that participants who measured high on a self-report questionnaire of romantic love also showed strong activity in particular areas of brain, including the ventral tegmental area. Intense romantic love associated with high levels of activity in subcortical reward regions of brain, rich in dopamine. A03- Brain reward system associated with romantic love most probably evolved to drive our ancestors to focus their courtship energy on specific individuals. Love at first sight is a basic mammalian response that our ancestors inherited to speed up the mating process. The reward/need satisfaction theory does not account for cultural and gender differences in the formation of relationships. Lott (1994) suggests that in many cultures, women are more focused on needs of others rather than receiving reinforcement. Suggesting that this theory is not a universal explanation of formation of relationships and therefore culturally biased. Mundane realism- most studies carried out in laboratory, therefore do not necessarily show that the principles of need satisfaction and similarity apply to real life- lacks mundane realism. Both theories are of a dated nature, and developed in 1960’s in USA and they reflect the social values of that society and time. These two explanations have a different focus. Reward theory focuses on why we have relationships and the motivations for engaging in them. Whilst, Filter theory focuses on how relationships develop over time. However, both agree that complementary needs are important in the survival of a relationship in the long term....