8. theories: duck's phase model

what is the model

phase model of relationship breakdown

phase model of relationship breakdown

• explanation of the stages people go through when their relationship is not working

• once a partner is dissatisfied, there are four phases in the model each with different focuses: intra-psychic, dyadic, social and grave dressing

what is each phase marked by

one or both partners reaching a threshold where their perception of the relationship changes

intra-psychic stage

• focus - cognitive processes within the individual

• worry for dissatisfaction reasons mulling over thoughts privately

• weigh pros and cos and evaluate these against the alternatives

• may use confirmation bias to reinforce their dissatisfaction

dyadic phase

• focus - interpersonal processes between the two partners

• point where cannot avoid talking about their relationship, so there is a series of confrontations where dissatisfactions are aired

• costs are emphasised and rewards dismissed as not enough

• characterised by anxiety, hostility and resentment

social phase

• focus - wider processes involving the couple’s social networks with break up made public

• turn to friends and family for solace, consolation and as a way to affirm their decision

• seek support and form pacts with mutual friends choosing sides - friends and families may use hindsight bias to reframe the relationship

• usually point of no return as break up takes on a momentum driven by social forces

grave dressing phase

• focus - aftermath

• make story for breakdown for public consumption allowing maintenance of positive reputations usually at the expense of the other partner

• also personal story to live with and may differ to the public one, its more to do with tidying memories with a certain degree of rewriting history

evaluation

1. application

2. cultural validity

3. incomplete model

4. early phases

5. descriptive

application

• useful real world application

• duck suggested relationship breakdown can be reversed with interventions during the intra-psychic or dyadic phases (ie counselling)

• increases practical value showing can be applied to relationship repair

cultural validity

• model may not apply equally across cultures

• research suggests relationship breakdown in collectivist cultures is less common and more socially discourages than in individualist - model assumes personal choice and emotional expression which may not reflect cultures where social expectations strongly influence relationships

• limits models cross-cultural validity

incomplete explanation

• does not explain all aspects of relationship breakdown

• model focuses mainly on emotional and psychological processes ignoring factors like financial pressure and stress - overlooking external influences means it presents a simplified account of why relationships end

• reduces explanatory power

early phases

• evidence for early phases is limited

• research relies heavily on retrospective self reports - memory is unreliable and can be distorted by later events so accounts of intra psychic phase may be inaccurate

• weakens reliability and validity

descriptive

• outlines what happens at each stage but does not explain why the relationship breaks down in the first place

• does not identify causal factors such as personality and stress meaning it tells us the process but not the reasons behind it

• limited explanatory power reducing usefulness as a complete theory