Factors Affecting Attraction: Filter Theory

What is the filter theory?

An explanation of relationship formation that states a series of different factors progressively reduces the rangge of available romantic partners to a much smaller pool of possibilities.

In terms of partner choice, what do we all have a field of?

Availables, the entire set of potential romantic partners, all the people we could realistically form a relationship with. But of course, not everyone who is available to us is desirable.

According to Kerkhoff and Davis, what are there three main factors that do?

Act as filters to narrow down our range of partner choice to a field of desirables. Each of these factors assumes greater or lesser importance at different stages of a relationship.

What does social demography refer to?

A wide range of factors all of which influence the chances of potential factors meeting each other in the first place.

What does social demography include?

Geographical location (or proximity), social class, level of education, ethnic group, religion, and so on.

What type of people are you much more likely to meet?

Those who are physically close to you and who share several demographic characteristics. Although we might frequently encounter people who live further away, our most meaningful and memorable interactions are with people who are nearby.

What is the key benefit of proximity?

Accessibility. It doesn’t require much effort to meet people who live in the same area, go to the same school or university, and so on.

Although there is a vast range and variety of partners, why is the realistic field much narrower?

Because our choices are constrained by our social circumstances. Effectively, anyone who is too ‘different‘ (like too far away) is discounted as a potential partner.

What is the outcome of filtering?

Homogamy.

What is homogamy?

Where you are more likely to form a relationship with someone who is socially or culturally similar. You will probably have a lot in common with someone who shares, for example, your ethnicity, religious beliefs and educational level. Most of us find such shared demographic similarities attrative.

What is the second level of filter?

Similarity in attitudes.

Why is it that partners will often share important beliefs and values?

Because the field of availables has already been narrowed by the first filter to those who have significant social and cultural characteristics in common.

What did Kerckhoff and Davis find about similarity of attitudes?

That it was important to the development of romantic relationships, but only for the couples who had been together for less than 18 months.

In the earlier stages of a relationship, what is there a need for partners to agree over?

Basic values, the things that really matter to them. This encourages greater and deeper communication, and promotes self-disclosure.

What has Byrne described the consistent findings that similarity causes attraction as?

The law of attraction, if such similarity does not exist, then the relationship is likely to fizzle out.

What is the third level of filter?

Complimentarity.

What does the third level of filter concern?

The ability of romantic partners to meet each other’s needs.

When do two partners compliment each other?

When they have traits that the other lacks. For example, one partner may enjoy making the other laugh, and in turn this partner enjoys being made to laugh.

What did Kerckhoff and Davis find about complementarity?

That the need for complementarity was more important for long-term couples. In other words, at a later stage of a relationship, opposites attract.

Why is complimentary attractive?

Because it gives two romantic partners the feeling that together they form a whole, which adds depth to a relationship and makes it more likely to flourish.

What is the strength of filter theory?

• Research support.

How is research support a strength of filter theory?

There is support from Kerckhoff and Davis's original study: the researchers conducted a longitudinal study in which both partners in dating couples completed questionnaires to assess two main factors - similarity of attitudes/values and complementarity of needs. Relationship closeness was measured by another questionnaire seven months later. The study found that closeness was associated with similarity of values but only for couples who had been together less than 18 months. For couples In longer relationships, complementarity of needs predicted closeness.

What does the research support mean for filter theory?

The study provided evidence that similarity is important in the early stages of a relationship, but complementarity is more important later on.

What is the counterpoint to the research support?

Levinger pointed out that many studies have failed to replicate the original findings of Kerckhoff and Davis. He put this down to social changes over time (e.g. dating pattems) and also to problems in defining the depth of a relationship In terms of Its length. 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 committed and had a deeper relationship.

What does the counterpoint to the research support mean for filter theory?

It is a questionable assumption which means that fiter theory is undermined by the lack of validity of Its evidence base.

What are the limitations of filter theory?

• Problems with complementarity.

• Actual versus perceived similarity.

How are problems with complementarity a limitation of filter theory?

Complementarity may not be central to all longer-term relationships. A prediction of filter theory is that in the most satisfying relationships partners are complementary, for example one partner may have a need to be dominant and the other a need to be submissive. However, Markey and Markey found that lesbian couples of equal dominance were the most satisfied. Their sample of couples had been romantically involved for a mean time of more than 4½ years.

What do problems with complementarity mean for filter theory?

It suggests that similarity of needs rather than complementarity may be assodated with long-term satisfaction, at least in some couples.

How is actual versus perceived similarity a limitation of filter theory?

Actual similarity matters less in a relationship than whether partners perceive or believe themselves to be similar. This was supported in a meta-analysis of 313 studies by Montoya et al. They found that actual similarity affected attraction only in very short-term lab-based interactions. In real-world relationships, perceived similarity was a stronger predictor of attraction. One interpretation of this finding is that partners may perceive greater similarities as they become more attracted to each other.

What does actual versus perceived similarity mean for filter theory?

That therefore perceived similarity may be an effect of attraction and not a cause, which is not predicted by the filter model.