Relationships AQA Psychology

AQA

what is sexual selection?

an evolutionary explanation of partner preference. Attributes and behaviours that increase reproductive success.

what is anisogamy? explain it

Differences between male and female gametes (sperm and egg), for example:

Sperm - relatively small, energetically cheap, created in vast numbers from puberty to old age

Egg - larger, energetically expensive, only one is released monthly for limited fertile years

what is the consequence of anisogamy?

Different mating strategies

explain inter-sexual selection

• preferred strategy of females, they prefer quality over quantity

• Females are choosey in picking a partner because they make a greater investment in offspring (pregnancy, childcare, etc) than men and stand more to lose if they choose a substandard partner

• female strategy is too choose a genetically fit partner who can provide resources for offspring

Inter-sexual selection causes the runaway process and the sexy sons hypothesis. Explain the two terms

• RUNAWAY PROCESS - female preference decides which traits are passed onto offspring (e.g height is considered attractive by females, so taller males are selected and gene for tallness is passed onto offspring, male height increases over time as a population)

• SEXY SONS HYPOTHESIS - women tend to pick males with the genes to create ‘sexy sons’ as their sexual partners, so that their sons have greater reproductive success

Intra-sexual selection

what is dimorphism? who wins the competition and why? what is a behavioural consequence of these competitions/intra-sexual selection?

• one sex competes for the access to a member of the opposite sex

• preferred strategy of males

• the assumption is that males compete bc of their desire to sleep with as many females as possible

• men with bigger muscles, taller, etc is more likely to win competition and pass on their traits to offspring

• causes DIMORPHSIM (diffs btwn sexes of the same species) as females do not physically compete for males, they have evolved to be smaller, less muscular, have less physical strength

• males may benefit from being more aggressive and deceitful to win competition which also leads to selection of aggressiveness in males

what do men prefer?

what did Singh et al. find?

symbols of youth and fertility

men in US, NZ, UK were shown drawings of a female figure identical in every way except the waist : hip ratio. men preferred low waist : hip ratio. Why?

• Symbol of health which would lead to healthier offspring

• shows sexual maturity and that she is not already pregnant

limitations of sexual selection

• cant explain homosexual relationships as they do not have the primary aim of reproduction. lowers validity

• underestimates influence of social and cultural factors e.g. women are in the workplace so less dependent on men for resources, so female preference may not be resource-orientated today

• Strassberg and Holly - put up female seeking male adverts. most popular advert was where the woman described herself as financially independent & successful. so men do care about money challenging evolutionary view of men caring more about looks

strengths of sexual selection

• Buss - cross-cultural survey on partner preference 10,000 adults across 33 countries females emphasised ambition, intelligence and good financial prospects whereas men emphasised physical attractiveness and youth. cross cultural gives validity

• Clark & Hatfield. attractive male and female student researchers went around campus asking opposite sex if they wanted to spend the night. 75% of males said yes, 0% females said yes. Shows that women are choosier than men and that men desire many female sexual partners counterarguement this theory is too simplistic, Buss found that both females and males are choosy when picking a long-term partner

Issues and debates sexual selection

Determinist

• doesn’t consider variability.

Social sensitivity

• legislates the idea that men are allowed to have many sexual partners whereas woman should only reproduce with one man

it is on the Nature side of the debate

• Assumes all relationships develop because we are unknowingly have an innate desire for the most genetically fit partner to reproduce with but doesn’t explain homosexual relationships

Reductionist

• condenses human behaviour

• Portrays women as baby-makers who become obsolete after infertility and men as sex-obsessed

What is Social Penetration theory?

• self disclosure

• breadth & depth

• Reciprocity

• Revealing too much info

• depenetration

social penetration theory - Altman and Taylor

Self -disclosure - revealing information about yourself to your partner as the rl progresses.

for a relationship to deepen, it must be reciprocal. disclosure suggests that they trust that person, which deepens the rl

Breadth & depth - type of information revealed in order: superficial (e.g. fave music), intimate, personal, core (e.g. painful memories). If you reveal too much high-risk information (e.g. desire to marry) it can put the other off, tmi.

depenetration occurs when a partner loses interest so self-discloses less

Stages of self-disclosure

1. orientation stage - small talk, convo adheres to social norms

2. exploratory affective stage - disclose personal info (politics)

3. affective stage - communicators feel comfy enough to argue

4. stable stage - communicators can predict how other will react

5. depenetration - less self-disclosure leads to relationship breakdown

Evaluate self disclosure

• SPRECHER & HENDRICK - found strong positive correlation between satisfaction & commitment and self disclosure. Also found that reciprocal self disclosure leads to more satisfying relationship. counterargument - only correlational, no causation. the variables could be switched the other way round or there could be a 3rd variable (eg the amount of time spent together)

• LAUERNCEAU participants wrote daily diary entries about progress in their relationships found that self-disclosure in a partner led to greater feelings of intimacy in a couple. Reverse also true - less intimate couples self disclosed less

• TANG et al. SD is western concept & imposed etic studied sexual self-disclosure in china vs us (collectivist/individual). sexual SD less common in china but satisfaction level same as us

self-disclosure issues and debates

• NOMOTHETIC - limited, can’t explain all types of relationships. claims that higher self-disclosure will invariably lead to greater satisfaction, ignoring many other factors possibly influencing relationships (cultural practices -Tang et al. - and personality)

• REDUCTIONIST - reduces relationship satisfaction to single factor ignoring many other aspects of romantic attraction, such as physical attractiveness, similarity of attitudes and complementarity.

• ETHNOCENTRIC, IMPOSED ETIC, CULTURE-BOUND - TANG studied sexual self-disclosure in china vs us (collectivist/individual). sexual SD less common in china but satisfaction level same as us

Factors affecting attraction - physical attractiveness

Explain why physical attractiveness is important

from an evolutionary standpoint we are attracted to good-looking people because their looks are an indication of good health, and we want to pass on the best genes to our offspring. for example, facial symmetry is an honest sign of genetic fitness, so it is attractive

Factors affecting attraction - physical attractiveness

What is meant by the halo effect?

The halo effect describes how physical attractiveness can lead to assumptions about a person's other positive traits, such as intelligence or kindness, influencing people's perceptions and interactions.

It is beneficial to the attractive person as people behave positively towards them and they may be given more opportunities ultimately leading to more success

Dion et al found that physically attractive people were assumed to more sociable, hardworking and intelligent compares to unattractive people

Support for the halo effect

Palmer and Peterson

Attractive people were consistently rated as more politically knowledgeable than unattractive people by pps. This has dangerous implications for democracy - politicians who are unsuitable may be more likely to be voted in if they are physically attractive.

Factors affecting attraction - physical attractiveness

explain the matching hypothesis. Why is it useful?

The matching hypothesis suggests that ppl assess their own attractiveness realistically then use this to find a partner who matches their own level of attractiveness in order to form a more stable relationship.

It is useful because:

• it prevents the pain of rejection if you ask out someone who thinks you are not as attractive as them

• it retains relationships as there is a small gap in the level of attractiveness which makes it less likely that one partner will be left for someone who is more attractive

support and limitation for the matching hypothesis

feingold - meta-analysis of 17 studies using real life couples and found a strong correlation between how attractive they rated each other in each couple, as predicted by the MH they used real-life couples which gives greater validity

taylor - looked at a popular dating site. daters sought partners who were more attractive than themselves, contradicts MH. they looked at actual date choices rather than partner preference which gives greater validity

Factors affecting attraction: Filter theory

Kerckhoff and Davis procedure

Studied attitudes and personalities of long-term couples (over 18 months) and short-term couples (under 18 months) to form a theory on how relationships form and develop

Factors affecting attraction: Filter theory

Summarise the theory

We have a field of availables which we filter down into a field of desirables using 3 filters. Each filter has varying importance at different stages of the relationship

‘field of availables’ - the whole set of people that you could start a rl with

‘field of desirables’ - the whole set of people that you could start a rl with that you are attracted to

Factors affecting attraction: Filter theory

The first filter

Social Demography

• the field is restricted to people who are geographically close to us bc with proximity comes accessibility - its easier to get to know someone when you have the same classes or go to the same church

• You use factors to filter people out people who are too different from you in religion, culture, physical proximity, level of education, age. This leads to homogamy - you are more likely to be attracted to ppl who are similar to you culturally and socially

Factors affecting attraction: Filter theory

2nd filter - who did k&d find that this was the most important to?

Similarity in attitudes

• Kerckhoff and Davis found that this was most important to short-term couples/the beginning of a rl - it is important as Byrne’s findings suggest that similarity causes attraction.

• similarity in attitudes also important to relationship development as it encourages self-disclosure. through self -disclosures, the individuals can discern whether to continue or end rl

Factors affecting attraction: Filter theory

3rd filter. Who did k&d find that this was most important to?

Complementarity of needs

• Complementarity occurs when two partners have traits that the other partner doesn’t have

• Eg. one partner likes to laugh, the other likes to make them laugh - harmonious needs

• Kerckhoff and Davis found it was most important in long-term couples/relationships

• Important because it creates the romantic feeling that together, the two partners form a whole which makes the rl more likely to flourish

Filter theory issues and debates

Culture bias

• Culturally bound/imposed etic - the research is on western relationships which values individual preference. this may not be the case in collectivist cultures where relationships are commonly arranged by ppl outside of the romantic relationship - therefore not everyone is able to use these filters - culture bias

Reductionist

• Cannot explain why people stay in long-term abusive relationships. The theory predicts that complementarity of needs is necessary for developing a long-term rl, so can’t explain why ppl stay despite conflicting complementarity of needs. - therefore a holistic approach may be better explanation

Filter theory evaluation

Lacks temporal validity - the findings of the 1962 model may not apply today as modern technology challenges the issues of:

• restricted field of availables - online dating opens the doors to people of different ethnic and social backgrounds

• proximity - now it is possible to talk to & start relationship with person in another country.

Perceived similarity is more important than actual similarity - Meta-analysis of 313 studies by Montoya et al. found that actual similarity was only a predictor of attraction in short, lab-based interactions whereas in the real world, perceived similarity was a strong predictor of attraction.

Levinger pointed out that k&d’s original study fails to be replicated. He puts it down to social change and k&d’s choice to put the cut off point at 18 months. they assumed that relationships over 18 months were deeper when it may take more or less time than this to establish a similarity of attitudes and complimentarity, while others skip sociodemographic filters altogether and feel they are ready to commit to long-term relationships earlier than the 18 month cut-off point.

Theories of romantic relationships

What is the Social Exchange Theory? who came up with it?

Thibault and Kelley

Romantic relationships are like economic exchanges - we aim to maximise gains and minimise losses.

Satisfaction in a relationship is based on the amount of profit, defined as rewards-costs

Rewards and costs are subjective in each relationship. What is rewarding and costly fluctuates over the course of a rl

Rewards - sex, companionship and emotional support. Costs - time, money, stress, compromise and opportunity cost → time and energy spent in your current relationship can’t be invested elsewhere

Theories of romantic relationships

What is the CL/comparison level?

-What is it influenced by?

-Why does it change over time?

-What is it linked to?

A measure of profit. It is the amount of reward that you think you deserve.

It is formed by experience of social norms which is reflected through tv, books and films and you use them to gauge what is a reasonable level of reward. Past relationships also influence your expectations of your current rl

your CL changes with the more rls you have and the more social norms you experience

CL is closely linked to self-esteem. someone with a low self-esteem may be satisfied with a low amount of profit whereas someone with a high self-esteem would not

What is CLalt/comparison level of alternatives?

Why do people stay in rls according to SET?

A measure of profit. It is the comparison of your current relationship to other rls to see if you could be in another rl with lower costs and higher rewards.

The alternatives become attractive when the costs of your current rl outweigh the rewards.

You stay in your current relationship as long as you believe it is more rewarding than the alternatives.

Stages of relationship development according to SET

Sampling - experiment with costs and rewards in your own rls or by observing others do so

Bargaining -the beginning of a relationship, partners exchange loads of rewards and costs to identify and negotiate the rewards and costs that are most profitable

Commitment - the relationship becomes more stable as rewards increase and costs lessen

Institutionalisation - the partners settle down because the norms of rewards and costs in the relationship are established

Evaluate SET

Gottman and Levenson found that the ratio of positive to negative exchanges was 5:1 in successful marriages whereas it was 1:1 in unsuccessful marriages. Shows that exchange is linked to successfulness of marriage

Can explain why people stay in abusive relationships unlike Filter theory. People may feel like there is no better alternative (eg. perhaps they would be homeless without their abusive partner)

Sprecher found that CLalt was the most important factor in relationship satisfaction and commitment. CLalt was negatively correlated with satisfaction and commitment counterpoint 1 - only correlational, third variable problem. counterpoint 2 - Miller found that people in highly committed relationships spent less time looking at images of attractive people. challenges CLalt which suggests we are always looking for more attractive alternatives. It could be that we only start counting rewards and cists when we are dissatisfied

Clark and Mills argues there are 2 types of relationships - communal and exchange. communal relationships (romantic) don’t involve exchange whereas exchange relationships (eg co-workers) do.

SET issues and debates

Ethnocentric - The theory is rooted in Western, individualistic cultural norms and may not apply well to collectivist cultures, where relationships are often maintained based on duty, family obligations, and community values, rather than personal rewards and costs.

Social Sensitivity - portrays people as selfish. ignores the idea that people can be altruistic

Reductionist - focusses in one way that relationships are maintained (rewards and costs) when there a many ways such as trust and emotional connection

difference between equity theory and SET?

equity theory says satisfaction comes when rewards are similar to the costs and both partners amount of profit is similar (not equal)

SET theory says that satisfaction comes when there is a rewards outweigh the costs

Equity theory. What causes dissatisfaction? What causes the most dissatisfaction?

a lack of equity - when partners underbenefit or overbenefit

underbenefitters feel resentment and hostility and overbenefitters feel shame and discomfort

equity theory says there is a correlation between perceived inequity and dissatisfaction

What causes the most dissatisfaction is changes in the level of perceived equity over time.

What is more important in Equity theory - the size of the profit, or the ratio of rewards : costs?

the ratio of rewards : costs. a partner who puts a lot into the rls but gets a lot out if it feels satisfied.

How is inequity dealt with?

the underbenefitted partner may revise their definitions of costs and rewards. what was certainly a cost may change to be accepted as a norm so that the ratio of rewards to costs becomes more similar.

alternatively they may work harder they to fix the relationship

equity theory evaluation

Berg and McQuinn conducted a longitudinal study on 38 couples. found that high levels of self-disclosure and perceived equity at the start of a rl were string predictors that a couple would stay together and low perceived equity a the start was a strong predictor they’d break up. however, they did not find any changes in perceived equity, unlike the theory suggests. this challenges a central part of the theory, lowers validity

‘Perceived equity’ doesn’t affect evryone in the same way - even when aware of the situation, ‘benevolents’ are more accepting of underbenefitting and ‘entitleds’ believe they deserve to overbenefit and do so without much guilt

Stafford and Canary - found that partners who perceived their rls as equitable received greater satisfaction than those who did not. Shows a correlation between equity and satisfaction in a rl, supporting equity theory

equity theory issues and debates

Culture bias - perceived equity is more important in individualistic cultures than collectivist. Aumer-Ryan found than men and women in collectivist cultures felt more satisfied when they were overbenefitting, not when the rl was fair

Nomothetic - tries to create general law for how romantic relationships are maintained when Clarke and Mills argue that it isn’t possible to assess equity because a lot of the input is emotional and unquantifiable. ET may benefit from taking on a more idiographic approach and focus an individual experiences

Gender bias - Sprecher found that women are more sensitive to under/over benefitting. This highlights the importance of conducting research into males and females separately to avoid beta bias