Studied by 1 person
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
orientation stage - small talk, convo adheres to social norms
exploratory affective stage - disclose personal info (politics)
affective stage - communicators feel comfy enough to argue
stable stage - communicators can predict how other will react
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.
Kerckhoff and Davis - longitudinal study questionnaires completed by couples (short & long-term). first questionnaire assessed complementarity of needs and similarity in attitudes. 2nd questionnaire assessed closeness. found that for short term couples (under 18 months), SIA was associated with closeness. for long-term, closeness was associated with CON. This confirms that SIA needed at the start but CON more important later on. counterargument - Levinger pointed out this 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. this assumption lowers the study’s validity
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
Note 
Flashcard (48)