Filter Theory (attraction in Romantic relationships)

Factors effecting attraction - Filter Theory

What does filter theory suggest (not specific filters - brief overview)?

People filter possible mates from a range of eligible candidates - FT suggests people use different methods at different levels of the process:

1. Social variables such as race or class, and proximity (bcs more likely to meet them) - more likely to seek similarity to ourselves

2. Next, individual/internal values (eg: personality) (Similarity of attitudes filter) - more important to seek complementary characteristics

Factors effecting attraction - Filter Theory

What are the filters?

1. Social demography:

   • Only meet small faction of people - most tend to be same: class, education level, race

   • SO attracted to those in our proximity

2. Similarity of attitudes:

   • Similarity of: attitudes, beliefs, values

   • Most important at start of relationship

   • Can stem from social demography factors (eg: religion)

3. Complementarity:

   • Based on Psychological factors + meeting each others needs (SO similarity = less important)

   • Chances of ST → LT depend on it most

Factors effecting attraction - Filter Theory

Evaluation/AO1 if needed: Supporting research

Kerckhoff + Davis (1962) (Longitudinal) - both members of heterosexual couples complete questionnaires on complementarity/similarity of attitudes, relationship ‘closeness’ measured 7 mnths later → found ‘closeness’ associated w/ similarity of attitudes in ST (<18 mnths) + complementarity in LT (>18 mnths) → supports FT

Factors effecting attraction - Filter Theory

Evaluation: issues w/ Kerckhoff + Davis (1962)

Uses arbitrary cut off point (18 mnths) for LT vs ST, reduces pop val bcs LT/ST = more subjective

Lacks temp val - Levinger (1974) - difficult to replicate Kerckchoff + Davis’ results → due to social changes in dating norms?

Factors effecting attraction - Filter Theory

Evaluation: bidirectional ambiguity

Bidirectional ambiguity → complementarity/SOA causes LT, OR, LT causes complementarity/SOA → hard to establish cause/effect → limits application/understanding of attraction in relationships (eg: Davis + Rusbult (2001) found partners become more similar as become more attracted (similarity = result, not cause)

Factors effecting attraction - Filter Theory

Evaluation: lacks temporal validity

FT may lack temp val due to eg: online dating à people today = larger dating pool SO certain filters (eg: social demography/proximity) may be less influential in attraction today → FT may not be a lasting feature of human behaviour + so lack temp val

Factors effecting attraction - Filter Theory

Evaluation: heteronormativity

FT developed using filters based on heterosexual relationships → Complementarity (eg: submissive + dominant) might not be central in all LT, contrary to what FT suggests → (eg: - Markey + Markey (2013): lesbian couples of equal dominance = most satisfied (mean relationship length of 4.5 yrs) → SUGGESTS FT oversimplifies attraction in relationships + heteronormative (+ tells us little about same-sex attraction)