Factors affecting attraction - filter theory

who came up with the filter theory?

Kerckhoff and Davis (1962)

filter theory

relationships go through a series of filters, each of which is essential for the relationship to begin/continue

4 filters of filter theory

proximity, similarity/demographic, psychological factors, complementarity of emotional needs

proximity meaning

physical/geographical closeness is the bare minimum

similarity/demographic meaning

physical attraction and similarity in ethnicity, class, religion, income

psychological factors meaning

similar values, attitudes, beliefs and interests

complementarity of emotional needs

how your personalities fit together

examples of how personalities fit

birds of a feather flock together or opposites attract

Kerckhoff and Davis study

longitudinal study of student couples who had been together for 18 months

Kerckhoff and Davis procedure

pps asked to report attitude similarity and personality traits with partner

Kerckhoff and Davis results

attitude similarity was the most important factor in first 18 months, after this then emotional compatibility

Kerckhoff and Davis evaluation

has external validity, only looks at one demographic in the 60s

Bossard (1932) support or challenge?

supports proximity filter

Bossard what year was the study?

1932

Bossard (1932) procedure

looked at 5000 marriage licenses in Philadelphia

Bossard (1932) results

a tendency for those getting married to live close to each other

issue with Bossard research

lacks temporal validity

Zajonc (1968) supports or challenges?

supports proximity filter

Zajonc (1968) procedure

2 months a student in a black bag sat in uni lectures

Zajonc (1968) results

attitudes changed from hostility to curiosity to friendship

Zajonc (1968) conclusion

came to like black bag because it was familiar and predictable

Zajonc evaluation

demand characteristics and temporal validity

Kendal (1978) supports or challenges?

supports similarity/demographic

Kendal (1978) procedure

asked students in secondary school to identify their best friend

Kendal (1978) results

best friends tended to be of the same age, religion, sex, social class and ethnic background

Kendal (1978) issue with study

at same school they are likely to have same demographic so better to go to a workplace or uni

Winch (1958) supports or challenges?

supports opposites attract, challenges similar personalities

Winch (1958)

couples who were different were happier than those who were similar

Winch (1958) evaluation

has external validity, lacks temporal validity

Burgess and Wallin (1953) supports or challenges?

supports similar personalities, challenges opposites attract

Burgess and Wallin (1953) procedure

had detailed info about 1000 engaged couples, including info about 42 personality characteristics

Burgess and Wallin (1953) results

no evidence to support opposites attract therefore similarity of personality is important

Burgess and Wallin (1953) evaluation

good sample (nomothetic)

Anderson et al (2003) supports or challenges?

challenges complementarity of emotional needs

Anderson et al year of study

2003

Anderson et al (2003) findings

similarity increases over time and is not necessarily a common feature of long term relationships

Anderson et al (2003) conclusion

C of EN is not the cause or filter for a good relationship but the effect of one

Anderson et al (2003) evaluation

contemporary research