Filter theory: factor of attraction

What is filter theory?

Kerckhoff and David 1962

How relationships form and dev

Ppl start looking at options available but not everyone available equally attractive to you so ppl apply criteria to narrow down available pool of partners = FIELD OF DESIRABLES

Compared attitudes of couples in short term and long term relationships

Found diff filters imp at diff times

1. Social demography

2. Similarity in attitudes

3. Complimentarity

What is social demography ?

1st lvl of filter

Sociodemographic characteristics =Chances of meeting ppl eg more likely to meet those physical close to u and more accessible as meet frequently =more likely to get 2 know

Similarities found more attractive =assurance of successful relationship as have more in common eg ppl 2 diff=automatcially b filtered out

RESULTS IN HOMOGAMY = attracted to those of same background, culture

Research support social demography Similarity in+counter

Festinger et al 1950

Ppl closest 2 stairs in apartment=most contact w others in block=most friendships

Clark 1952 50% of citizens of Columbus Ohio USA married 2 partners initially living w/in walking distance

Shows more lilkley 2 build relationships geographically close and accessible + share cultural and social similarities

HOWEVERRRRRRR social changes =relationships less common 50 yrs ago-online dating =field of desirables SIG INCREAED LOCATION NO LONGER LIMITING partner choice = research relevant ? Temporal validity is lacking

What is similarity of attitudes ?

2nd lvl of filter

More attractive if share same core beliefs and values eg career views, views of family imp

Particularly in early stages as agreement over basics promotes communication and increases SD = increases beadth and depth=more intimacy

Little in common=relationships Rarely dev past first few dates

Cause or effect -similarity in attitudes

Davis and Rusbult 2001- attitude alignment effect in longer term relationships.

Romantic partners overtime= attitides align =similarity WAS AN EFFECT of attractions NOT CAUSE

Anderson et al 2003 = longitudinal study =cohabiting partners =more sim in emotional responses overtime= EMOTIONAL CONVERGENCE

Not predicted by filter theory

What is complimentarity?

3rd filter

Each partner has characteristics that other partner lacks and fulfill each others Needs eg one shy and one sociable and active = sociable one takes role of introduction and involving them =compilments and helps each other= strengthens relationship

OPOSITES ATTRACT = more important in long term = gives feeling of creating a WHOLE

Complimentarity central 2 all longer term relationships?

Markey and markey 2013 lesbian couples of equal dominance =most satisfied

Sample of couples=romantically involved for mean of more than 4 ½ years

Similarity of needs rather than complimentarity may b associated w long term satisfaction in some couples

Issues and debates

Filter theory uses individualst western cultures

=value free will in partner choice and individual preferences

Apply criteria freely and w/o influence of other ppl

However collectevicts cultures= arranged couples more common= not free 2 apply filters

CULTURE BIAS = assumes rules of partnership choice in western cultures apply universally