Relationships Revision

Session 1:Theories of formation and maintenance of romantic

relationships.

Formation

• The reward/need satisfaction model (Byrne and Clore 1970)

• Relationships are rewarding. Reward can be direct (operant conditioning) or indirect (classical conditioning-by association). This is based on the behavioural approach

Formation:RNSM cont...

Direct reinforcement: If someone is friendly, helpful etc they are liked more by others. Smiling and cheering somebody up when they are sad they provide positive re-inforcement.This increases our liking of that person and the likelihood that a relationship will form.

Formation:RNSM cont...

• Argyle (1994) argued that a relationship may be re-enforcing if they satisfy our social needs. Argyle identified motivational systems that drive social behaviour:

• Biological needs- eating/drinking• Dependency-comforted/nurture• Affiliation- seeking approval/company• Dominance- being bossy/decision maker for others.• Sex-flirting etc• Aggression- violence• Self-esteem and ego identity-being valued by others.

Formation:RNSM cont...

• Liking through association( classical conditioning):

• People are liked because they become associated with something pleasant.e.gMay&Hamilton (1980)found that female students preferred photos of strangers when played pleasant music, as opposed to unpleasant or no music (control).

• Studies such as this show that positive emotions can lead to attraction and allow formation of a relationship.

Evaluation of RNSM

1) Hays(1985) found that friends valued giving as much as receiving (EQUITY THEORY).

2) Cultural limitations- non-western relationships often show little need for re-enforcements.

3) Gender bias: women in most cultures are socialized into being more attentive to the needs of others (although this might be reinforcing in itself!)

The matching Hypothesis

• The more socially desirable a person is, the more they would expect a potential partner to be

• Couples who are matched are more likely to have happy, enduring relationships

• “Realistic choices”(Walster et al): when choosing a partner, individuals are influenced by

• Desirability of potential match

• Probability of the other person saying “yes”

The matching hypothesis cont...

Research: • Murstein (1972) argues initial attraction in the beginning of

relationships is due to physical attractiveness. So matching your targets level of attractiveness to your own occurs.

• KEY STUDY:Walster et al (1966) The computer dance study: 752 students believed they had been matched with a partner (but they had been matched RANDOMLY) for a date.

• FINDINGS: all PPs reacted more positively to more physically (not intelligence, class, personality) attractive dates and were more likely to try to arrange further dates. There seemed to be no concern of rejection.

The Matching Hypothesis cont...

• Matching in the real world?

• Many correlational studies conducted with real couples shows a strong matching effect ( Silverman, 1971, Murstein, 1972)

• Long-term couples are more strongly matched than casual couples( Cavior and Boblett,1972).

Evaluation of the Matching Hypothesis

1)Complex matching: The initial theory stated that people match on many social desirability factors e.g. social standing, intelligence). However, most studies have only focused on physical attractiveness.

The idea that people can compensate for lack of attractiveness(with money, status, personality etc)is called, ‘complex matching’. Could explain an older wealthy man and attractive woman.

Evaluation of the Matching Hypothesis

2)Cultural limitations: doesn’t consider arranged marriages. Ignores third parties, e.g. Internet dating sites or being blind dates!

3)Gender differences: men value physical attractiveness more than women (evolutionary theory)

Relationship Maintenance

• ECONOMIC THEORIES:Homans (1971)Social Exchange Theory (SET)

• Relationships involve rewards BUT ALSO costs (e.g. money, time, emotional distress...).

• Satisfaction from relationship depends on the ratio between costs and benefits (rewards) - the ‘OUTCOME’.

• If rewards outweigh the costs, there is PROFIT. Vice versa, there is loss, which leads to dissatisfaction.

• People are basically selfish, aiming to MINIMISE COSTS and MAXIMISE REWARDS.

Maintenance: SET

Thibaut and Kelley(1959)developed SET by proposing a 4 stage model of long-term relationships:

1)Sampling –explore costs/rewards in different relationships.

2)Bargaining- couple cost out the relationship

3)Commitment-settling in-exchange of rewards becomes predictable.

4)Institutionalization- interactions are established- settled down.

• PLUS:

• comparison level (CL): what previous partners had to offer

• comparison level for alternatives (CLAlt): benefits of possible alternative relationships

•

Maintenance: Equity theory

• Walster (1978)• Equity theory • Explains how SET works in REAL LIFE: people strive to

achieve fairness and are distressed if they perceive unfairness.

• 4 principles:• people try to maximise rewards and minimize costs• distribution of rewards is negotiated to ensure fairness• unfair relationships produce dissatisfaction• as long as the ‘loser’ feels there is a chance of restoring

fairness and is motivated to save the relationship, he/she will endeavour to re-establish equity.

Evaluation of Equity Theory

1) Contrived methodologies and limited application: lack of ecological validity. Feeney et al (1994) found that equity theory failed to predict relationship satisfaction because it doesn’t consider the variance in context of modern-day relationships.

2) Lack of consistent empirical support: Clark&Mills (1979) identified 2 types of couples

• ‘communal couple’: positive regard for the other motivates giving

• ‘exchange couple’

3) ethical issues with using interviews on a sensitive topic as relationships.

4) most people in relationships do not carry out the exercise of counting costs and benefits

5)Gender differences: Prins et al (1993) interviewed Dutch couples and found that women were more likely than men to consider (or have)an affair due to perceived inequity in the relationship

Maintenance: The Investment model

Rusbult (1983)• The level of commitment predicts the likelihood of the

relationship being maintained.

• Commitment is increased by the level of satisfactionderived from the relationship and weakened by the presence of possible alternatives to the relationship.

• Also INVESTMENT increases commitment.

• INVESTMENT= anything a person puts into a relationship that will be lost if they leave it

The Investment Model

• Research:• Rusbult (1983) asked college students in heterosexual relationships

to complete questionnaires (on satisfaction, alternatives, investment+feeling of commitment) over a 7-month period. Those with higher satisfaction and investment were more committed to the relationship.

• Le&Agnew(2003) meta-analysis of 52 studies on over 11000 PPs in 5 countries on BOTH HETEROSEXUAL AND HOMOSEXUAL couples. Confirmed Rusbult’s theory. Highest correlation was between SATISFACTION and COMMITMENT. No gender differences, but correlation between investment and commitment was stronger in heterosexual men.

• Correlation between alternatives and commitment was stronger for lesbian than heterosexual women.

The Investment model Evaluation

1)Lots of research support

2) meta-analysis relies on only PUBLISHED research (some research with negative outcomes may never be published-RESEARCHER BIAS)

3)Commitment in abusive relationships- Rusbult and Martz(1995) applied the model to abusive relationships. Asked abused women why they had stayed so long in bad relationships.Supported the model as their investment was great.

Exam Questions

It is possible a question will ask about both formation and maintenance. It is unlikely breakdown will be asked with maintenance and formation.

1) Outline one or more theories relating to the formation and/or maintenance of relationships (9 marks).

2) What makes people happy in a relationship is whether things feel fair”.

Discuss two theories of the maintenance of relationships with reference to the claims made in the quotation. (25 marks)

3) Discuss theories of the formation of romantic relationships (25 marks).