Psychology RELATIONSHIPS

View mindmap
  • Relationships
    • Parasocial
      • PSR are appealing because there is a lower chance of rejection
        • PSR are with people who are attractive and 'similar' to the viewer
      • GILES AND MALTBY ABSORPTIon ADDICTION MODEL
        • 1.Entertain social; 2.Intense personal ; 3. Borderline-pathological
      • ATTACHMENt THEORY - PSR have the same qualities as real life relationships.
        • Proximity seeking- reducing the distance between them.
        • Secure base- very little chance of rejection from an attachment figure so they can create a safe haven.
        • Protest at Disruption - prolonged distress following separation or loss of the attachment figure.
      • Individuals with anxious-ambivalent attachment are more likey to create a PSR.
        • Anxious-ambivalent - individuals with a negative view of themselves. They turn to TV characters as a way of satisfying their unmet relational needs
    • Evolutionary explanations
      • Intra sexual selection - individuals compete with one another.
        • Inter sexual selection - evolve preferences for desirable qualities
      • Females are more attracted to resourceful men.
        • Men are more attracted to women who show signs of fertility
      • BUSS 1989 males+female from 37 cultures asked to rate characteristics they look for
        • Women look for financial stability. Men look for attractiveness and youth.
    • Physical Attractiveness
      • Men place great importance on physical attractiveness
        • Matching hypothesis- individuals seek out partners who physical attractiveness matches their own
      • WALSTER AND WALSTER 1966- male and female students completed questionnaires about physical attractiveness
        • Randomly allocated but PP believed they were matched by intelligence and personality
          • PP reacted more positively if their dates were physically attractive than 'matched'
    • Self Disclosure
      • Greater self disclosure leads to greater feelings of intimacy
      • The more self disclosure received is a better predictor of liking and loving then self disclosure given.
      • Norms of self disclosure- not too disclose too much too early. The more that is disclosed the more is expected back.
      • SPRECHER ET AL 2013- students paired in either reciprocal or non-reciprocal pairs and assessed for the liking of one another.
        • Those in reciprocal pairs show higher levels of liking than those in non reciprocal pairs.
    • Attraction: Filter Theory
      • We choose partners by using a series of filters, where we narrow down the 'field of availables'
      • Filter 1 - Social Demography - age, social group, location
        • Filter 2 - Similarities in attitudes - similar psychological characteristics
          • Filter 3 - Complimentar of needs- people who have different needs like each other because they provide a mutual satisfaction
      • KERCKHOFF AND DAVIS 1962- couples completed questionnaires of shared attitudes and values and degree of opposing needs.
        • Dating for less than 18 month- similarity of values was the most important indicator of closeness. Dating for more than 18 months complementarof needs was the more important indicator of closeness.
    • Social Exchange
      • Individuals attempt to maximise their rewards within a relationship
      • Commitment to a relationship depends on its profitability and what you get out of the relationship.
      • Comparison level - a product of our experiences and our general views about what we expect.
        • If the relationship exceeds the CL then we will judge the relationship as worthwhile
      • Comparison level of alternatives - where a person weights up rewards with current partner and a new partner.
    • Equity Theory
      • Equity - when one partners benefits minus their costs equal their partners benefits minus their costs.
        • Being over or under benefited leads to inequity and distress
      • SCHAFER AND KEITH- inequity more likely to be during child-bearing years.
      • HATFIELD AND RAPSON - concern with inequity depends on the stage of the relationship.
        • Early stages - high considerations of fairness and equity. Long term - less worry about equity and day to day rewards
      • STAFFORD AND CANARY 2006 -  200 married couples completed measure of equity and relationship satisfaction
        • Satisfaction was highest when relationships perceived to be equitable
    • Investment model of relationships
      • Satisfaction level - positive vs negatives in  a relationship.
      • Quality of alternatives - extent to which needs could be fulfilled outside the relationship. If alternatives are absent, the relationship may continue.
      • Investment size - measure of all resources that are attached to the relationship which would be lost if the relationship ended.
      • Commitment level - likelihood that an involvement will persist. Little gain high loss if leaving the relationship.
      • High levels of satisfaction plus high investment = increasing dependency on the relationship = high commitment
      • LE AND AGNEW 2003 - meta-analysis of 52 studies of different components in the investment model.
        • All three components highly correlated with relationship commitment and satisfaction level most correlated
    • Relationship Breakdown
      • BREAKDOwn - partner feels dissatisfied with the relationship
      • INTRAPsychic - social withdrawal and re evaluation of alternatives in secret
      • DYADIC - confronts partner and discuss their binding factors. The relationship could be saved.
      • SOCIAL - shares problems with friends which makes it harder to deny. Outsiders create pressure into no going back
      • GRAVE-DRESSING - partners must present themselves as trustworthy and loyal for other potential partners. No going back
    • Virtual Relationships on social media
      • People present 'edited' version of themselves over social media.
        • Levels of self disclosure depend on whether it is a public or private account.
          • Confidence to self disclosure comes from being anonymity and 'strangers on  a train' effect
            • Strangers on the train - self disclose more to strangers as they know they will never see them again.
      • Gates- barriers that limit opportunities for the less attractive, she or less socially skilled to form relationships in face to face.
        • ZHAO ET AL 2008 - found that gated individuals present identities that they hope to establish but are unable to face to face.
        • YURCHISIN ET AL 2005 - people online tend to give a more socially desirable image of themselves to make themselves more popular.

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Relationships resources »