Studies

   participants were evaluated on a creative task by an experimenter and then asked to rate how much they liked the experimenter. This rating was highest when the experimenter had positively evaluated (i.e. rewarded) the participants performance on the task, supporting the claim that we like some individuals because they provide direct reinforcement

    female students listened to pleasant music, unpleasant music or no music at all whilst rating the appearance of photos of male strangers. The ratings correlated with the type of music being listened to; those who rated whilst listening to the pleasant music rated the strangers as better looking. Supports classical conditioning 

    HOWEVER it's gender bias and only used photos thus making their scientific method lack internal validity

·        asked 337 individuals to assess their current relationships in terms of reward level and satisfaction. Results showed that reward level was superior to all other factors in determining a relationship

·         A basic problem with the theory is that it only explores receiving of rewards. Hays (1985) found that we gain satisfaction from giving as well as receiving – but this may be a reward in itself, so may not refute theory in its entirety 

·students were led to believe they were meeting dates based on being matched accordingly on similar social desirability factors but were in fact matched randomly. Everyone reacted positively to physically attractive dates and were more likely to arrange further dates with them regardless of their personality – socially desirable factors have importance when forming relationships

·         Matching in the real world: strong correlations for attractiveness scores in actual couples. There’s similarity between each partner’s levels of physical attractiveness. The stronger the match, the more committed the couple were. Bobblet et al found evidence for a matching effect for more committed couples showing those matched similarly appeared to have a stronger relationship (married, engaged or going steady)

·         Simpson (1990) asked ppts to rate members of the opposite sex in terms of attractiveness and found that those ppts who were already in a relationship gave lower ratings than those who weren’t. It shows how people deal with threats to their relationship – it protects the current relationship by reducing the potential profit of the alternative. This supports the comparison level by showing how we deal with potential alternatives

·         Stafford and Canary (2006) found that satisfaction was highest for spouses who perceived their relationship to be equitable, followed by over benefited partners and lowest for under benefit partners. Supports the idea that relationships need to be equally equitable in order to work

·         Clark and Mills (1979) disagree with the claim that all relationships are based on economics. They distinguished between exchange relationships and communal relationships. They found in communal relationships people were more desired to respond to the needs of the partner rather than keep track of rewards and costs. The individuals believed any inequity would balance out in the long run

·         Gender differences: Steil and Weltman (1991) found that among working couples, husbands who earned more than their wives, rated their career more important. In addition, women also rated the same. However, in couples where the women earned more, neither partner rated their own career as more important. Suggests than men and women judge the equity of a relationship different

·         Feeney found that the theory fails to consider the variance in contents in which relationships occur in modern times

·         Extramarital affairs: Boekhout et al (1999) asked undergraduates were asked to rate sexual and emotional reasons why men and women would cheat on their partner. It was found men would more likely be disloyal due to boredom or lack of excitement (stimulation) and women would more likely be unfaithful due to lack of attention or lack of commitment and communication (skills). Shows how affairs may be due to lack of skills and/or stimulation in the current relationship

·         Real life application through the Couples Coping Enhancement Training (CCET) programme. Aims to improve communication and problem solving skills in a relationship. Cina et al. (2003) compared 50 couples who received CCET with a control group who didn’t. Results showed that the CCET group reported much higher marital quality after training compared to the control group

·         Maintenance difficulties: Long distance relationships are actually quite common. 70% of the students asked had experienced a long distance relationship at some point. This is because we have developed to become a much more mobile society through social media (facebook etc) and thus management strategies have been developed. Holt and Stone (1988) found that there was little decrease in relationship satisfaction as long as lovers were able to reunite regularly

·         Tashiro and Frazier (2003) surveyed undergraduates who had recently broken up with their partner. Reported that they experienced emotional distress as well as personal growth. The breakup had given them new insights into themselves and a clearer idea about potential future partners. Through prior processes to ‘resurrection’ they were able to put the relationship to rest and get on with their lives. The theory has some credibility

·         The study (Tashiro) only focused on students meaning the sample was age bias, as students may be different to that of adults (they’re more mobile, different types of relationships may be more common i.e. long distance due to being at uni) and the wider population therefore lacking external validity 

·         Buss et al: cross cultural study using over 37 cultures and 10,000 people on mate preference. Males reported to prefer younger, physically attractive females (signs of fertility) and females looked for physically strong and athletic males with an emphasis on resources. Both are engaging in behavior that increases reproductive success

However  questionnaires used (self-report method). These can be misunderstood across cultures and may be inaccurate due to translation problems occurring through third party translators

·         Dunbar et al: looked at 4 American newspapers with over 900 personal ads reviewing mate preference. Women offered youth and physical attraction whilst men offered financial status and resources. Each offered what the other was looking for in a potential mate

the study was based only on Americans (cultural bias); kindness and intelligence was rated higher in importance from both sexes which doesn’t fully fit in with the theory

·         Singh et al: men preferred waist to hip ratio of 0.7 across cultures. This is the typical hourglass figure and a sign of fertility

·         Thornhill et al: symmetrical faces were sought by both genders and that symmetry was a sign of strong genetic fitness and strong resistance. Women also sought men with masculine features while men preferred women with childlike features i.e. full lips, good teeth, small nose (indicators of youth and fertility)

·         Buss: gender differences supported. US male students display more distress about sexual infidelity, where they are more afraid of their partner cheating on them sexually. Females experience more distress concerning emotional infidelity as this displays lack of male commitment of resources

·         Andersson et al: looked at investments by fathers in the college education of biological and step-children, finding they were highest when the biological father lived with the mother of his children. Also found they would care for step children in order to prove to their mother they will be able to provide for own offspring as well

·         Geher et al: males are adapted to view themselves and behave as if they were capable fathers even when they are not in reality. They are more desirable as potential mates this way

·         Fraley (1998): conducted a meta-analysis finding positive correlations between early attachment types and later relationships – implication here is that greater support is likely needed in the childhood stage to encourage social interaction (e.g. playgroups) as this could affect the child’s life significantly later on into adulthood with difficulties in adult relationships 

    ·          Hazen and Shaver’s love quiz (1987): a quiz in a local American newspaper in order to measure attachment type and peoples beliefs about love. Found that ppts attachment type as child positively correlated with future beliefs on relationships and love. For example, securely attached people grew up to have long term, trusting and caring relationships. Supports Bowbly’s internal working model and Shaver’s attachment system

     - volunteer sample

    - one town in America

    - Self report method

·         Kirkpatrick and Hazan (1994): relationship breakups are associated with a shift from secure to insecure attachments with significant early relationship experiences affecting current attachment types

·         Simpson et al (2007): longitudinal study spanning more than 25 years involving 78 ppts at 4 key points: infancy, early childhood, adolescence, and adulthood and they were studied on how well they interacted with friends/partners. The findings support the claim that expressions of emotions adult romantic relationships could be related back to a person’s early attachment experience. Useful because it allows researchers to observe changes in behaviour first hand as opposed to asking people to rely on memory which may be biased or affected 

Belsky et al: cited studies showing that secure women experienced less conflict with their husbands than insecure women. Secure women were also found to more likely be able to manage conflict in a mutually focused way which may explain why they experience less conflict in the first place. Secure individuals were also seen to be more committed to relationships and feel greater love for their partners à consistent with Shaver’s theory

Gender bias tho

·         Masden: tested the effects of dating behaviour in adolescence on the quality of young adult relationships. She found Moderate or low dating frequency predicted higher quality young adult relationships, whereas heavy dating predicted poorer quality young adult relationships. Suggests some dating can be advantageous for adult relationship quality, but too much can be maladaptive 

·         Coleman and Hendry (1999): close relationships with parents are still useful and result in healthy future relationships, even if breaking free from parental control may be important. They called this “connectedness”. Larson et al (1996) used pagers to find out what 10 – 18 year olds were doing at random times in the day. Amount of time spent with family have reduced a lot in adolescence (beginning to support the basis of the theory), but the time that was spent with family was consistent, suggesting that adolescent relationships supplement rather than replace parent-child relationships

·         Haynie (2003): found that romantic involvement increased some forms of deviance in adolescents by as much as 35%, showing relationships have potential negative effects rather benefit future adult relationships

·         Neemann et al (1995): romantic involvement in early adolescence was associated with decreases in academic achievement and increases in conduct problems. Shows that relationships have potential negative effects rather benefit future adult relationships. In late adolescence, romantic involvement was no longer related to these negative outcomes, suggesting that it’s the timing that determines what influence they’ll have

·         Roisman et al (2004): found no effect of romantic experiences at age 20 on romantic relationships at age 30, suggesting that there’s no consistent evidence that adolescent romantic relationships are the ‘building blocks’ of adult relationships

·         In non-western cultures marriages tend to work well with low divorce rates and in 50% of cases the spouses have even reported to have fallen in love with their partner (Epstein et al) – traditional match making in families appear to have some value

·         Gupta and Singh: studied 100 Indian marriages of educated couples. 50 were arranged and 50 were love marriages. Couples were assessed after 1, 5, and 10 years of marriage. Love marriages reported initial feelings of love as high but this decreased over time. In contrast, arranged marriages reported low feelings of love to begin with but this grew over time, suggesting arranged marriages become more successful over time

·         Gibbons: Mexican students tend to be more interdependent in their relationships due to their upbringing in a collectivist society, whereas the independence of the American students is due to their individualistic society upbringing

·         Simmel: higher divorce rates in western cultures = individualism. Encourages search for what the individual wants from a perfect partner/relationship

·         Whyte et al: women in Chengdu who married for love actually felt better about their marriages than women who had arranged marriages showing partner choice appears to be an important element in sustainable relationships regardless of culture

o    The main issue with Whyte’s research is that the sample was women only (gender bias) from Chengu (cultural bias) – this may just be a unique culture in China and may not be able to be applied to all cultures across China (not representative). Men were also not asked how happy they were, findings may not necessarily be the same case for men

·         McKenry et al found that in cultures where females have become more influential and independent, divorce rates have risen considerably. This suggests that the lower divorce rates in non-western cultures is not an indication of happy marriages but of male dominance