Economic theories only apply to Western relationships in individualistic countries - very mobile and experience many short-term relationships so are concerned with short-term give and take. Collectivist cultures more concerned with commitment
1 of 22
Huseman (1987)
Benevolents - prepared to contribute more to a relationship. Entitleds - feel they deserve to be overbenefitted
2 of 22
Hatfield (1989)
Found underbenefitted partners felt angry and deprived, and overbenefitted partners felt guilty and uncomfortable
3 of 22
Goodfriend and Agnew (2008)
Future plans invested and planned may also be a motivation for commitment
4 of 22
Agnew et al (2003)
Meta-analysis 11000 PPs - satisfaction, CLalt and investment predicted commitment - for men, women, across cultures and homosexual couples
5 of 22
Flemlee (1995)
Attraction hypothesis - breakdown cause by getting too much of what you asked for - explains hatred
6 of 22
Rollie and Duck
Resurrection phase - preparation for future relationships using past experiences. Also not a completely linear process
7 of 22
Clarke and Hatfield (1989)
Psychology students on university campus asked other students whether they would have sex with them - 0% of females asked agreed, 75% men agreed - supports different strategies
8 of 22
Altman and Taylor (1973)
Self-disclosure
9 of 22
Sprecher and Hendrick (2004)
Studied heterosexual dating couples, found strong correlations between satisfaction and self-disclosure being reciprocal
10 of 22
Shackelford and Larsen (1997)
People with symmetrical faces are rated as more attractive, possibly due to it being a sign of general health
11 of 22
Taylor (2011)
Online daters sought meetings with potential partners who were more physically attractive that them. Other factors involved eg self-esteem
12 of 22
Kim (1997)
Korean and American students judged physically attractive people to be trustworthy and friendly. But this does not support the idea physical attractiveness is a crucial factor in relationship formation!
13 of 22
Kerkhoff and Davis (1962)
Filter theory
14 of 22
Davis and Rusbult (2001)
Attitude alignment hypothesis - partners aligned their attitudes with their partners attitudes because they were attracted to them
15 of 22
Thibault and Kelley (1959)
Social exchange theory
16 of 22
Sproull and Kiesler (1986)
Reduced-cues theory
17 of 22
Walther (1996)
Hyperpersonal model
18 of 22
McKenna and Bargh (2000)
Socially anxious people who used CMC were more likely to self-disclose than in FtF - 70% lasted more than 2 years
19 of 22
Whitty and Johnson (2009)
Questions asked online are more direct and intimate. FtF involves a a lot of small talk - supports hyperpersonal model
20 of 22
McCutcheon (2002)
Parasocial relationships
21 of 22
Schmid and Klimmt (2011)
Found similar levels of parasocial attachment to Harry Potter in individualistic and collectivist cultures
22 of 22
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Benevolents - prepared to contribute more to a relationship. Entitleds - feel they deserve to be overbenefitted
Back
Huseman (1987)
Card 3
Front
Found underbenefitted partners felt angry and deprived, and overbenefitted partners felt guilty and uncomfortable
Back
Card 4
Front
Future plans invested and planned may also be a motivation for commitment
Back
Card 5
Front
Meta-analysis 11000 PPs - satisfaction, CLalt and investment predicted commitment - for men, women, across cultures and homosexual couples
Comments
No comments have yet been made