Romantic relationships- formation, maintenance and breakdown research cards

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: Robyn
  • Created on: 16-01-14 10:01
Griffitt and Guay (1969)- Support for reward/need satisfaction theory (direct reinforcement)
pps were evaluated on a creative task by an experimenter and then asked to rate how much they liked the experimenter. They liked the experimenter more if they had been positively evaluated.
1 of 15
Griffitt and Guay- Support for the rewards/needs satisfaction theory (association)
pps had to say how much they liked the onlooker of their evaluation. The onlooker was liked more when the pp was evaluated positively.
2 of 15
Cate et al (1982)- Support for rewards/needs satisfaction theory
337 individuals asked to assess their current relationships in terms of reward level and satisfaction. Results showed that reward level was superior to all other factors in relationship satisfaction.
3 of 15
Lehr and Geher (2006)- Support for similarity & reciprocal liking
study of 24 male and 32 female students, Pps given a description of a stranger, the stranger either liked or disliked pp. pp measured for liking of stranger= higher when similar and stranger 'liked' the pp. Support for similarity & reciprocal liking
4 of 15
Aron et al (2005)- support for importance of rewards
pps who measured very high on a self-report questionnaire of romantic lovealso showed strong activity in areas of the brain- ventral tegmental area. Early-stage intense romance= high activity of subcortical reward regions= dopamine.
5 of 15
Rosenbaum (1986)- weakens similarity model, however disproven
dissimilarity rather than similarity was the more important factor in whether a relationship will form. DISSIMILARITY REPULSION HYPOTHESIS has been tested in other cultures, however found dissimilarities= less attraction.
6 of 15
Yoshida (1972)- limitations of similarity model
There is only a narrow view of factors important in relationship formation, because research has only been based on attitude and personality similarities
7 of 15
Simpson et al (1990)- support for SET- how people in a relationship deal with alternatives
asked pps to rate members of the opposite sex in terms of attractiveness. Pps already in relationships gave lower ratings.
8 of 15
Marelich et al (2008)- support for SET- sex as an exchange resource (as a reward and the cost of sexual deception)
Surveyed 267 students in the US, finding that men were more likely to use blatant lies to have sex, while women were more likely to have sex to avoid confrontation, gain partner approval and promote intimacy.
9 of 15
Clark and Mills (1979)- Undermines equity theory
Disagreed that all relationships were based on economics. Distinguished between exchange and communal relationships. Although exchange may mean keeping track of costs and rewards, communal= desire to respond to needs of partner.
10 of 15
Steil and Weltman (1991)- gender differences in equity theory
among married working couples, husbands who earned more than their wives rated their careers as more important. Women of such couples also felt their husbands' careers were more important. When woman earned more- neither was more important
11 of 15
Duck (1999)- reasons for breakdown
lack of skills. Lack of stimulation. Maintenance difficulties
12 of 15
Rollie and Duck (2006)- processes of breakdown
five 'processes' of breakdown: intrapsychic, Dyadic, Social, Grave dressing, Resurrection
13 of 15
Tashiro and Frazier (2003)- real life support for Duck and Rollie
surveyed undergrads who had recently broken up.Typically reported that they had experienced emotional distress and personal growth. Reported that break up= new insights into themselves and clearer idea of future partners.
14 of 15
Brehm and Kassin (1996)- gender differences in reasons for breakdown
Women are more likely to stress unhappiness and incompatibility as reasons, men get particularly upset by sexual withholding
15 of 15

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Griffitt and Guay- Support for the rewards/needs satisfaction theory (association)

Back

pps had to say how much they liked the onlooker of their evaluation. The onlooker was liked more when the pp was evaluated positively.

Card 3

Front

Cate et al (1982)- Support for rewards/needs satisfaction theory

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Lehr and Geher (2006)- Support for similarity & reciprocal liking

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Aron et al (2005)- support for importance of rewards

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Relationships resources »