The Student Room Group
Reply 1
oooh rep me!

right....info - i dont know anything about Lee...only just found him in my other textbook!
Dont really know what ya want...but here's me helping! :

ive got commentary on reasons why r'ships break down!
Felmlee (1995) - a partners behaviour which once may have been attractive are not anymore and gradually become annoying!
Some R'ships do survive reduced proximity e.g long distance r'ships and are more common than we think. Rohfling. 1988, found 70 % of students sampled had experienced at least one Long distance r'ships and 90% has experienced a long distance friendship.
Holt & Stone (1988) found that there was little decrease in r'ships satisfaction as long as lovers were able to reunite regularly.

Duck 1999, may apply to only certain groups of ppl. non WEstern R'ships may be formed differently and it is therefore that differnt pressures will function in their dissolution. e.g if a couple move to a differnt culture, the influence on the ciimmuntiy & their commitment may be threatened, leading to r'ship breakdown

Breham and Kassin (1996) women are more likely to stress unhappinmess whilst men are particulary upset by 'sexual withholding'
Akert (1988) woemen are more likely to stay friends after a r'ship breaks up. whereas men want to cut their losses.

dont know if you have this :
Commentary on Ducks model
Lee 1984 research also led to a stage modle and there is a strength in that it focuses on the early stages when a r'ship may be saved. in ducks, there is more focus on the beginning and end with little in the middle.

both show dissolution is not a sudden step process

neither explain why r'ships break down....just describe the process.
Akert, 1998 found that students experiences in breaking up both partners were involeved in decisions tht had to be made the fewer physical symptoms they experienced.

this is from my usual textbook....so sorry if it repeats stuff : ( its all about Duck...ok)
Evaluation of ToRD (theory of Relationship Dissolution)
it makes common sense and it a good account as to why r'ships break down and can relate to it.
the view of r'ship dissolution as a process underlying ToRD is an important insight, which is now widely accepted.
ToRD doesnt focus exclusively on the individual partner but takes his/her social context into account.
ToRD doesnt take into account why the dissatisfaction has arisen in the first place. in this respect it fails to give a full account of dissolution.
As with all such theories, ToRD's 4 phases may not apply in every or even most cases of r'ship break down!

think that is all i have and hope it was some help....oh thats for pointing out Lee....never heard of him in my usual textbook! thank you!
Reply 2
*gives rep in a nice basket with scones and muffins*
Reply 3
Also, Akert (1992) found that relationship dissolution affected different people in different ways. Akert found that those who did not initiate the dissolution suffered greater depression and lonlieness than those who initiated it. Those who started the break up had few ill effects, mostly a feeling a guilt.
Reply 4
Here are a few evaluative points which you may find helpful:

1) Both models are too descriptive as they don't explain why relationships breakdown.

2) Huge ethical issues. Studying two people as their relationship breaks down is unethical and could lead to further distress. Huge psychological and physiological issues occur after breaking down, and asking questions about their breakdown can tip them over the edge. It's best to research in retrospect, although there maybe inaccuracies.

3) The models are reductionist as biological, cultural and situational factors are neglected.

4) Duck's model is universal, so it fails to take into account individual differences.

5) Both models only look at relationships concerning heterosexual types.
Reply 5
Lovely, thanks guys, I will rep you two as well once I have some spare

Latest

Trending

Trending