Revision:A2 Psychology A Level - Relationships and Cognitive Development

TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > Psychology > A2 Psychology A Level - Relationships and Cognitive Development

Formation Studies and Theories

Studies: Proximity, Similarity - Attitude, Demographics, Personality, Physical Attractiveness

Theories: Evolutionary and Reinforcement and Need Satisfaction)

The formation of relationships from research studies, suggest that there are many factors involved, such as proximity, similarity and physical attractiveness.

PROXIMITY

Festinger found by analysing students in a university complex the different relationships and found that those who were most friendliest were those who lived next door to each other, second most friendly were those who lived at least on door away and third most friendly were those who lived next to the stairs. However the least friendly were those at the end of corridors away from stairs.

In addition to this Bosard found that from 5000 pre-martial addresses of couples, that half of them lived within walking distance of each other and suggesting this is an important factor. However, this study has been criticised as being dated- 1932, and that we can travel greater distances- as well as the recent impact of the internet.

Zajonc also found suggested the “mere exposure” effect- and that where a person see’s someone more often, they begin to like them even more- however contradicting research suggests that this can often have an opposite effect and lead to dislike.

SIMILARITY - ATTITUDE

In terms of SIMILARITY, firstly ATTITUDE – Werner suggested that, “those who play together stay together”, in other words those who share similar interests in leisure activities form relationships. However, Newcomb found that after setting up students with different attitude similarities there were different results. Those who were paired up with similar attitudes to themselves- 58% of them got on. However, those who were with unsimilar attitudes – 25% of them got on. This is criticised as students were paid, and this was an artificial experiment.

DEMOGRAPHICS

In terms of DEMOGRAPHICS Kandel found after asking secondary students to identify their best friends amongst others- in the majority of cases they selected someone of the same demographics- e.g. gender, age, ethnic, race, social background.

PERSONALITY

In terms of PERSONALITY it has been suggested relationships form with people who are either similar “ birds of a feather flock together” or that “opposites attract”. Winch argued in favour that opposites attract, and he explained this was so because couples would have complimentary needs e.g. a domineering person with a submissive person would mean both their needs are complimented and fulfilled.

However, research has found that there is no notion for the statement that opposites attract.

PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS

Physical attractiveness is also said to be an important factor in the formation of relationships. The matching hypothesis theory and findings from Murstein et al and Walster et al support this.

Maintenance Theories

Theories: Economic theories- Social Exchange Theory and Equity Theory

The main assumption of the social exchange theory is that individuals try to maximise their rewards and reduce their costs. Examples of rewards include: affetion and attention, and examples of costs include: time and effort.

Also another assumption is that the rewards received from a person must be proportionate to the rewards that have previously been given by the person receiving.

Thibaut and Kelley suggested that there were 4 main stages in long-term relationships:

1. SAMPLING- This is where the costs and rewards are explored
2. BARGAINING- The costs and rewards are negotiated between the parties’
3. COMMITMENT-The costs and rewards are quite expected and predictable
4. INSTITUTIONLISATION – The costs and rewards are not firmly established

AN ADDITIONAL ASSUMPTION IS THE USE OF A COMPARISON LEVEL, WHICH SUGGESTS THAT INDIVIDUALS COMPARE TE REWARDS THEY ARE RECEIVING IN COMPARISON TO PREVIOUS RELATIONSHIPS.

The Equity Theory

This is an extension of the SET and hatfield et al suggested that this theory takes into account that rewards need to be proportionate to those given previously as mention in SET, but if there is an imbalance, it can be tolerated as long as the parties’ can accept the situation.

The main assumption were expressed by Walster et al. He suggested that firstly that rewards are maximised by individuals and costs and minimised. Secondly those in an inequitable relationship will feel distressed if they are the most disadvantaged. Thirdly, the person that will usually be trying to make the relationship equitable will be the one who is disadvantaged. Lastly, he expressed that were there was an imbalance, it could be adjusted by the other party compensating for it. For example, if a person goes away from the party to play sport once a week, they could go shopping to make up for it.

This is further supported by research asking couples how they felt about their marriages in relation to the amount of rewards received. Those who received the most rewards, felt guilty, those who had the least rewards, felt angry. However, most interestingly, those who found their relationship equitable were the most content.

EVALUATION

There is research to suggest that those who concentrate on exchange and equity are the least happiest in their relationships, compared to those who do not focus on an equal amount of rewards and costs. Furthermore this does not take into account non-western cultures.

Comments

• Suitable for: A2 Psychology
• Written by: JohnnyJamJar
• From this thread.