Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
5 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Duck's 1982 Phase Model of romantic relationship breakup (how) |
Duck proposed a phase model that predicted the stages of relationship breakup: 1. IntraPsychic Phase - issues, but not voicing them 2. Dyadic Phase - talking to their partners 3. Social Phase - talk to other people (friends) Duck was not satisfied with his original phase model so he added to extra stages alongside Rollie (2006) 0. Breakdown Process - when one party in the relationship reaches a point when they consider the r. should finish. If things do not improve and dissatisfaction is great enough, they move to next phase. 5. Resurrection Process - Where person moves on to another [possibly] relationship. Learn from previous mistakes and think about what they want in future r's. |
|
|
Evidence supporting Duck's Theory of R. break-up |
Tashiro and Frazier (2003) surveyed undergraduates who'd recently broken up with a romantic partner. They reported they'd experienced emotional distress but had also experienced personal growth. They reported that breakup had given them new insights into selves and given clearer ideas about future partners. Through grave dressing and resurrection processes they could put original r. to rest and get on with their lives. Duck's research has led to useful app. The Couples Coping Enhancement Training (CCET) programme aims to sensitise couples to issues of equity and respect within r. and improve communication. and problem-solv. skills. Cina et al (2003) compared 5 couples (average length of r. 12 years) who received CCET training with a group who did not. Results showed the CCET group reported much higher marital quality after training compared to control. |
|
|
Evaluation of research into relationship breakdown |
Strengths SBE High face validity - can identify stages in our own and others r. breakdowns Identifies breakdown as process rather than event - it is a culmination rather than a moment Identifies importance of social factors - opinions of others Duck's phase offers insight which has led to interventions appropriate for that phase (Relate counselling) In later stages people outside may help patch up the marriage Led to CCET - effective training Weaknesses Socially sensitive issue - participants may experience distress when re-examining issues leading to breakdown Stage Model is incomplete because it doesn't consider WHY dissatisfaction first developed Not all couples break up in same sequence - e.g. talk to friends FIRST Methodology can be criticised for self reports - could give socially desirable answers weakening theory's support Heterosexual bias in research samples - homosexual couples could have different dynamic Culture bias - assume couples have same opportunity to leave (which may not be true in non-Western cultures) |
|
|
Duck's Factor Theory of Relationship Breakup (why) |
This theory identifies several factors that lead to relationship breakdown, including - Lack of interpersonal skills Maintenance difficulties Gender differences in expectations Cultural differences |
|
|
Evidence to support factor theory |
Relationships may be difficult because people lack the interpersonal skills to make them mutually satisfying. Individuals lacking like this may be poor conversationalists, poor at indicating interest, and generally unrewarding in interactions with others (found by Duck, 1991). This perception that they are not interested leads to a relationship breakdown. Baxter 1994 found that lack of stimulation (boredom or belief the r. has no momentum) is quoted when breaking up. People expect change / development, and when they don't get it they decide to end it or begin another (affair). Maintenance - Partners can't see each other enough. Going away to uni for example places great strain on relationships - Shaver et al. 1985 says it is often responsible for the breakdown. But some Long Distance Relationships do survive reduced proximity and are more common than perhaps thought. One study found 70% of students had experienced at least 1 LDRR and 90% had one LDFriendship (Rohlfing 1998). Holt and Stone (1988) found there was little decrease in r. satisfaction as long as lovers could reunite regularly. Gender differences - Women are more likely to stress unhappiness and incompatibility as reasons for dissolution, whereas men are upset by sexual withholding (Brehm and Kassin, 1996). Culture - Non-western r's form differently and different pressures lead to dissolution. Research has shown that if a couple moves to a different culture, the influence of the community that helped form their relationship is threatened, potentially leading to relationship breakdown. |
