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;
18 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Self-disclosure: Social penetration theory |
Gradual process of revealing self to someone Has to be reciprocal Release information = display trust |
|
|
Self disclosure: breadth and depth |
Breadth: Altman and Taylor We disclose a lot at start of relationship but it's superficial, low risk info
Depth: as relationship develops, self-disclosure becomes deeper Eventually revealing intimate, high risk infoevalua |
|
|
Self-disclosure: evaluation 1 |
Research support: Sprecher and Hendrick (2004) Strong positive correlations between several measures of relationship satisfaction and self-disclosure.
✅✅✅ |
|
|
Self-disclosure: evaluation 2 |
Real life applications: Hass and Stafford (1998) 57% of gay men and women said open and honest self disclosure was main reason why they maintained relationship.
✅✅✅ |
|
|
Self-disclosure: evaluation 3 |
Cultural differences: Tang et al (2013) Reviewed research and found men/women in USA disclose significantly more than men/women in China
❌❌❌ |
|
|
Physical attractiveness: the halo effect |
A stereotype = preconceived ideas about personality traits of attractive people Always positive: kind, strong, sociable, successful |
|
|
Physical attractiveness: the matching hypothesis |
Elaine Walster (1966) Everyone can't form relationships w/ most attractiveness People choose romantic partners who are roughly of similar physical attractiveness to them. |
|
|
Physical attractiveness: evaluation 1 |
Research into halo effect: Palmer and Peterson (2012) Found physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people Supports halo effect ✅✅✅ |
|
|
Physical attractiveness: evaluation 2 |
Individual differences: Towhey said some people are more influenced by physical attractiveness than others.
❌❌❌ |
|
|
Physical attractiveness: evaluation 3 |
Mainly applies to short term relationships: When choosing long term partner people tend to focus more on similarity of values and needs satisfaction. People may compensate attractiveness with other traits.
❌❌❌ |
|
|
Filter theory: social demography (1st filter level) |
Factors: proximity, social class, level of education, ethnic group, religion etc Anyone too different (too far away, too middle class) is discounted. Outcome of this is homogamy= more likely to form relationship with someone socially/culturally similar |
|
|
Filter theory: social demography (1st filter level) |
Factors: proximity, social class, level of education, ethnic group, religion etc Anyone too different (too far away, too middle class) is discounted. Outcome of this is homogamy= more likely to form relationship with someone socially/culturally similar |
|
|
Filter theory: similarity in attitudes (2nd filter level) |
Partners often share beliefs etc due to first filter Kerckhoff and Davis (1962) found similarity of attitudes was important in relationship development but only up to 18 months. Need for partners to share basic values in early stages - self disclosure |
|
|
Filter theory: complementarity (3rd filter level) |
Ability of partners to meet each others needs 2 partners compliment each other when they have traits the other lacks Kerckhoff and Davis found complementarity important in long term couples |
|
|
Filter theory: evaluation 1 |
Research support: Peter Winch (1958) found similarities of personality, interests and attitudes are typical at early stages of relationship. ✅✅✅ |
|
|
Filter theory: evaluation 2 |
Failure to replicate: George Levinger (1974) pointed out that many studies have failed to replicate original findings that formed basis of filter theory. Due to social changes over time
❌❌❌ |
|
|
Filter theory: evaluation 2 |
Failure to replicate: George Levinger (1974) pointed out that many studies have failed to replicate original findings that formed basis of filter theory. Due to social changes over time
❌❌❌ |
|
|
Filter theory: evaluation 3 |
Direction of cause and effect: filter theory suggests people are attracted to each other because of similarities. Anderson et al (2003) found cohabiting partners became more similar in emotional responses over time = emotional convergence
❌❌❌ |
