AQA A level psychology year 2 relationships revision notes
15 mal angesehen 0 mal verkauft
Kurs
Relationships
Hochschule
AQA
Book
AQA Psychology for A Level Year 2
- Year 2 relationships
- All material is covered in these notes
- AO1 in an extensive amount with A03
- Evaluations are all in PEEL format
- All possible 16 markers are covered
AQA A level psychology year 2 forensics psychology lesson notes
AQA A level psychology year 2 stress revision notes
Alles für dieses Buch (22)
Schule, Studium & Fach
A/AS Level
AQA
Psychology
Relationships
Alle Dokumente für dieses Fach (170)
Verkäufer
Folgen
sadiajannat
Inhaltsvorschau
Relationship:
Evolutionary explanation for partners preferences
- Darwin came up with a theory called sexual selection to explain why certain traits were passed down
- Sexual selection is an evolutionary explanation for partner preferences. Attributes or behaviours that
increase reproductive success are passed on and may become exaggerated over succeeding generations
- Natural selection focuses on traits that enhances survival whereas sexual selection looks at traits that
enhance reproduction for instance physical attractiveness
- Some traits can be described as a genetic fitness
- These traits allow both survival and reproduction
- For example, someone who can digest dairy. When food supply is low but dairy is available it gives them
survival advantages. Those who are able to continue to grow for this reason can then reproduce.
- Other traits can be adapted for sexual selection eg aggressiveness
- Human reproductive behaviour: This refers to any behaviours which relate to opportunities to reproduce
and thereby increase the survival chances of our genes. It includes the evolutionary mechanism underlying
our partner preferences eg mate choice and mate competition
- Basically some people act a certain way to enhance their reproductive success with someone
- Human reproductive behaviour is a result of anisogamy (differences between a male and female sex cell)
- The male sex cell is much smaller and has no shortage of fertile males
- Females are larger but you can have fertile females over time as they stop producing egg cells
- As a result women are more likely to be selective in choosing a mate
- Males can produce many sperm cells and so could potentially mate with multiple females. However, not
all males have access to fertile females. This leads to competition among males for the chance to mate
- Anisogamy then leads to inter sexual selection and intra sexual selection
- Inter sexual selection: It is a preferred strategy for females as they choose quality over quantity.
- If wrong choices are made for a partner it’s more serious for the woman
- As a result, women are more picky for a genetically fit partner. This is because whoever she chooses her
offspring will carry their gene to also have specific traits which will then be passed on to their offsprings
- This is known as the runaway process - when characteristics become exaggerated over generations
- Fisher (1930) “sexy son hypothesis” - A trait that is passed on because it was a characteristic that was
admired and therefore chosen to reproduce and can be seen in many offsprings
- Intra sexual selection: It is a preferred strategy of a male to choose quantity of quality. They prioritise
mating with as many females as they can rather than being selective about the quality of each mate
- This type of sexual selection leads to dimorphism where males and females end up looking different
- For instance, many women prefer men to be more muscular or preferably larger. This provides a driving
force in evolutionary processes. More men will adapt to this in order to be the preferred male that
females mate with. Over generations larger males will be seen as they were successful in intra sexual
competition. This is what leads to the different characteristics in men and women
Evaluation:
- P: One strength is that there is evidence to suggest that women are more ‘choosy’ when it comes to
heterosexual partner preferences.
- E: Clark and Hatfield (1989) sent male and female students to university for an experiment. They asked
the opposite gender “I have noticed you are campus. I find you to be very attractive. Would you go to
bed with me tonight?”
- E: No females agreed however 75% of males did.
- L: This shows that women are more choosy supporting inter-sexual selection and that males have a
different strategy to reproduce.
,- P: On the other some researchers believe the theory of sexual selection to be too simplistic
- E: Buss and Schmitt (2016) sexual strategies theory suggest that when looking for a long term
relationship both males and females adopt similar matching strategies to find a partner.
- E: They both want loyal, kind and loving partners to raise their offspring with.
- L: This suggests that there could be other factors for choosing a reproductive mate which the sexual
theory does not explain.
- P: Another strength is evidence to support the predictions of sexual selection theory.
- E: Buss (1989) asked over 10,000 students in 33 countries questions relating to a variety of attributes that
sexual theory predicts are important in partner preferences.
- E: He found that females place greater value on resource-related characteristics than males did (good
financial prospects and ambition) Males valued physical attractiveness and youth more than females did.
- L: These findings reflect consistent sex differences in partner preferences which support the predictions
from sexual selection theory.
- P: One limitation is that evolutionary theories overlook the influences of social and cultural factors.
- E: Bereczkei et al (1997) argued that social change has consequences to how a person decides about what
they want in a partner.
- E: These changes include use of contraception, women in the workforce and homosexual relationships.
- L: This theory therefore has limited application as it doesn’t take in social and cultural factors.
Factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships: Self-disclosure
- Self disclosure is revealing personal information about yourself. Romantic partners reveal more about
their true selves as their relationships develop. Self disclosure about a person's deepest thoughts and
feelings can strengthen a relationship when it is used appropriately
- Taylors and Altman came up with the Social penetration theory (SPT)
- The social penetration theory is the gradual process of self disclosure to deepen a relationship
- This would lead to a reciprocal response so that the person can reveal a little bit more about themselves
- Social penetration theory has two elements - breadth and depth
- Breadth is how a relationship starts off. We don’t share personal information, but we do share
information we would with our friends and coworkers - ‘Low-risk’ information
- Depth is when we are ready to share deeper experiences - ‘high-risk’ information
- Depenetration is how dissatisfied partners self disclose when they pull away from the relationship
- Reis and Shaver (1988) suggested for a relationship to develop there needs to be a reciprocal element to
disclosure
Evaluation:
- P: One strength about self disclosure from SPT is that it has been supported by other research.
- E: Spretcher and Hendrick (2004) studied heterosexual relationships and found a strong correlation
between satisfaction and self-disclosure.
- E: Both partners in the relationship that self disclosed, and believed that the other partner did, were
more satisfied and committed in their relationship.
- L: This increases the validity of the theory as reciprocated self disclosure leads to more satisfaction.
- P: On the other hand, most of the research to support self disclosure is correlational.
- E: Correlation does not always mean causation so we can’t draw a valid conclusion from it.
- E: It could mean that the more satisfied a partner is, the more they choose to self disclose or even
satisfaction and self disclosure may be independent of each other and both are caused by a third variable
eg the amount of time a partner spends together can increase both self disclosure and satisfaction.
- L: Therefore self disclosure may not cause satisfaction directly reducing the validity of the SPT.
,- P: Another strength is it can help people who want to improve their communication in relationships.
- E: Haas and Stafford (1998) found that 57% of homosexual men and women said that open and honest
self disclosure was the main way they maintained and deepened their relationship
- E: Less skilled partners can learn to use self disclosure to achieve several benefits to their relationship in
terms of deepening satisfaction and commitment
- L: This shows that psychological insight can be valuable in helping people who are having problems in rs.
- P: Another limitation is increasing depth and breadth of self-disclosure may not lead to a more satisfying
relationship in all cultures.
- E: Taang et al (2013) reviewed research into sexual self-disclosure. They concluded that men and women
in the US (individualist culture) self-disclose more than men and women in china (collectivist cultures)
- E: Despite the lower levels in self disclosure, levels in satisfaction were both the same.
- L: Therefore self disclosure theory has limited application from individualist cultures which can’t be.
generalised to other cultures.
Factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships: Physical attractiveness
- Physical attractiveness: An important factor in the formation of romantic relationships. The term applies
to how appealing we find someone's face to be. We seek to form a relationship with the most attractive
person available
- Larsen (1997) found that people with symmetrical faces are rated as more attractive. This could be due to
a signal of genetic fitness
- Those with neotenous features (baby features) can also be seen as attractive because they trigger a
protective or caring instinct
- The halo effect is a term used to describe how a distinguishing feature (such as physical attraction) has an
influence on our judgement of a person's other attributes. For example their personality
- Those who are physically attractive are associated with the belief that they are kind, strong, sociable, and
likeable. (Dion et al) As a result we behave more positively to them because these characteristics make
them more attractive to us
- Matching hypothesis: The belief that we do not select the most attractive person as a prospective partner
but instead we are attracted to a person who matches us in physical attractiveness. (This implies that we
take into account our own attractiveness, intelligence, and personality when seeking a romantic partner.)
- Walster and walster (1969) tested their hypothesis by a study called ‘The computer dance’
- Procedure: Male and females were asked to dance. They completed a questionnaire about themselves,
and observers rated how attractive they thought the participants were. They were then told the data
about themselves and were told they would be matched with someone similar to themselves (they were
actually paired randomly)
- Findings: The most liked partners were the most attractive and this did not match their own level of
attraction they were given (Findings did not support the hypothesis)
- When the study was replicated by Berscheid (1971) when the participant was able to select their own
partners they chose people similar to themselves
- Conclusion: we select people who we consider are “within our league’. For example, you rate yourself a
6/10 we you would be going for someone around that too due to the fear of rejection
Evaluation:
- P: One strength is evidence that physical attractiveness is associated with a halo effect.
- E: Palmer and Peterson (2012) found that physically attractive people were rated as more politically
knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people.
- E: This halo effect was so powerful that it persisted even when participants knew they had no expertise.
- L: These findings show implications for the political process. (dangers for democracy if politicians are
judged as suitable for office just because they are considered physically attractive by enough voters)
, - P: Another strength of physical attractiveness is research support for evolutionary processes.
- E: Cunningham et al. (1995) found that women who had features of large eyes, prominent cheekbones,
small nose and high eyebrows were rated as highly attractive by white, Hispanic and Asian men.
- E: The researchers concluded that what is considered physically attractive is remarkably consistent across
different societies. Attractive features (symmetry) are a sign of genetic fitness and therefore perpetuated
similarly in all cultures (sexual selection).
- L: Therefore the importance of physical attractiveness makes sense at an evolutionary level.
- P: One limitation is that the matching hypothesis is not supported by real-world research into dating.
- E: Taylor et al. (2011) studied the activity logs of a popular online dating site. This was a real-world test of
the matching hypothesis because it measured actual date choices and not merely preferences.
- E: The researchers found that online daters sought meetings with potential partners who were more
physically attractive than them.
- L: This undermines the validity of the matching hypothesis because it contradicts the central prediction
about matching attractiveness.
- P: However, choosing people to date could be considered a different situation from selecting a partner for
a romantic relationship.
- E: Feingold (1988) carried out a meta-analysis of 17 studies and found a significant correlation in ratings
of physical attractiveness between romantic partners.
- E: Also, just because online daters seek more attractive partners does not mean that they get them.
- L: This shows that there is support for the matching hypothesis from other studies.
Factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships: Filter theory
- Kerckhoff and Davis (1962) designed the filter theory to explain how romantic relationships form
- Filter theory is an explanation of how a relationship is formed. It states that a series of different factors
progressively reduces the range of available romantic partners to a much smaller pool of possibilities. The
filters include social demography, similarity in attitudes and complementarity.
- There are people available if we want to be in a relationship but, not all of these people are desirable
- The filter theory consists of three main factors that help us to narrow down our field of availability down
to our field of desirability (social demography, similarity in attitudes and complimentary)
- Social demography: Demographics are features that describe populations, social demographics include
geographical location and social class. Such factors filter out a large number of available partners. This
means many relationships are formed between partners who share social demographic characteristics
- For example, you are more likely to be with someone who shares the same religion or ethnicity
- The outcome of this filtering is known as homogamy (a relationship with someone who is socially or
culturally similar)
- Similarity in attitudes: We find partners who share our basic values attractive in the earlier stages of a
relationship, so we tend to discount available individuals who differ markedly from us in their attitudes.
- This is important for the couples who have been together less than 18 months and the development of
their relationship
- Their is a need to agree on basic values as it creates greater and deeper communication (self-disclosure)
- Byrne (1997) found that similarity causes attraction. He called this the law of attraction
- Complementarity: similarity becomes less important as a relationship develops, and is replaced by a need
for your partner to balance your traits with opposite ones of their own.
- This is to meet each other’s needs in order for a long term relationship to work out
- In the later stage of the relationship opposites attract
Alle Vorteile der Zusammenfassungen von Stuvia auf einen Blick:
Garantiert gute Qualität durch Reviews
Stuvia Verkäufer haben mehr als 700.000 Zusammenfassungen beurteilt. Deshalb weißt du dass du das beste Dokument kaufst.
Schnell und einfach kaufen
Man bezahlt schnell und einfach mit iDeal, Kreditkarte oder Stuvia-Kredit für die Zusammenfassungen. Man braucht keine Mitgliedschaft.
Konzentration auf den Kern der Sache
Deine Mitstudenten schreiben die Zusammenfassungen. Deshalb enthalten die Zusammenfassungen immer aktuelle, zuverlässige und up-to-date Informationen. Damit kommst du schnell zum Kern der Sache.
Häufig gestellte Fragen
Was bekomme ich, wenn ich dieses Dokument kaufe?
Du erhältst eine PDF-Datei, die sofort nach dem Kauf verfügbar ist. Das gekaufte Dokument ist jederzeit, überall und unbegrenzt über dein Profil zugänglich.
Zufriedenheitsgarantie: Wie funktioniert das?
Unsere Zufriedenheitsgarantie sorgt dafür, dass du immer eine Lernunterlage findest, die zu dir passt. Du füllst ein Formular aus und unser Kundendienstteam kümmert sich um den Rest.
Wem kaufe ich diese Zusammenfassung ab?
Stuvia ist ein Marktplatz, du kaufst dieses Dokument also nicht von uns, sondern vom Verkäufer sadiajannat. Stuvia erleichtert die Zahlung an den Verkäufer.
Werde ich an ein Abonnement gebunden sein?
Nein, du kaufst diese Zusammenfassung nur für 5,68 €. Du bist nach deinem Kauf an nichts gebunden.
