These materials are the intellectual property of Lotus Mohammad and are for personal use only. Any reproduction,
distribution, or sharing without explicit written permission is strictly prohibited.
Detailed 16 marker plans for Relationships (Paper 3)
Discuss evolutionary explanations for partner preferences (16).
AO1
S- Selection of a partner is explained by evolutionary theory through sexual selection.
E- This refers to how behaviours and attributes in partners can maximise their chance of
reproductive success to become exaggerated in their offspring - those with advantageous traits
om
are more likely to be chosen as a preferred partner as they show reproductive fitness
AO1
S- Intersexual selection is one type of sexual selection, referring to the difference between men
l.c
and women and how women choose their partners based on desirable qualities.
E- This could manifest as male display and female fertility. This is where males display their
wealth and ability to provide both physically (e.g. height) and materially, whereas females
ai
display their fertility levels through physical attributes such as a desirable waist-to-hip ratio, and
general signs of youthfulness and good health, such as long hair.
gm
AO1
S- The second type of sexual selection is intrasexual selection, referring to the way males
compete for females, which leads to dimorphism
@
E- This is done through competition with other males via physical attributes such as height,
muscles, competitiveness, aggression, and more where females choose who is most physically
fit, but because females don’t compete for any attention, they evolve to be smaller and less
72
muscular, which leads to physical dimorphism, which is the differences between males and
females
ct
AO3
P- One strength of sexual selection is supporting evidence.
so
E- For instance, Clarke and Hatfield 1989 conducted a field experiment where attractive
strangers asked participants if they would go to bed with them, and found that 75% of men said
yes, while 0% of women said yes
tu
E- This shows that men are relatively more likely to base their choices for partners based on
physical attributes such as youthfulness, while women are more likely to be weary and reject
lo
men competing for them, which is support for the theory of female choosiness.
L- Therefore, this research increases the validity for the evolutionary explanation of sexual
selection, increasing its usefulness in explaining relationships in humans.
AO3
P- One weakness of this theory is that it is limited in its explanation.
E- For instance, when explaining attraction in homosexual couples or any other members of the
LGBT community, this study fails to explain how people make their choices of partners.
,
These materials are the intellectual property of Lotus Mohammad and are for personal use only. Any reproduction,
distribution, or sharing without explicit written permission is strictly prohibited.
E- This is because reproductive success and passing on advantageous alleles has virtually no
value in the choices of homosexual relationships, so sexual selection with the aim of finding
youthful, fertile traits is irrelevant, deeming this explanation limited.
L- Therefore, the validity of this explanation is limited and it cannot be used in all explanations of
partner preferences and modern relationships.
AO3
P- Another strength of this theory is more supporting evidence.
om
E- For example, research by Daly & Wilson (2001) found that young men who live in dangerous
neighbourhoods with a high homicide rate are more likely to take risks and put themselves in
danger in order to attract women
E- This shows that they are competing with other men to attract women, with the goal of passing
l.c
on their genes while they are still able to do so, so hoping to continue their bloodline and pass
on their genes to their offspring
L- Therefore, the validity of intrasexual selection is increased due to supporting conclusions in
ai
many studies.
AO3
gm
P- Lastly, a limitation of the theory is that it suffers from alpha bias between genders
E- This is seen as it exaggerates the differences between males and females in their
choosiness or mechanisms to finding a partner through explanations such as anisogamy
@
E- This is a weakness as it may be that both males and females look for similar traits that are
not necessarily about resources or physical traits. These traits could cover a middle ground and
be important for both sexes such as kindness or emotional maturity, where attraction can be
72
irrelevant to the nature of the gender, as seen in some sexualities such as pansexual
individuals.
L- Therefore, the validity and usefulness of intersexual selection is decreased as it is inherently
ct
flawed in explaining the formation of relationships
so
Discuss factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships. (16)
AO1
S- There are three factors which affect romantic attraction. The first of which is self-disclosure,
tu
which is the exchange of information about the self to another person
E- This is most widely explained by Social Penetration Theory, which states that information is
lo
shared in a shallow to deep order, following the steps outlined: superficial, intimate, personal,
core. Increased deepness increases trust, promoting increased attraction
AO1
S- Another factor affecting attraction is physical attraction, which is how physical attributes are
perceived and how they can lead to an increased romantic attraction
E- This can be explained by the matching hypothesis, stating that people are likely to choose
partners of similar attractiveness to them. This is a cognitive process by which people internally
rate their own attractiveness, and then aim to find people in the range of their attractiveness +/-1
,
These materials are the intellectual property of Lotus Mohammad and are for personal use only. Any reproduction,
distribution, or sharing without explicit written permission is strictly prohibited.
AO1
S- The third factor is Filter theory, which is the mechanism by which people narrow down the
pool of romantic considerations
E- This has three steps: social demography, which relies on the practicality of the couple,
including factors such as proximity and similar religious views to narrow down a field of
availables. Next, similarity in attitudes is considered where people choose those with a similar
world view to narrow down available to desirables. Last, complementarity, the idea of a couple
om
matching and completing one another, eventually causes people to find partners
AO3
P- One strength of self-disclosure is real-world application.
l.c
E- For example, in Western cultures, there is a strong emphasis on communication within
relationships, and this importance forms the foundations of marriage counselling.
E- This is because usually, couples will form a foundation on the details they share with each
ai
other, finding commonalities and mutual interests and experiences which strengthen their bond,
and upon conflict, councillors immediately resort to creating a safe space for the couple to begin
gm
deeper communication and resolve issues which stem from unsaid feelings. This strongly
solidifies the importance of self-disclosure in creating and maintaining relationships.
L- Therefore, the application of self-disclosure in the real world and in psychological counselling
improves the usefulness of the theory in explaining attraction in relationships
@
AO3
P- However, a weakness of physical attractiveness’s matching hypothesis opposing evidence
72
E- For instance, Taylor et al. (2011) investigated the matching hypothesis using the activity logs
of an online dating site, and found that people do not necessarily apply the matching hypothesis
when it comes to dating decisions, professing a preference for the most attractive
ct
males/females on the site
E- This means that studies validating the matching hypothesis lacks temporal and external
so
validity, because novel applications of internet sites to relationships introduces new aspects of
attraction where reciprocity is not a direct consequence, so the matching hypothesis fails to take
account of how the development of long-distance or online relationships decreases how much
tu
people focus on their own attraction level in comparison to their partners’
L- Therefore, the overall validity and usefulness of the matching hypothesis as an explanation
lo
for attraction in romantic relationships is decreased due to opposing evidence in relation to
internet dating.
AO3
P- A strength of filter theory is supporting evidence
E- For example, Anderson et al. (2003) found that people in relationships become emotionally
similar as their relationship progresses (known as emotional convergence) and that couples
who are more emotionally similar are more cohesive and less likely to break up
distribution, or sharing without explicit written permission is strictly prohibited.
Detailed 16 marker plans for Relationships (Paper 3)
Discuss evolutionary explanations for partner preferences (16).
AO1
S- Selection of a partner is explained by evolutionary theory through sexual selection.
E- This refers to how behaviours and attributes in partners can maximise their chance of
reproductive success to become exaggerated in their offspring - those with advantageous traits
om
are more likely to be chosen as a preferred partner as they show reproductive fitness
AO1
S- Intersexual selection is one type of sexual selection, referring to the difference between men
l.c
and women and how women choose their partners based on desirable qualities.
E- This could manifest as male display and female fertility. This is where males display their
wealth and ability to provide both physically (e.g. height) and materially, whereas females
ai
display their fertility levels through physical attributes such as a desirable waist-to-hip ratio, and
general signs of youthfulness and good health, such as long hair.
gm
AO1
S- The second type of sexual selection is intrasexual selection, referring to the way males
compete for females, which leads to dimorphism
@
E- This is done through competition with other males via physical attributes such as height,
muscles, competitiveness, aggression, and more where females choose who is most physically
fit, but because females don’t compete for any attention, they evolve to be smaller and less
72
muscular, which leads to physical dimorphism, which is the differences between males and
females
ct
AO3
P- One strength of sexual selection is supporting evidence.
so
E- For instance, Clarke and Hatfield 1989 conducted a field experiment where attractive
strangers asked participants if they would go to bed with them, and found that 75% of men said
yes, while 0% of women said yes
tu
E- This shows that men are relatively more likely to base their choices for partners based on
physical attributes such as youthfulness, while women are more likely to be weary and reject
lo
men competing for them, which is support for the theory of female choosiness.
L- Therefore, this research increases the validity for the evolutionary explanation of sexual
selection, increasing its usefulness in explaining relationships in humans.
AO3
P- One weakness of this theory is that it is limited in its explanation.
E- For instance, when explaining attraction in homosexual couples or any other members of the
LGBT community, this study fails to explain how people make their choices of partners.
,
These materials are the intellectual property of Lotus Mohammad and are for personal use only. Any reproduction,
distribution, or sharing without explicit written permission is strictly prohibited.
E- This is because reproductive success and passing on advantageous alleles has virtually no
value in the choices of homosexual relationships, so sexual selection with the aim of finding
youthful, fertile traits is irrelevant, deeming this explanation limited.
L- Therefore, the validity of this explanation is limited and it cannot be used in all explanations of
partner preferences and modern relationships.
AO3
P- Another strength of this theory is more supporting evidence.
om
E- For example, research by Daly & Wilson (2001) found that young men who live in dangerous
neighbourhoods with a high homicide rate are more likely to take risks and put themselves in
danger in order to attract women
E- This shows that they are competing with other men to attract women, with the goal of passing
l.c
on their genes while they are still able to do so, so hoping to continue their bloodline and pass
on their genes to their offspring
L- Therefore, the validity of intrasexual selection is increased due to supporting conclusions in
ai
many studies.
AO3
gm
P- Lastly, a limitation of the theory is that it suffers from alpha bias between genders
E- This is seen as it exaggerates the differences between males and females in their
choosiness or mechanisms to finding a partner through explanations such as anisogamy
@
E- This is a weakness as it may be that both males and females look for similar traits that are
not necessarily about resources or physical traits. These traits could cover a middle ground and
be important for both sexes such as kindness or emotional maturity, where attraction can be
72
irrelevant to the nature of the gender, as seen in some sexualities such as pansexual
individuals.
L- Therefore, the validity and usefulness of intersexual selection is decreased as it is inherently
ct
flawed in explaining the formation of relationships
so
Discuss factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships. (16)
AO1
S- There are three factors which affect romantic attraction. The first of which is self-disclosure,
tu
which is the exchange of information about the self to another person
E- This is most widely explained by Social Penetration Theory, which states that information is
lo
shared in a shallow to deep order, following the steps outlined: superficial, intimate, personal,
core. Increased deepness increases trust, promoting increased attraction
AO1
S- Another factor affecting attraction is physical attraction, which is how physical attributes are
perceived and how they can lead to an increased romantic attraction
E- This can be explained by the matching hypothesis, stating that people are likely to choose
partners of similar attractiveness to them. This is a cognitive process by which people internally
rate their own attractiveness, and then aim to find people in the range of their attractiveness +/-1
,
These materials are the intellectual property of Lotus Mohammad and are for personal use only. Any reproduction,
distribution, or sharing without explicit written permission is strictly prohibited.
AO1
S- The third factor is Filter theory, which is the mechanism by which people narrow down the
pool of romantic considerations
E- This has three steps: social demography, which relies on the practicality of the couple,
including factors such as proximity and similar religious views to narrow down a field of
availables. Next, similarity in attitudes is considered where people choose those with a similar
world view to narrow down available to desirables. Last, complementarity, the idea of a couple
om
matching and completing one another, eventually causes people to find partners
AO3
P- One strength of self-disclosure is real-world application.
l.c
E- For example, in Western cultures, there is a strong emphasis on communication within
relationships, and this importance forms the foundations of marriage counselling.
E- This is because usually, couples will form a foundation on the details they share with each
ai
other, finding commonalities and mutual interests and experiences which strengthen their bond,
and upon conflict, councillors immediately resort to creating a safe space for the couple to begin
gm
deeper communication and resolve issues which stem from unsaid feelings. This strongly
solidifies the importance of self-disclosure in creating and maintaining relationships.
L- Therefore, the application of self-disclosure in the real world and in psychological counselling
improves the usefulness of the theory in explaining attraction in relationships
@
AO3
P- However, a weakness of physical attractiveness’s matching hypothesis opposing evidence
72
E- For instance, Taylor et al. (2011) investigated the matching hypothesis using the activity logs
of an online dating site, and found that people do not necessarily apply the matching hypothesis
when it comes to dating decisions, professing a preference for the most attractive
ct
males/females on the site
E- This means that studies validating the matching hypothesis lacks temporal and external
so
validity, because novel applications of internet sites to relationships introduces new aspects of
attraction where reciprocity is not a direct consequence, so the matching hypothesis fails to take
account of how the development of long-distance or online relationships decreases how much
tu
people focus on their own attraction level in comparison to their partners’
L- Therefore, the overall validity and usefulness of the matching hypothesis as an explanation
lo
for attraction in romantic relationships is decreased due to opposing evidence in relation to
internet dating.
AO3
P- A strength of filter theory is supporting evidence
E- For example, Anderson et al. (2003) found that people in relationships become emotionally
similar as their relationship progresses (known as emotional convergence) and that couples
who are more emotionally similar are more cohesive and less likely to break up
