Relationships:
Evolutionary explanations –
Sexual selection – Genes that have an advantage for survival which promote successful
reproduction.
Anisogamy – differences between male and female sex cells. Males have unlimited sperm cells
so are relatively ‘cheap’ whereas females have a small amount of egg cells so are ‘pickier’ when
it comes to their preferences.
Inter-sexual selection – females want a genetically-fit partner e.g. height. This leads to
successful reproductions as there will be more males who have this desired characteristic. This
trait becomes exaggerated.
Intra-sexual selection – males compete for women as there are less fertile females. Those who
‘win’ will pass on this for the next generations contributing to their victory. Males who have a
bigger structure are more likely to ‘win’ as they prefer females who are smaller is size because
they feel more controlling. Male aggressiveness also has a play when choosing females.
One strength is that there is supportive research for intersexual selection. Clark and Hatfield did
a study in a university and asked both males and females. ‘Do you want to go to bed with me
tonight?’. The results were that 0% of females agreed whereas 79% of males agreed. This
shows that females are very picky when it comes to selecting males whereas males don’t really
care as they have more sex cells than females. However, this study is oversimplified as it states
that females are very specific because of their fertility, whereas in modern research we see that
females desire more personality characteristics.
Another strength is that there is supportive research for intra sexual selection. Buss surveyed
over 10,00 adults in 33 countries asking about what they desire in their partners. He found that
females looked for resource-related males whereas males looked for reproductive capacity in
females. These findings support the theory of sexual selection.
A limitation is that it is culturally specific. Partner preferences are determined by culture
practices and the social norms in that area. For example, the wider availability of contraception
and the changing roles of the women means that women don’t want resource related males.
This means that the theory is limited.
A limitation is that it only looks at heterosexual relationships. Research shows that the mating
strategies differs when it comes to same sex relationships.
Self-disclosure/social penetration theory
, Altman and Taylor reveal personal information to each other to show trust and reciprocate for
them to deepen their relationship. Penetration is when you disclose more, so you will go
deeper into each other's loves. Depenetration is when you disclose less which means you are
less likely to be satisfied in your relationship and they disengage.
Breadth and depth – discuss a range of topics and then eventually go in deeper
Evaluation:
A strength is that there is research to suggest that there is a strong correlation with the more
the couples self-disclose the higher the satisfaction rates on heterosexual couples and the more
committed they are in the relationship. – Sprecher and Hendrick. This increases the validity of
the research and theory. However, we can't determine cause and effect.
Another strength is real world value. Hass and Stafford found that 57% more the couple's self-
disclose the better maintenance of their relationship. Couples who limit themselves to ‘small
talk’ are encouraged to self-disclose more. This increases the validity and highlights the
importance of self-disclosure of the research and can help with couple therapy.
One limitation is that there is cultural bias. Tang et al found that in individualistic cultures they
disclose more sexual thoughts than in collectivists cultures. However, the satisfaction levels
were similar. Therefore, we can’t generalise this to all cultures.
Another limitation is that the theory may be incorrect as when people break up, they disclose
more but the satisfaction rates are still low. Therefore, we can’t determine if self-disclosure
helps maintain relationships.
Physical attraction:
Shackleford and Larsen found that people with symmetrical faces are more attractive because it
shows genetic fitness.
Baby features trigger caring and protective instincts, related to forming an attachment in
infancy.
Halo effect- physically attractive people are positive. Dion et al found that physically attractive
people are kind, strong, sociable and successful compared to unattractive people.
Walter et al believe that we choose partners based on who matches us . He did a computer
dance where participants rated the most physically attractive people. Then they were told to
match the couples. He found that physically attractive partners were likes the most, this does
not support the hypothesis. However, Bers held et al replicated the study and found that
students selected partners that had similar physical attractiveness. This suggests that partner
Evolutionary explanations –
Sexual selection – Genes that have an advantage for survival which promote successful
reproduction.
Anisogamy – differences between male and female sex cells. Males have unlimited sperm cells
so are relatively ‘cheap’ whereas females have a small amount of egg cells so are ‘pickier’ when
it comes to their preferences.
Inter-sexual selection – females want a genetically-fit partner e.g. height. This leads to
successful reproductions as there will be more males who have this desired characteristic. This
trait becomes exaggerated.
Intra-sexual selection – males compete for women as there are less fertile females. Those who
‘win’ will pass on this for the next generations contributing to their victory. Males who have a
bigger structure are more likely to ‘win’ as they prefer females who are smaller is size because
they feel more controlling. Male aggressiveness also has a play when choosing females.
One strength is that there is supportive research for intersexual selection. Clark and Hatfield did
a study in a university and asked both males and females. ‘Do you want to go to bed with me
tonight?’. The results were that 0% of females agreed whereas 79% of males agreed. This
shows that females are very picky when it comes to selecting males whereas males don’t really
care as they have more sex cells than females. However, this study is oversimplified as it states
that females are very specific because of their fertility, whereas in modern research we see that
females desire more personality characteristics.
Another strength is that there is supportive research for intra sexual selection. Buss surveyed
over 10,00 adults in 33 countries asking about what they desire in their partners. He found that
females looked for resource-related males whereas males looked for reproductive capacity in
females. These findings support the theory of sexual selection.
A limitation is that it is culturally specific. Partner preferences are determined by culture
practices and the social norms in that area. For example, the wider availability of contraception
and the changing roles of the women means that women don’t want resource related males.
This means that the theory is limited.
A limitation is that it only looks at heterosexual relationships. Research shows that the mating
strategies differs when it comes to same sex relationships.
Self-disclosure/social penetration theory
, Altman and Taylor reveal personal information to each other to show trust and reciprocate for
them to deepen their relationship. Penetration is when you disclose more, so you will go
deeper into each other's loves. Depenetration is when you disclose less which means you are
less likely to be satisfied in your relationship and they disengage.
Breadth and depth – discuss a range of topics and then eventually go in deeper
Evaluation:
A strength is that there is research to suggest that there is a strong correlation with the more
the couples self-disclose the higher the satisfaction rates on heterosexual couples and the more
committed they are in the relationship. – Sprecher and Hendrick. This increases the validity of
the research and theory. However, we can't determine cause and effect.
Another strength is real world value. Hass and Stafford found that 57% more the couple's self-
disclose the better maintenance of their relationship. Couples who limit themselves to ‘small
talk’ are encouraged to self-disclose more. This increases the validity and highlights the
importance of self-disclosure of the research and can help with couple therapy.
One limitation is that there is cultural bias. Tang et al found that in individualistic cultures they
disclose more sexual thoughts than in collectivists cultures. However, the satisfaction levels
were similar. Therefore, we can’t generalise this to all cultures.
Another limitation is that the theory may be incorrect as when people break up, they disclose
more but the satisfaction rates are still low. Therefore, we can’t determine if self-disclosure
helps maintain relationships.
Physical attraction:
Shackleford and Larsen found that people with symmetrical faces are more attractive because it
shows genetic fitness.
Baby features trigger caring and protective instincts, related to forming an attachment in
infancy.
Halo effect- physically attractive people are positive. Dion et al found that physically attractive
people are kind, strong, sociable and successful compared to unattractive people.
Walter et al believe that we choose partners based on who matches us . He did a computer
dance where participants rated the most physically attractive people. Then they were told to
match the couples. He found that physically attractive partners were likes the most, this does
not support the hypothesis. However, Bers held et al replicated the study and found that
students selected partners that had similar physical attractiveness. This suggests that partner
