Outline and evaluate Ducks phase model of relationship breakdown (16marks).
Duck proposed a phase model of relationship breakdown. He argues that ending a relationship
begins once a person realises that they are dissatisfied and process take time and goes through 4
distinct phases. Each phase is characterised by a partner reaching a threshold where the perception
of the relationship changes. A partner may reassess and decide a relationship is not bad, stopping
the process of breakdown. Or they may cross the threshold and move onto the next stage of the
model.
The intra-psychic phase involves one partner becoming dissatisfied about their relationship. Then
they focus on the reason for this and this will usually focus on their partners shortcoming.
Dissatisfied partners tend to keep this to themselves, may share thoughts with a trusted friend,
weighing pros and cons continues. The dyadic phase, the focus on this stage is on interpersonal
processes between two partner and they confront each other about the dissatisfaction they have
experienced and their needs. Discussions, these can either be constructive and result in
reconciliation or be unpleasant and result in a relationship to end. The social phase is when the
breakup is made public and partner seek support from a joint friend. These friend may be
encouraged to choose a side but others may try to prevent the break up by acting as a go between.
Once gone public , usually there is no point of return. Finally, the grave dressing stage. This stage is
an actual breakup of a relationship. Both partners justify their actions and dissatisfaction and put
themselves in positive light. Both reflect on what’s happened, who was to blame and give different
versions of what happened to gain sympathy and support.
A strength of the model is that it can be applied to real-life situations. The model describes the
different stages of a relationship breakdown but also offers an explanation of how to maintain
relationships. For example Duck suggested that individuals who were in the intra-psychic phase
should focus on the positives of their relationship rather than the negatives. This could help reverse
the breakdown of a relationship by recognising the different stages. Therefore this matters because it
suggest that the model has value and can be used practically for example relationship counselling.
A limitation of the model is that it can be criticised for being reductionist. For example the
breakdown of relationships is a complex phenomenon but the model breaks it down into four simple
stages. The breakdown may be due to other factors such as arranged marriages, short and or long-
term relationships. Thus this matters because if further research was conducted on a range of
different relationships, the results may show different processes of relationships breakdowns
indicating a more holistic approach.
A final weakness of the model is that the research evidence related to it has methodological issues.
For example much of the research used retrospective data. Participants will usually discuss their
experiences of a relationship breakdown after the relationship has fully ended. This would mean that
we are relying on participants memories of the relationship which may not always be accurate. Thus
this affects the validity of the data. However it can be difficult to assess relationships during the early
stages as an individuals perception may be distorted and also researchers may be hesitant to get
involved during the early phases as they may make things worse.
Duck proposed a phase model of relationship breakdown. He argues that ending a relationship
begins once a person realises that they are dissatisfied and process take time and goes through 4
distinct phases. Each phase is characterised by a partner reaching a threshold where the perception
of the relationship changes. A partner may reassess and decide a relationship is not bad, stopping
the process of breakdown. Or they may cross the threshold and move onto the next stage of the
model.
The intra-psychic phase involves one partner becoming dissatisfied about their relationship. Then
they focus on the reason for this and this will usually focus on their partners shortcoming.
Dissatisfied partners tend to keep this to themselves, may share thoughts with a trusted friend,
weighing pros and cons continues. The dyadic phase, the focus on this stage is on interpersonal
processes between two partner and they confront each other about the dissatisfaction they have
experienced and their needs. Discussions, these can either be constructive and result in
reconciliation or be unpleasant and result in a relationship to end. The social phase is when the
breakup is made public and partner seek support from a joint friend. These friend may be
encouraged to choose a side but others may try to prevent the break up by acting as a go between.
Once gone public , usually there is no point of return. Finally, the grave dressing stage. This stage is
an actual breakup of a relationship. Both partners justify their actions and dissatisfaction and put
themselves in positive light. Both reflect on what’s happened, who was to blame and give different
versions of what happened to gain sympathy and support.
A strength of the model is that it can be applied to real-life situations. The model describes the
different stages of a relationship breakdown but also offers an explanation of how to maintain
relationships. For example Duck suggested that individuals who were in the intra-psychic phase
should focus on the positives of their relationship rather than the negatives. This could help reverse
the breakdown of a relationship by recognising the different stages. Therefore this matters because it
suggest that the model has value and can be used practically for example relationship counselling.
A limitation of the model is that it can be criticised for being reductionist. For example the
breakdown of relationships is a complex phenomenon but the model breaks it down into four simple
stages. The breakdown may be due to other factors such as arranged marriages, short and or long-
term relationships. Thus this matters because if further research was conducted on a range of
different relationships, the results may show different processes of relationships breakdowns
indicating a more holistic approach.
A final weakness of the model is that the research evidence related to it has methodological issues.
For example much of the research used retrospective data. Participants will usually discuss their
experiences of a relationship breakdown after the relationship has fully ended. This would mean that
we are relying on participants memories of the relationship which may not always be accurate. Thus
this affects the validity of the data. However it can be difficult to assess relationships during the early
stages as an individuals perception may be distorted and also researchers may be hesitant to get
involved during the early phases as they may make things worse.
