Lifestyle

PsychExchange.co.uk Shared Resource

Description
1. THEORIES OF THE BREAKDOWN OF RELATIONSHIPS<br />Duck’s (1988) model of the dissolution of relationships<br /><ul><li>A simple way to remember…
Categories
Published
of 3
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
Share
Transcript
  • 1. THEORIES OF THE BREAKDOWN OF RELATIONSHIPS<br />Duck’s (1988) model of the dissolution of relationships<br /><ul><li>A simple way to remember the stages: Intelligent ducks swim grumpily.
  • 2. 3837940311150</li></ul>Duck also came up with risk factors (1982) – things that make relationships more likely to break down...<br /><ul><li>Predisposing personal factors: distasteful personal habits, change in interests, poor role models (e.g. parents divorced), poor social skills.
  • 3. Precipating factors: deception, boredom, relocation, conflict.</li></ul>These factors at least offer an explanation for dissolution (unlike Duck’s model). However, many relationships are stable, despite these factors being present. <br />Lee’s (1984) stages in the breakdown of relationships<br />Lee found the following stages from a survey of 112 breakups of premarital romantic relationships. He found that the relationships that had bee the strongest took the longest time to work through the five stages.<br />A simple way to remember the stages: Denying everything never resolves troubles.<br />Evaluation (Duck & Lee)<br /><ul><li>Lee mainly looks at events leading up to dissolution, and Duck looks at processes afterwards.
  • 4. Neither model explains why relationships break down (although Duck did write some reasons which helped explain why – don’t confuse them with the model though).
  • 5. Felmlee’s (115) ‘fatal attraction’ theory suggests another reason for breakup – the same characteristics that initially attract us to a person ultimately lead to dissolution – they might be exciting or different to start with, but then later be predictable, or strange.
  • 6. Research in non-Western cultures found differences between those and Western cultures. Moghaddam et al. (1993) found that North American relationships are mainly individualistic (concerned with the needs of the self), voluntary and temporary (the majority of relationships are able to be terminated). Most non-Western relationships are collective (concerned with the needs of other, e.g. kin), obligatory and permanent.
  • 7. Impact of relationships dissolution – Akert (1992) found that the role people played in the decision to end the relationship was the most powerful indicator of how the breakup would affect people – those who didn’t initiate the relationship dissolution (the dumped!) were the most miserable. Those who did initiate it (the dumpers!) didn’t feel so bad, although they did feel guilty.
  • 8. Name both models:
  • 9. What is the third stage of Duck’s model?
  • 10. What is the second stage of Lee’s model?
  • 11. Give one difference between the models (in general, not names or number of stages etc):
  • 12. Give one similarity between the models (in general, again!):
  • 13. Who researched non-Western cultures, and what did they find? Bonus point if you can get the year...
  • 14. What is fatal attraction theory? Does it agree with either of the models?
  • 15. Explain the last stage of Duck’s model:
  • 16. Explain the third stage of Lees model:
  • 17. What are Duck’s reasons for relationship breakdown?
  • We Need Your Support
    Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

    Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

    No, Thanks