I've combined and summarized the content from my relationship videos into this relationships revision video if you don't understand any of the content I cover here go to my longer videos for a full explanation but if you just need a reminder of the key points quickly this is the video for you but don't just use this video I've got a psych boost app and it's designed to test your knowledge of all the topics in A- level psychology actively using flashcards it's on IOS and Android and you can use it for all paper one for free if in instead you want tutorial support videos with questions from all free papers you can access over 16 hours of these as well as hundreds of princial resources over on my patreon but enough of that let's get started the evolutionary explanation for partner preferences human reproductive behavior is driven by the need to survive and reproduce both males and females need to ensure they have children and those children survive into adulthood sexual selection acts on creatures ability to compete with others of the same sex often males for mates and attract the opposite sex often females therefore genes that provide reproductive Advantage will be selected for increasing in the human gene pool inter seexual selection AKA mate Choice when members of One sex typically females choose mates of the other sex to reproduce with based on specific traits in most animals including humans it generally has females who choose because females invest more in Offspring time energy resources than males do making them more selective picking the highest quality mate from the wide selection of mates available to them intrasexual selection AKA make competition when members of the same sex typically males compete with each other to access and attract members of the opposite sex this could be displays of physical power social dominance or resources in most animals including humans males compete due to low investment costs and a lack of Parental certainty males compete for access to as many members of the opposite sex as possible male female dimorphism enhanced secondary sexual characteristics are selected for by both genders making these physical characteristics more common in the population females look for qualities that will help raise a child to adulthood resources and money physical characteristics linked to dominance tall healthy v-shaped chest males look for qualities of fertility that indicate production of healthy Offspring large breasts young facial features a body shape of 0.7 hip to waist ratio indicates sexual maturity but not pregnant evaluations dumbar and wayf for 1995 used content analysis on 900 data ads found 42% of males were looking for youth formates compared to 25% of females in their adverts men were likelier to emphasize their economic status women were likelier to emphasize their looks this supports the evolutionary theories explanation or females being more attracted to status and resources with meant advertising these and males look looking for females capable of reproduction Clark in harfield 1989 male and female student researchers asked other students one or three questions will you go out with me tonight will you go back to my house or will you have sex with me found 50% of both genders agreed to a date 0% of females agreed to sex compared to 75% of males this supports the concepts of intra and Inter sexual selection that males will attempt to sleep with as many women as possible while women will be more selective research by Cunningham 1986 found men were most attracted to images of youthful faces large eyes small noses and chins research by Singh 1993 shows a cross-cultural preference for a 0.7 hip to waist ratio The evolutionary approach could be criticized as legitimizing a gender double standard between men and women sexual differences may have been exaggerated suggesting Alpha bias research in this area could be seen as socially sensitive findings could be used as a justification for shaming women for their sexual behavior even evolutionary explanation for sexual selection can also be criticized for not explaining homosexual partner preferences factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships self-disclosure people who share information are liked more this is because when an individual discloses personal information to someone else this disclosure suggests they trust that person social penetration Theory Alman and Tyler suggest that as a relationship between individuals develop interpersonal Communications breath the type of topics and depth the level of detail increase from shallow to more intimate reciprocity relationships will only develop if both individuals are active in disclosing information and responding appropriately attributions individuals consider the motivations behind self-disclosure so one who discloses to everyone is seen as less attractive than someone who reveals information to fewer people appropriateness while revealing information is generally seen as improving relationships breaking social norms or revealing information too early TMI can have the opposite reaction lowering attraction sper and hendrik observe couple self-disclosure and dates men and women were found to have similar levels of self-disclosure and a positive correlation was found between the amount of self-disclosure and measures of the quality of the relationship satisfaction love and commitment much of the research in self-disclosure is correlational so there may not be a cause or link rather than self-disclosure causing attraction we may self-disclose more to people we're attracted to or there's a third Factor if we share interest with people this may lead to both increased disclosure and increased attraction it's generally thought that women are better communicators more willing to share intimate information this however could be an example of alpha bias exaggerating the differences between men and women physical attractiveness we're more attracted to physically good-looking people evolutionary theories suggest this is because what we perceive as attractiveness are visible indications of genetic and physical health for example facial symmetry body shape and youth from an evolutionary perspective it makes sense to mate with someone capable of conceiving and successfully raising a child and passing on the best gen possible the halo effect people with the physical characteristic of physical attractiveness are assumed to be successful in other areas of life I.E intelligent hardworking and sociable this can result in others interacting more positively towards them acting as a self-fulfilling prophecy actually making them more successful matching hypothesis we cannot all mate with the most attractive members of our population we realistically appraise our attra compared to others we look for romantic Partners who are at a similar level of attractiveness we avoid the pain of rejection by not chasing Partners we see as too attractive we retain our partners by not choosing someone who will leave us for someone else Merin 1972 8 judges rated photographs of each individual from 19 of couples according to attractiveness found couples were likelier than random match pairs to have a similar attractiveness level this suggests individuals are highly likely to select Partners who are in equivalent level of attractiveness to themselves it may be the matching hypothesis theory is becoming more valid as online dating websites and apps depend heavily on visual cues for partner selection this may provide more feedback for people to assess their attractiveness rating matching hypothesis may give some explanation for initial partner selection however theories of relationship exchange that include potential costs and benefits May better explain make selection over the long term filter Theory kirkoff and Davies 1962 argue while the field of availables is very large all the people we could theoretically form a relationship with we only actually become attracted to those people who pass through a series of filters these people form the field of desirables first filter social demography were more likely to come into contact with people who live nearby and people who share characteristics like social class level of education and economic status second filter similarity and attitudes due to social demography we're more likely to come into contact with people with similar core values and these people are seen as more attractive compatible these shared attitudes also help to encourage self-disclosure at the start of relationships third filter complimentarity we're attracted to those people who provide for our emotional needs in this way Partners can have mutually beneficial differences for example one partner might like to organize a couple of social activities while the other is happy to attend planned events if both wanted to manage the schedule this might lead to conflict this is seen as important for the success of long-term relationships kirkoff and Davy's 1962 in a longitudinal study of student dating couples found similarity of attitudes was the most important factor for short-term relationships less than 18 months and complimentarity was the most important factor in long-term relationships it could be that people initially pick incompatible partners with different attitudes the correlation of similar values seen in long-term couples could be explained by beliefs converging over time as partners communicate Also complimentarity may develop over time due to each partner finding their role within a relationship filter fairy Lacks temporal VY changing attitudes globalization and migration have resulted in more frequent relationship formations across ethnicities and cultures also virtual relationships enabled by dating apps lack traditional filters like social demography theories of romantic relationships social exchange theory Fibber and Kelly 1959 an economic model with Partners seeing relationships as similar to a business performing a cost benefit analysis maximizing rewards and minimizing losses this is the minmax principle rewards include self-esteem entertainment Financial Security friendship and sex costs include giving up time emotional instability stress loss of money and opportunity cost comparison level comparing our relationship to previous relationships other people's relationships and relationships in the media to get an idea of how rewarding relationships should be link to feelings of selfworth comparison of Alternatives is looking at other potential partners and considering if they would give a higher profit if so the original relationship will end Equity the develop of social exchange theory economic model by Hatfield including equality in the economic model equality is the balance of rewards and costs being the same for both Partners even if particular rewards in cost are different over benefits if one partner feels they get more overall profit they'll feel shame pity and guilt and may end the relationship under benefits if one partner feels they get more overall costs they'll feel resentful and angry and may end the relationship investment theory development of social exchange theory including consideration of how much has been invested in the current relationship not just current satisfaction commitment equals satisfaction minus Alternatives plus investment Investments are different to rewards and costs as once invested in a relationship Investments cannot be easily recovered in a breakup difficult to divide intrinsic Investments are resources placed directly into the relationship like emotional work time and self-disclosures exic Investments are resources originally outside of the relationship that is now connected to the relationship ship like shared friends and material possessions evaluations rosor 1983 longitudinal questionnaire on costs rewards investment and comparisons 17 males and 17 females results show that cost benefit analysis applied less at the start of a relationship what was considered as the relationship developed spee of 2001 101 dating couples if the availability of alternative Partners increased levels of satisfaction and commitment decreased suggesting when there are an alternative satisfaction is higher or alternatives are less attractive when the individual is satisfied UT 1984 conducted a self-report survey on married couples measuring perceived equity and contentment relationship stability found Partners in equal relationships had high commitment happier than either over benefited or under benefited Partners no sex differences in desire for equality rosbert 1983 long junal question on cost rewards investment in comparisons 17 males 17 females results showed that as relationship developed investment Siz increased resulting in Greater commitment and reduced quality of Alternatives investment Theory explains why many relationships stay together when social exchange theory and Equity Theory suggest they should not such as abuse partners and why satisfied relationships with low Investments and an attractive alternative will end studies in this area of psychology use self-report questionnaires in most research designs and look for correlations variables like social desirability bias could influence results and the relationships found may not be causal social exchange theory and Equity fa may be culturally biased taking a western perspective collectivist cultures may have less of a focus on personal satisfaction also shame will be a factor in not ending a failing arranged marriage however the family will consider a cost benefit analysis in initially arranging the marriage hey there I should still watching I'm guessing you'll find this video useful as I release content right up to the exams don't forget to subscribe so you know when new videos are uploaded also as this video is being released I'm on around 50,000 subscribers and I'd love to get to 100K at some point in the next few years Duck's phase model of relationship breakdown duck three reasons for a breakdown pre-existing Doom individuals are not compatible from the start mechanical failure compatible people can no longer function as a couple sudden death a traumatic event egy cheating Duck's phase model for relationship break down most relationships end via process passing through stages in psychic stage one or both Partners consider feelings about relationship problems plan confrontation and consider alternatives to relationship make invid in friends dactic phase Partners confront each other to discuss relationship issues and have conversations relating to inequity intimacy and the cost of breakup social phase splitting couples tell their social network they are breaking up and participate in social activities to get over the relationship practical aspects of the break up are negotiated social network members pick sides and provide support grave dressing phase Partners create a narrative of the breakup to say fate they blame their partner or circumstances out of their control May question their decision and consider how the breakup has impacted their social network evaluations to Sheron Fraser 2003 use a self-report survey method of 96 graduates on their breakups findings indicated that relationships broke down in stages as expected by Theory especially the grave dressing stage low population validity as this study uses young educated University students the breakup stages for The Wider population may be very different dck improved his bundle into 2006 with a resurrection stage after the relationship ends each partner will focus on reconfiguring themselves as an individual and developing new hobbies and interests laav 2012 virtual relationships demonstrate social phase behaviors such as removing tag pictures and changing status to It's Complicated also grave dressing and Resurrection stages with pictures after emphasizing fun relationship counselors can support couples and prevent breakups by improving communication Styles in the didactic phase Duck's phase model gives a same process for men and women minimizing potential differences Bea bias both experience breakdowns in different ways and give different reasons men often cite a lack of sex and women a lack of emotional support virtual relationships in social media researchers are interested in why people disclose more and develop intimacy sooner in online Communications absence of gating mechanisms communication through the internet removes factors that normally act as filters to interacting in face-to-face encounters for example attractiveness speech deficit age group or social and ethnic backgrounds reduce Q fairies non-verbal communication like body language is missing this could result in people misinterpreting a text or reading too much into typed communication anonymity leads to deindividuation feelings of reduced responsibility lowering inhibition people can say things online that they wouldn't face to face this results in feelings of intimacy but also sexing and trolling Hy personal model people manipulate their online identity appearing hyper honest or hyper dishonest they do this by carefully controlling interactions evaluations Smith and Dugen 2013 in a survey of 200000 Americans found online dating is becoming more acceptable 53% agree a large number of potential Partners helps find a better match however 53% had experienced someone misrepresenting themselves McKenna and brow 2000 showed that people felt more able to express themselves online and after 2 years 70% of relationships that formed online survived compared to 50% of relationships that started in the real world lack of temporal validity theories were constructed where online interaction was mainly text based now it's unusual people not to share images and videos using apps like Snapchat and Skype so gating mechanisms are back virtual relationships allow people who may find it difficult to form relationships due to social gating mechanisms around class age ethnicity and disability to form meaningful relationships reducing loneliness lack of face-to-face communication and practice reading non-verbal communication can lead to difficult developing real life relationships due to a lack of social skills parasocial relationships parasocial relationships are one side of relationships in which one member is heavily invested while the other has limited or no awareness of the other person's existence parasocial relationships are common in the relationship between celebrities and their fans but can happen in any situation where the interaction is one-sided levels of parasocial relationships the celebrity attitude scale Cas was developed by McCutchen to classify the extent of attitudes and behaviors entertainment social the F will only follow celebrity and aspects of their life closely so they have information they can use to gossip with their friends intense personal the fan feels a strong sense of personal connection with the celebrity and may think and talk about them obsessively borderl pathological the fan over identifies feeling the celebrity successes and failures of their own behaviors and Fantasies become more intense and uncontrollable with a fan potentially trying to contact the celebrity or even stalk them expecting their strong feelings to be returned by the cele celebrity the absorbtion addiction model McCutchen 2002 a Fan's parasocial relationships are an attempt to escape the reality of their lives and make up for deficits in their real life relationships but they can also provide a sense of identity absorption intense involvement in finding information about the personal life and career of the celebrity this is an attempt to feel closer to them addiction behaviors escalate similar to a drug addiction becoming more extreme may result in an attempt to contact the celebrity or stalk them the attachment fairy explanation based on bal's theory that attachment problems in childhood result in adult relationship issues due to the development of a defective internal working model parasocial relationships are linked to insecure resistant relationships with mothers involving inconsistent affection and rejection this results in a need to avoid rejection in later life parasocial relationships provide for the need for attachment but without the possibility of rejection evaluations theut in 2016 asked 330 students to complete the cast and the test of emotional well-being finding higher levels of anxiety when students scored on the two higher subscales as well as problematic real life intimate relationships the absorption addiction model is more of a description of parasocial relationships than an explanation of them there is significant evidence that early attachment goes on to influence adult relationships the theory that this would include parasocial relationships has faced validity m in 2006 measured childhood attachment celebrity worship and the tendency to condone celebrity stalking in 299 college students finding participants with insecure types were not more likely than secure types to be attracted to celebrities as predicted by attachment Theory understanding the origins of parcial relationships can lead to practical applications such as relationship counselors being better able to advise clients and how to prioritize their real life relationships there are issues with the validity of parasocial relationship research This research relies on correlation as participants must already demonstrate parasocial relationships and this research of relies on retrospective recall of childhood attachments parasocial relationships are often viewed negatively and even considered pathological by researchers however Jensen and Jenkins 1992 positive active view considers parasocial relationships as serving important functions such as helping to develop social networks between fans who may otherwise be socially isolated don't forget you can now test yourself on the relationship unit with the py boost app if you want to try out the app all the topics are paper one or free and you can get on iOS or Android if you want to see model answers to questions or access my other resources there's also patreon speaking of patreon I do want to thank all of my patrons for their support with the help of all of these students and teachers I'm able to teach parttime so I can work on the main mission of Scythe boost the development of a free to watch and hopefully high quality AEV psychology course and a special thank you to Kat posnik and ammed Rani for supporting at the developer level so thanks for them good luck with your vision and I'll see you in the next psych Boost video e