ASSIGNMENT REPORT FORM

Student ID Tutor ID Date Student sent assignment:

Date Received by tutor:
58117156 Name: Date Sent to Oscail:
Overall Mark
Obtained:

Module:PSY 2 Group: 1 TMA No:

Summary of Performance*
Performance Bands Bands Bands Bands Bands Bands Bands
Components Excellent Very Good Good Fair Weak Poor Not
(H1) (H2.1) (H2.2) (H3) applicable

Marks range: Marks

Marks 60-69% Marks Marks Marks range:
range: range: range: range: below
70-100% 50-59% 40-49% 35-39% 35%
Attention to
assignment task
Analysis
Structure
Use of sources
References
Introduction
Conclusion
Spelling/Grammar
Presentation (Style)
* This table facilitates the assessment of your performance in selected components of your assignment, and is designed to alert
you to the general areas of strength and/ or in need of improvement in your work. Please note that the components are not equal
in terms of contribution to your overall mark. Attention to Assignment Task, Analysis and Structure are the three most
important criteria for assessment. Please note that the total mark indicated is based on an evaluation of your overall
performance in the set assignment.

Summary Comments

ADVICE FOR FUTURE ASSIGNMENTS

Annotated Feedback
(Refer to Assignment for the sections relating to the following comments)
1.
2.

Write a briefing paper summarising the social psychological approaches that

should inform self-help material on Interpersonal relationships.

This briefing paper has been written to assist organisations in compiling self-help
material for distribution to couples who may be experiencing relationship difficulties. The format
or structure of the end material is not within the scope of this paper, its purpose is to provide the
main points of the current psychological discourse apropos theories of interpersonal attraction,
close relationships and long term relationship maintenance. However, this paper will outline how
the research findings and theoretical approaches discussed can be converted into practical advice.
It is assumed that the end material will, for the most part, be intended for couples who have
already acknowledged that some level of difficulty has developed in their relationship. This does
not, however, preclude those whose relationships are healthy from gaining insight by reading the
material since the intention is to focus on maintaining healthy relationships as well as identifying
and resolving problems that may already be present.
Within psychology there are a number of aspects of interpersonal attraction that have
been shown to influence to varying degrees the intensity of the initial attraction between people.
Some of these aspects are more relevant than others in relation to longer term partnerships,
which is the focus of this paper, so we will concentrate on these.
Similarity
In spite of the old adage that opposites attract, research has shown that people who do
not hold similar value systems, attitudes, interests and personalities are unlikely to form long
term intimate relationships (Berscheid & Reis, 1998). Our beliefs are central to who we are, as are
the processes by which we make judgements of and evaluate others and situations around us.
When we encounter and interact with someone who holds a roughly similar set of values,
expresses similar attitudes regarding important issues and has opinions which align with our own,
we experience a process called social validation. This process reinforces what we already believe
and so makes us feel right to have those beliefs, values or opinions therefore making us feel good
about ourselves (Byrne & Clore, 1970). Furthermore, research had also shown encountering
people who do not share our opinions and attitudes with regard to important issues causes us to
subconsciously liken them to those we have met in the past who show signs of unpleasantness,
immorality, weakness or thoughtlessness (Rosenbaum, 1986). The general conclusion drawn from
these two research results is that in the initial stages of attraction people are drawn to others
similar to themselves and are repulsed, and in turn avoid, those who are not.
To contextualise these findings with respect to the self help material to be produced; it
may be of benefit to include references to the fact that partners in a relationship were likely to
have initially been drawn to each other because they were alike in many ways. Unless one or both
have altered their core values and attitudes significantly they both still share much common
ground. This still remains a good basis upon which to build a long-term relationship and thus may
help in encouraging the relationship (if that is the object of the self-help counselling).
Reciprocal Liking
Being liked and liking a partner plays an important role in interpersonal relationships; so
important is this determinant that it can make up for a lack of similarity between partners (Akert,
Aronson & Wilson, 1999, p.378). If Partner A expresses a liking for Partner B, this can encourage
a reciprocal emotion in Partner B. Thus the process can become self-fulfilling as both partners
mirror each others' behaviour (Curtis & Miller, 1986). Another important research finding involving
people in close relationships has been in the area of self-esteem and its part in facilitating
reciprocal liking. Some psychological studies have shown that when some people's self esteem is
low they may not react in the same way to displays of liking as someone with moderate or high
self esteem, instead they may feel that they are undeserving of the friendly behaviour and fail to
respond reciprocally (Swann, 1992). Within long-term close relationships it has been
demonstrated that those with a negative self concept who were viewed favourably by their
partners, were least likely to show reciprocal liking and actually indicated the lowest level of
commitment to their partners. This could be due to the fact that they may feel undeserving of the
friendly behaviour and choose not to respond. There is another type of liking that can occur in
relationships, when one partner can “idealise” the other. People in close relationships who have
positive self concepts tend to embellish the good points and overlook the faults of their partners
and this causes the relationships to be more resilient to the after affects of arguments and
conflict. More importantly this process of idealisation causes the “idealised” partners to raise their
own self esteem (Akert et al. 1999, p.380) again demonstrating the power of the self fulfilling
prophesy.
In relation to the content of the documentation required to help couples with difficulties
or to spot early signs of possible problems, the importance should be placed on couples being
aware that regular kind words and minor demonstrations of affection and liking can bring
enormous benefits to both the receiver and the giver. These can enable reciprocal liking, help
build self esteem and even reverse negative feelings about one's self. It is important therefore to
provide in the documentation ideas and hints that facilitate couples to engage in these practices in
order that they might become habitual.
Theories of Interpersonal Attraction
Social Exchange Theory
At its heart social exchange theory claims that how people feel about a relationship is
based on their perceptions regarding their level of input into the relationship (costs), how much
they feel they gain from the relationship (rewards), the sort of relationship they feel they deserve
(comparison levels) and their chances of having a better relationship with someone else
(comparison levels for alternatives) (Akert et al, 1999, p.398). During experiments, results have
shown that over the short term, up to 7-12 months, the general perception was that rewards had
increased over time but during the end of this period costs came into play too and if costs
continued to increase then satisfaction levels within the relationship dropped. Thus while rewards
appeared to always play an important role in the outcome of relationships; costs become
increasingly important over time (Akert et al, 1999, p.398). Rewards, costs and comparison levels
are also used in an investment model of commitment. These three factors feed into the level of
satisfaction with the relationship. Along with the level of investment in the relationship and the
quality of alternatives to the relationship, the level of satisfaction with the relationship combines
to provide an overall commitment to the relationship. This indicates the overall stability of the
relationship.
Social exchange theory in intimate relationships has been supported by extensive
research (Rusbult 1993; Rusbult & Van Lange, 1996; Rusbult, Yovetich, & Verette, 1996) and any
self help material should include elements of its findings in order to help couples spot early danger
signs, e.g. simplified and shortened questionnaires could be compiled to provide rough indicators
of partners perception of their costs versus rewards within a relationship. The level of investment
is also a factor that could be evaluated in order to provide a very simplified indicator to major
differences in perception between partners. Once identified, these issues could then be addressed
by the partners.
Relationships as an Interpersonal Process
A more recent approach to studying interpersonal relationships has been to view them
as changing and evolving during the lifetimes of the participants, to see the them as “processes”
and not as fixed or static entities (Duck, 1982). By discussing their feelings couples define and
redefine their understanding of the relationship, this process of discussion helps to create the
sense of a mutually shared relationship (Acitelli, 1992). According to the theory, the elements that
caused couples to be attracted to each other initially (e.g. similarity, physical attractiveness, etc.)
also shape our behaviour once in those relationships if they are long term.
This approach introduces the concept of relational dialectics which focusses on the fact
that our perceptions of our relationships are continually changing due to tensions between
opposite but interconnected forces: autonomy/connection, novelty/predictability and
openness/closedness. Studies have shown that people do attribute the breakdown of relationships
to the inability to deal with the autonomy/connection pressures, hence their feelings of “feeling
trapped” or being disappointed by their partners lack of commitment or sharing (Baxter, 1986).
Relation dialectics has also to be able to predict which issues are important at various stages of a
relationship (Baxter, 1990). Initially feelings of openness/closedness are important. How much
should I reveal about myself? Has he or she revealed more or less? In established relationships
other conflicts come into play. Am I losing my self identity or does he or she care as much as I
do? This demonstrates issues with autonomy/connectedness. Fears regarding the
novelty/predictability conflict are also common. Is there too much change and variety in the
relationship or am I becoming boring and mundane? (Baxter, 1990)
A major insight provided by this process driven model of relationships is its emphasis on
change and negotiation between partners (Akert et al, 1999, p.408). For the purposes of self help
material, highlighting the requirement of couples to engage in discussing their thoughts and
feelings about the point at which they find themselves in a relationship would be beneficial. Also,
since the potential problem areas that lead to tension in a relationship are identified e.g.
openness/closedness, partners can be reminded to be aware and sensitive of these areas.
Summary of Recommendations
While there are many other areas within interpersonal and close relationship theory that
could be beneficial and included in self help material for couples experiencing difficulties these are
the main points that I consider pertinent for this particular brief:
• Remind the readers of the similarities which initially brought them together and ask
them to evaluate whether their core values, attitudes and beliefs are still what they were
initially, if not discussing how they have changed would also be beneficial.
• Ask the reader to examine their contribution to the relationship in terms of building
their partners self confidence. How encouraging are they of their partner’s efforts to meet
difficult challenges and accomplishments? Are they more inclined to show infrequent but
grand gestures of affection or do they tend to constantly remind their partner of their good
points? Are they aware of their partner’s preference with regard to these demonstrations?
• Possibly include some form of simple questionnaire to be completed by both partners
and then shared. This would serve to highlight what each partner’s perception is of the
sacrifices they make in order to make the relationship work. This should be balanced with a
similar exercise to determine the perception of each partner’s level reward garnered from
the relationship.
• Provide some topics to be discussed in a serious way by the couples. These topics
should include:
◦ Perception of the level of support within the relationship
◦ Perception of the level of openness and communication
◦ Perception of the presence of any feelings of isolation or feelings of being
“trapped” within the relationship
• Overall the emphasis throughout the material should be on the benefits of
communication within relationships to help create a feeling of a shared experience as this
will facilitate the resolution of any potential difficulties.
References
Acetelli, L.K. (1992) Gender Differences in relationship awareness and marital satisfaction among
young married couples. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 102-110
Akert, R.M., Aronson, E. & Wilson, T.D. (1999) Social Psychology (3rd ed.) New York:Longman
Baxter, L. (1986) Gender differences in the heterosexual relationship rules embedded in break-up
accounts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 3, 289-306
Baxter, L. (1990) Dialectical contradictions in relationship development
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 69-88
Berscheid, E., & Reis, H.T. (1998). Attraction and close relationships. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G.
Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol 2, pp. 193-281). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Byrne, D., Clore, G.L. (1970). A reinforcement model of evaluative processes. Personality: An
International Journal,1, 103-128.
Curtis, R.C., & Miller, K. (1986). Believing another likes or dislikes you: Behaviours making the
beliefs come true. Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 284-290.
Duck, S. (1982). A typography of relationship disengagement In S. Duck. (Eds.), Personal
Relationships 4:Dissolving Personal Relationships (pp 1-30). London: Academic Press
Rosenbaum, M.E. (1986). The repulsion hypothesis: On the nondevelopment of relationships.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1156-1166
Rusbult, C.E. (1993). Understanding responses to dissatisfaction in close relationships: The exit-
voice- loyalty-neglect model. In S. Worchel & J.A. Simpson (Eds), Conflict Between
People and Groups: Causes, Processes and Resolutions (pp. 30-59). Chicago: Nelson-
Hall
Rusbult, C.E., & Van Lange, P.A.M. (1996). Interdependence processes, In E.T. Higgens & A.W.
Kruglanski (Eds.), Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles (pp. 564-
596). New York: Guilford.
Rusbult, C.E., Yovetich, N.A., & Verette, J. (1996). An interdependence analysis of
accommodation processes. In G.J.O. Fletcher & J. Fitness (Eds.), Knowledge Structures
in Close Relationships: A Social Psychological Approach (pp.63-90). Mahwah,
NJ:Erlbaum
Bibliography:
Liberty, K. B. (2002). My partner, my shadow: A typological investigation of the attitude-antagonistic couple
(Doctoral dissertation, Alliant International University, 2002).
Bowles, C. (2000). If only you could read my mind : A guide to help couples understand each other and connect.
Burnstown, ON: General Store Publishing House.
Lurtz, P. K. (1999). Partner similarity and relationship satisfaction among couples (Doctoral dissertation, Saint
Louis University, 1999). Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(04)
Hubbard, J. P. (1995, Spring). Type and couples therapy. Bulletin of Psychological Type, 18(2), 31.