Relationships

In evolutionary explanations of partner preference, what does the principle of anisogamy refer to?

• AThe difference between large, costly female gametes and small, plentiful male gametes✓
• BThe tendency for both sexes to invest equally in offspring
• CThe preference for genetically similar partners to preserve a gene pool
• DCompetition between males of the same species for access to females

Answer: Anisogamy is the difference between the sexes' sex cells: the female ovum is large, energy-costly and limited, whereas male sperm are small, plentiful and continuously produced. This asymmetry underpins differing reproductive strategies and mate preferences.

A female being choosy about a mate who can offer resources and good genes, thereby shaping the traits of the opposite sex, is an example of which evolutionary mechanism?

• AIntra-sexual selection
• BInter-sexual selection✓
• CThe sexy sons hypothesis acting on males
• DRunaway gene mutation

Answer: Inter-sexual selection is preferences BETWEEN the sexes: one sex (typically the female, who invests more) is selective and chooses, shaping the traits of the other. Intra-sexual selection is competition within a sex for access to mates.

Which behaviour is best explained by intra-sexual selection in human mate competition?

• AA woman preferring a partner who is generous and high-status
• BA couple disclosing personal information to deepen intimacy
• CMen competing aggressively with one another for fertile partners, favouring size and dominance✓
• DPartners matching one another in physical attractiveness

Answer: Intra-sexual selection is competition WITHIN one sex (typically males) for mating access. Traits aiding success in those contests, such as greater size, strength and aggression, are selected for, which is offered as one account of human sexual dimorphism.

According to social penetration theory (Altman & Taylor), how does self-disclosure typically deepen a relationship?

• ADisclosure should be one-sided to maintain mystery and attraction
• BOnly non-verbal cues, not disclosure, build closeness
• CVery deep disclosure early on always strengthens a new relationship
• DReciprocal, gradually broadening and deepening exchange of personal information increases intimacy✓

Answer: Social penetration theory holds that relationships develop through reciprocal self-disclosure that gradually increases in breadth and depth; as partners 'penetrate' more deeply, trust and intimacy grow. Excessive early disclosure can in fact be off-putting.

The matching hypothesis in the study of physical attractiveness predicts that people tend to form relationships with partners who:

• AAre similar to themselves in level of physical attractiveness✓
• BAre the most physically attractive individuals available, regardless of their own looks
• CPossess opposite personality traits to balance the relationship
• DShare the same attachment type from infancy

Answer: The matching hypothesis proposes that we are attracted to those of roughly similar physical attractiveness to our own, balancing a desire for the most attractive partner against the realistic fear of rejection. It concerns similarity in attractiveness, not personality opposites.

In Kerckhoff and Davis's filter theory, which factor acts as the MOST important filter in the EARLY stages of forming a relationship?

• AComplementarity of needs
• BSocial demography (proximity, education, social class)✓
• CEquity of rewards and costs
• DInvestment size

Answer: Filter theory proposes three filters applied in sequence. Social demographic variables (such as proximity, social class and education) operate first, narrowing the 'field of availables'. Similarity in attitudes matters in the short term, and complementarity becomes important later.

In social exchange theory (Thibaut & Kelley), the comparison level for alternatives (CLalt) is a judgement about whether:

• AInputs and outputs are fairly balanced between the two partners
• BThe current relationship exceeds the rewards expected based on past experience
• CThe person could obtain greater rewards and fewer costs from a different relationship or from being alone✓
• DThe investments already made are too great to leave

Answer: Comparison level for alternatives concerns whether a person could do better elsewhere (another partner or being single). It is distinct from the comparison level (CL), which is the standard of rewards a person expects based on past experience and norms.

Equity theory differs from basic social exchange theory primarily because it emphasises that satisfaction depends on:

• AMaximising rewards while minimising any costs
• BThe number of attractive alternatives available outside the relationship
• CThe size of the irretrievable investments already made
• DA perceived fairness in the ratio of each partner's inputs to outputs, not just total profit✓

Answer: Equity theory argues that people are most satisfied when the relationship feels fair, that is, when the ratio of one partner's inputs to outputs is roughly equal to the other's. Both under-benefitting and over-benefitting can cause dissatisfaction, going beyond simple profit.

According to Rusbult's investment model, which THREE factors together determine commitment to a relationship?

• ASatisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size✓
• BRewards, costs, and comparison level only
• CSelf-disclosure, physical attractiveness, and similarity
• DIntimacy, passion, and decision/commitment

Answer: Rusbult proposed that commitment is greater when satisfaction is high, the quality of alternatives is low, and investment size (resources put into the relationship that would be lost) is high. Commitment, not satisfaction alone, best predicts whether a relationship persists.

In Duck's phase model of relationship breakdown, the phase in which partners make the breakup public, tell friends, and negotiate a 'face-saving' account is the:

• AIntra-psychic phase
• BDyadic phase
• CSocial phase✓
• DGrave-dressing phase

Answer: Duck's model runs intra-psychic (private brooding), dyadic (confronting the partner), social (telling the wider network, who may take sides), then grave-dressing (constructing a favourable account of the breakup). Going public characterises the social phase.