Discuss and research theories/ studies relating to the formation of relationships

There atomic number 18 umpteen theories relating to formation of births. These include the dribble theory, the matching hypotheses, social-biological theory and the reinforce handst-affect theory.Kerckhoff and Davis came up with the try model of standoff. They believed that we rely on social and personal factors to filter potential relationships from the field of eligibles. There ar five criteria proximity, interchangeableity, physical invitingness, comple custodytarity of necessitate and competence. We narrow down the hatful whom we whitethorn form a relationship with, through a series of selection filters. The criteria tend to be apply a different stages.In initial devotion, proximity is the obvious filter we form relationships with those who live close by, this is how we may become aware of the person. resemblance is important because the people who we partake the same ethnicity, background and occupation we are more(prenominal) likely to talk and come in contact w ith. erst this stage of filtering has taken place, people then consider weather we share the same attitudes as the other(a) person. disconcert and Gillmor believed if we do share like attitudes then the relationship is more likely to be pursued. Caspi and Herbener carried out a survey which found that married couples who were more similar were more satisfied with their marriage.People may have been initially drawn together because of their similarity, exclusively it may become apparent that one person has characteristics that the other lacks, for mannikin someone who is domineering may be attracted to someone who is sub ignoreive.Physical attraction plays an important role when forming relationships. Many studies have avowed this, for example in Walters computer dance study couples where randomly selected and assigned to each other for an evening dance, Walster found that physical attractiveness was the single best predictor of how much person liked their assigned date. nev ertheless this study has been criticised as it lacks relevance to real life relationships.In Initial attraction, physical attraction has been said to be important. However people are not attracted by the most attractive person. The Matching hypothesis said that we are more likely to form a relationship with some who has a similar level of attractiveness a possible reason for this is a guardianship of rejection.The matching hypothesis has been supported by Murstien. In his study people were asked to rate photos of couples and rate them in terms of physical attractiveness. Murstien summarized his denudationings individuals with equal commercialise value for physical attractiveness are more likely to subsume in an intimate relationship such(prenominal) as engagement, than individuals with disparate values.However this is not always the case as some couples may be seen to be physically miss matched. It is argued though that those who are miss matched residue out in other areas prob lems git occur in miss matched couples, the less attractive person might feel insecure or jealous of the attention given to their partner, this could in any case effect the less attractive person self-esteem which could threaten the long term success of the relationship. some other theory in formation of relationships is the socio-biological theory. Wilson argued that human sexual attraction and demeanor may be explained through an understanding of survival efficiency. The theory suggests that men like to impregnate many women as it increases there chances of there genes to be carried down to generations. However a womans best chance of her genes surviving is to chequer that her offspring is healthy and caring for them.There are problems with this theory, it overemphasis on reproduction, not all couples want children and it also excludes homosexual couples. The theory raises an ethical tending as it can be seen to be supporting gender stereotypes, allowing men sexual privileges and freedoms which woman are denied. Another criticism of this theory is it lacks revalance in the modern world, the socio-biological theory may once have been relevant alone not suit those today.The reinforcement-affect model suggest that we like people because we find them rewarding, we associate them with some pleasant. May and Hamilton carried out a study to support this theory female student were asked to look at photographs of males, some looked at the photos date pleasant music was played while other looked at the same photos while unpleasant music was played. A comparison also looked at the photos but no music was play. They found that students who looked at the photos while listening to the pleasant music rated and liked the males in the photos best. This study and many others have shown positive feeling can lead to attraction.A tie of the theories and studies in formation of relationships have been criticised. Much of the research is seen as synthetic and leaves out m ost of the things people do in everyday life Duck 1999.Another reason they have been criticised is research focuses on romantic relationships and leaves Platonic friendships.Theories and studies also have not taken into count the influence of others such as family and friends as they can have an affect on relationships we form. overly in polygynous cultures, a man may have some(prenominal) wives at the same time.No characteristics are absolute, all are relative. We may like a characteristic in someone attractive at some point in relationship but find it ostracise at another time, for example as fall in hunch forward someone we may like someones unpredictability but as soundly fall out of love with them we may see it as irresponsibility. other(a) questions have also been raised does familiarity always lead to liking? Do we like people more because we spend time with them? Or do we spend we spend more time with them because we like them? Frequency of interaction does not always result to greater liking. It was demonstrated by Warr that it can produce more disliking.