final test info for Relationship Final---2.docx

A complicated, difficult task even if you focus only on romantic relationships (not friendships, family relationships, etc) o E.g., When do friends-with-benefits end? • People pursue divorce rates because these are recorded but even they require thoughtful interpretation (diverse calculations, missi...

A complicated, difficult task even if you focus only on romantic relationships (not friendships, family relationships, etc) o E.g., When do friends-with-benefits end? • People pursue divorce rates because these are recorded but even they require thoughtful interpretation (diverse calculations, missing data) and a careful critical eye (what about cohabitating partners, are separated individuals divorced?) • Table 12.1 shows a few ways divorce rates are calculated o Crude divorce rate: Number of divorces per 1000 people in a given year (not age adjustment) o Refined divorce rate: Number of divorces per 1000 married women in a given year (excludes same-sex married men) o Cohort approach: The lifetime probability of marriages to end in divorce for a given cohort of individuals (can have missing data) Divorce Rates (e.g., United States) • 2.3 (crude divorce rate; U.S. census, 2021) • 14 women per 1,000 women 15 or older (Westrick-Payne, 2022) • 43 - 46 % of marriages between 2005 and 2010 will end in divorce (Smock & Schwartz, 2020) Divorce Rates Over Time • If students have not read the chapter, ask them if they think the divorce rate has risen or declined since 2010 • Help students see how changes in divorce have occurred over time by reminding them that it rose precipitously after the no-fault divorce laws were put into place in the U.S. in the 1970s, peaking around 1979, then declining since then. • Discussion – How is divorce helpful and how is it harmful? o Student responses might include: easier ways to legally end an unhealthy marriage can benefit personal health and well-being; divorce can be harmful to children; legal ties may encourage people to work on their relationships; divorce can help people live happier, healthier lives divorce can increase loneliness, etc. • Discussion – Why has the divorce rate changed over time? o Student responses might include changes in values, delayed marriage, rise in cohabitation and the decline of marriage in general (perhaps only those highly committed or unlikely to divorce enter marriage) o can increase loneliness, etc. Instructor Manual to DiDonato & Jakubiak, The Science of Romantic Relationships © Theresa DiDonato and Brett Jakubiak 2023 Rates of Non-Marital Dissolution • Very hard to estimate o Consider all the situations that are missed when people self-report breakups of casual encounters • Some people experience few, some people experience many o High variability is likely in people’s experiences • Estimates likely ignore predominately sexual relationships Predictors of Relationship Dissolution • Use this figure to lay the framework for discussing breakups o Problems with me or you o Problems with us o Problems with context • Activity: To help students enter a critical mindset about breakups, consider showing a clip or two from a familiar movie that shows a breakup. This one, from the movie “The Breakup” offers an opportunity to have students discuss with another classmate (e.g., in a pair-share format) why they think this relationship is ending, what they notice about their dynamic that could reflect underlying problems, what they notice about the emotions expressed, etc. Problems with “Me” or “You” • Discussion – What breakup reasons might fall under this umbrella? • Personality o Some personalities are associated with more relationship problems o E.g., neuroticism, low agreeableness, low conscientiousness o E.g., dark triad traits • Habits and Behaviors o Self, e.g., personal desires (e.g., more excitement, growth) o Partner, e.g., unfavorable traits, not doing enough chores, harmful behavior Problems with “Us” • Remind students what “us” is: an entity born of the interdependence between people, the relationship is the “thing” that breaks • To break a relationship is to weaken the foundations of what a relationship is, namely (or ask students to recall these features from chapter 1): o Breaking intimacy o Breaking interdependence o Breaking commitment • Note that the model here is most closely tied to close relationships Instructor Manual to DiDonato & Jakubiak, The Science of Romantic Relationships © Theresa DiDonato and Brett Jakubiak 2023 Problems with “Us”: Breaking Intimacy • Intimacy is closeness and knowing the other person o Low intimacy predicts dissolution • Usually not sudden, can decline slowly (people drifting apart) o Disaffection (romantic disengagement) • Characterized by disillusionment o loss of closeness, affection, and love, feelings of disappointment, and a lack of faith in one’s partner • Can constitute an emotional divorce o Recall that people weave their self-concepts together; low inclusion of other in self is a risk factor for divorce Problems with “Us”: Breaking Interdependence • Incompatibility o Repeatedly having misaligned interests o Nearly 20% of divorces cite incompatibility as part of the problem • Conflict as a often-cited reason for dissolution • But, meta-analysis suggests conflict is a weak predictor of dissolution (Le et al., 2010) Problems with “Us”: Breaking Commitment • Consider drawing the investment model of commitment on the board, remind students of its key components • The investment model of commitment (Rusbult, 1980) ties commitment to: o Investment o Satisfaction o (Fewer) alternatives • This model asserts that satisfaction is only one component of commitment (contrary to many ideas about why people breakup) Problems with “Us”: Breaking Commitment with Infidelity • Infidelity: secret sexual or emotional betrayal • A serious transgression in monogamous relationships – increases divorce odds by 363% according to recent research • Occurs commonly, all types of relationships and all over the globe o More common in less committed relationship structures Problems with “Us”: Why People Engage in Infidelity • Not one reason • Reasons appear relevant for relationship stability • Relationship-based reasons are Instructor Manual to DiDonato & Jakubiak, The Science of Romantic Relationships © Theresa DiDonato and Brett Jakubiak 2023 o Especially toxic to stability o E.g., lack of love, dissatisfaction, anger • Situational reasons include o e.g., vacation, drinking o and could be regretted mistakes Problems with “Us”: Consequences of Infidelity • Strong, but not universal, predictor of dissolution o Forgiveness linked to children, partner assurances o Extra-dyadic partner being a stranger vs friend (friend is worse) o Unsolicited confession (better) vs solicited confession vs learning in another way (worse) Problems with Context • Relationships do not operate in isolation o Even well-matched partners are not immune to breaking up • Highly stressful contexts threaten relationship stability Problems with Context: Financial Stress and Incarceration • Financial Stress o Low income is linked to relationship problems • Why? Consider challenges that are linked to low income o Financial stress is a risk factor for divorce • Incarceration o Remind students that incarceration disproportionally affects Black men o Introduces an array of new problems, including adding financial problems • Disrupts work • Adds expenses (e.g., lawyers) • Reduces access to resources o Prolonged separation harms relationships • Also a problem relevant to other groups (e.g., military families) Problems with Context: Parenting • Parenting introduces an array of problems (e.g., financial, agreeing on parenting styles) • Introduces other challenges o Infertility (a stress, not necessarily problematic, need more research here) o Challenges linked to children with health or developmental problems • E.g., cerebral palsy, Autism Spectrum Disorder • Added financial stress, parenting demands Instructor Manual to DiDonato & Jakubiak, The Science of Romantic Relationships © Theresa DiDonato and Brett Jakubiak 2023 • Variability in effect on relationship stability Problems with Context: Social Network • Discussion: Why might other people matter to the success of another person’s relationship? Responses might include: they can interfere, gossip, they can make things easier (match-making), they can have a stake in the stability of the relationship (e.g., family business, wanting to keep a friend circle intact), they can provide attractive alternatives o Tension with partner’s friends or family • Not liking a partner’s friends or family • Disagreements o Own or partners’ social network approval • Approval linked to stability • Stigmatization and/or marginalization o Social networks can introduce challenges for marginalized relationships (age-gap, same-sex, etc), such as being unwelcoming, distancing, rejecting, encouraging the end of a specific relationship. How Do People Breakup? • Invite students to think specifically about the process of a breakup, by asking them to generate a list (e.g., on the blackboard) of ways people can end relationships. The goal is to help students see that there is both diversity in these methods but also commonalities (e.g., goal-driven behaviors) Breaking Up as a Process • Remind students that most of the research on breakups focuses on divorce, but that much of what is learned can often be applied to other relationships • The divorce-stress-adjustment perspective o Breakups occur over time, not suddenly • The stress and challenge begins before, continues during, and persists after the breakup o Also applies to unmarried partners • Includes commitment uncertainty o People can wonder or feel unsure about whether they want to be in a relationship • Includes dissolution consideration (divorce ideation) o Common, does not necessarily lead to dissolution • People can think about breaking up, and imagine what it would be like to not be in the relationship Phase Model of Dissolution (Duck, 1982; 2005) • Breakups… Instructor Manual to DiDonato & Jakubiak, The Science of Romantic Relationships © Theresa DiDonato and Brett Jakubiak 2023 o Begin in the mind of one person o Then move to an interpersonal space between partners o The news is shared with partners’ social network o Ex-partners engage in meaning making o Ex-partners prepare for new relationships • Stage models help see common, but not necessarily universal patterns of behavior Breakup Strategies • Goal-driven behaviors that vary widely o If students generated ways that people end relationships earlier in the class, bring their variety to light here • Open, honest confrontation is considered ideal • Indirect approaches are also used o E.g., Ghosting is easy for initiator, harder for partner The Breakup Experience • Activity: Encourage students to think about different ways breakups (short and long-term) affect people by pausing class for a music listening moment. Create a medley of short clips from popular breakup songs that you can play for the students in class (students could also submit song ideas in advance). Organize students into small listening groups and have them each create columns to jot down behaviors, emotions, and cognitions that are present in the songs. With art reflecting life, this is an engaging way for students to see how varied people’s emotional reactions, thoughts, and actions are, in response to different breakups. Short-term Consequences of Dissolution • Linked to level of prior commitment o Loss of an attachment figure • Toll on mental health • Increases mortality risk o E.g., the widowhood effect – people are more likely to die after a spouse dies Long-term Consequences of Dissolution • Two alternative pathways are proposed by the divorce-stress-adjustment model • The crisis model of distress o Acute negative outcomes, then people adjust o Aligns with most people’s experience Instructor Manual to DiDonato & Jakubiak, The Science of Romantic Relationships © Theresa DiDonato and Brett Jakubiak 2023 • The chronic strain model of distress o Resource deficits and hardships extend indefinitely o Less common but still reflects people’s experiences Factors Explaining Diverse Post-Dissolution Outcomes • Why does the crisis model help explain so many people’s experience, but the chronic strain model is helpful for others? • Pre-existing vulnerabilities o E.g., mental health challenges, anxious attachment • Personality o E.g., neuroticism, lower extraversion, lower openness predicts worse outcomes o E.g., higher trait resilience predicts better adjustment • Gender o Women tend to initiate more divorces but they are at risk for worse financial outcomes and are often responsible for more of the childcare • Pre-breakup relationship quality o Ending unhealthy relationships can be especially helpful for later wellbeing Post-Dissolution Relationships with Ex-Partner • Many people stay friends with ex-partners o There’s a risk doing this: it can prolong adjustment o Motives vary (e.g., practical – co-parenting, work colleageus etc;, lingering romantic feelings) • Unwanted pursuit behaviors o E.g., annoying behaviors; stalking, cyberstalking • On-again/off-again relationships o Tend to be lower quality than unbroken relationships Forging a New Self, Separate from an Ex-Partner • Remember that close relationships involve linking the self with the partner, forming a representation of the self that includes the partner. o Endings require disentangling one’s ex from one’s self-concept • All the self-expansion that occurred via relationship participation needs to be addressed; Retain some partner-influenced aspects, drop others o Self-expansion residue – the partner aspects that are retained as aspects of the self from prior relationships • Post-dissolution growth o Retrospectively, people report important personal gains offered by a breakup Instructor Manual to DiDonato & Jakubiak, The Science of Romantic Relationships © Theresa DiDonato and Brett Jakubiak 2023 New Romantic Relationships • Rebound relationship o When people shift to a new pairbond quickly, it can be a positive relationship with good outcomes (not necessarily a “bad” move as it is often thought) • New relationships offer new opportunities to gain the benefits of relationships • People who re-partner tend to have better outcomes than those who do not Major Take-aways • Aspects of people’s personalities can predict breakups, but we tend to blame breakups on our partners more than ourselves. • Closeness can dissipate, incompatibility is a key predictor of divorce, and issues of commitment (especially infidelity) can jeopardize relationship stability. • Low income and incarceration are key situational factors predicting dissolution. • People can adopt myriad strategies to end their relationships, and the strategies they choose reflect their own attributes and influence the intensity of the breakup experience. • New relationships offer new opportunities to gain the benefits of relationships • People who re-partner tend to have better outcomes than those who do not • The loss of a relationship is associated with psychological distress and poorer physical health, and while some people experience the strain of dissolution in an acute crisis fashion, others experience chronic challenges tied to the loss of their relationship. • Forming friendships with an ex-partner is common and perhaps especially important in some contexts. The self-concept shrinks in the aftermath of a relationship dissolution and requires rebuilding; people who re-partner tend to have better outcomes than those who do not. 1. Why is the divorce rate declining overall, but rising among older adults? Drawing on social demography research, consider factors that help explain changes in the divorce rate among the general population and among older adults. How do gender, relationship composition (e.g., different-sex, samesex) and racial identity factor into the frequency of divorce? What might we expect over the next 20 years, and why? 2. How does incarceration affect relationship stability? Drawing on recent research, use this paper to examine how and why incarceration is a risk factor for relationship dissolution. Consider the problem from a personal and Instructor Manual to DiDonato & Jakubiak, The Science of Romantic Relationships © Theresa DiDonato and Brett Jakubiak 2023 societal level, paying particular attention to the problem of disproportional incarceration for certain groups over others. 3. Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder often require more from their parents than children not on the spectrum. Integrating examine the costs and benefits of raising children with ASD (or another diagnosis of your choosing) for parents’ relationships and what works (and doesn’t work) to help support romantic relationship stability and thriving while parenting children with diagnosed emotional, behavioral, and/or physical challenges. 4. Why do people engage in ghosting as a breakup strategy? Drawing on recent research, define ghosting within the context of other breakup strategies and use theory, buttressed by evidence, to examine why people choose ghosting to end relationships. Pursue the behavior of ghosting by identifying personal and situational predictors of ghosting and ultimately, the pros and cons of ghosting for both the ghoster and the victim. 5. Should people be friends with their ex-romantic partners? Drawing on evolutionary theory, interdependence theory, and attachment theory, examine the transition from romantic partners to friends. When and how and for what reasons does forming a friendship benefit ex-partners and when/how does it introduce costs? 6. What factors shape people’s experiences entering widowhood? What makes widowhood easier? What makes it harder? Use this paper to investigate how people experience the loss of a romantic partner. Consider diverse relationship structures and composition as you use theory and recent research to shine a spotlight on widowhood.