Dissolution Of Relationships

The dissolution of relationships
Duck suggested that there are predisposing factors that lead to relationship dissolution, one of which includes a lack of skills.
An example could be applied to poor conversationalists- their lack of interpersonal skills may be interpreted by their partners as them being uninterested in the relationship, causing it to break down.
A lack of stimulation may also cause relationship breakdown.
In terms of social exchange theory, this could be explained by one or both of the individuals experiencing a lack of satisfaction, therefore less reward.
Baxter supports this reason, claiming that a relationship which has stopped developing causes the reward – cost ratio to lean towards a lack of rewards, and so costs
Similarly, individuals who are high in agreeableness (co-operative, supportive and non-confrontational) tend to be in relationships which have less conflict and are longer lasting.

A lot of research into relationship breakdown such as Graziano et al’s is hampered by various factors however, such as observer bias and the use of imposed practices (such as the use of Western questionnaires to assess attitudes to relationships). Another weakness is that much of this research is based on retrospective accounts that preceded relationship termination. Because such accounts are susceptible to distortions in the interpretation of and memory for past events, the results of cross-sectional research must be interpreted with caution.

Despite suggested maintenance difficulties, some long distance romantic relationships (LDRRs) have been known to continue successfully.
Rohlfing et al’s findings supported this, showing that approximately 70% of students sampled had experienced at least one LDRR. If maintenance difficulties were a definite factor in the dissolution of a relationship, then Rohlfing’s findings should have indicated far fewer LDRRs taking
As Rohlfing’s research was conducted in 1988, his findings may be considered outdated. Technological developments have lead to a far more mobile society for many, such as Skype and easy access to transport, meaning that couples are far more able to reunite than they were twenty years ago and so relationships can be more easily maintained.
The predisposing factors identified by Duck may only apply to some cultures, with each focussing on individualistic culture norms such as personal freedom. Moghaddam identifies the major difference between Western-style marriage and non-Western arranged marriages in terms of Sternberg’s love triangle (intimacy, passion and commitment).
With romantic marriages in western societies, passion is most important during the initial stages of a relationship but in arranged marriages commitment is, and that commitment involves the entire family. It may be therefore that Duck’s suggested predisposing factors such as a lack of skills/ stimulation have little or no effect on relationship breakdown in collectivist societies, as their perception of the wife role has stronger emphasis on being a married woman and mother- much less focus on the actual