'Compare Explanations for Relationship Breakdown Given\r'

' equal explanations for kinship sectionalisation given by exchange possibleness and equity theory. Which do you consider to be the to a greater extent or less win over and why? What does Duck’s theory add to the explanation? The trade possibleness which was roll forward by Homans in 1971 suggests that when we ar in a kindred, we cargo hold an eye on what we are lay in and getting out of a race. It argues that whether ir not we are squelched depends on the ratio of rewards and be that are given within the relationship.If the person elusive feels as though, for them, the rewards outweigh the costs, they will most potential feel satisfied with the relationship as they do not invite to give as much, however, if the person tough feels like the costs outweighs the rewards, they will contract dissatisfied with the relationship and this will terminus in them becoming possible to reflexion elsewhere for ‘better offer’ and the old relationship will go aroundd birth.On the other hand, righteousness scheme which was developed by Walster in 1978, does not argue that if the rewards outweigh the costs the person will be happy, hardly that when in a relationship, the people complex expect the relationship to be fair. Where give-and- come across Theory would say that people would collapse a relationship as it is if they matt-up they were in the advantaged position where rewards are concerned, justness theory says that the person would look to retrieve the equity within the relationship by either reducing their input or increasing their outputs.If this does not appear to work, it is possible that the relationship will breakdown as an equilibrium has not been tinted. I mobilize that the Equity Theory is a more than convincing uprise to the breakdown on relationships as most people in the 21st century, are more likely to try and ‘work it out’ if the relationship appeared to be in turmoil.It is align that if psyche feels like they aren’t getting full out of the relationship, then the relationship is more likely to break down, but this the transform Theory suggests that the relationship will breakdown straight away which is not true to reality as it is likely that the par totallyel would discuss things before a ratiocination is made on the future of the relationship. This is defined in Duck’s theory. Also, the Exchange Theory suggests that humanness are self-serving as the theory seems to say that humans are fixated on getting the rewards from a relationship.In 1988, Duck demonstrated how a relationship should typically end. In order to do this, he developed a quad acquaint model of dissolution. Stage unrivalled, the Intra-psychic phase, states that at least one member of the friction match will start to feel lovesick and will start to focus on the behaviour of their partners. They will eventually r severally the threshold and will voice their concerns. The wink stage, the dyadic phase, states that the couple will ware part in discussions and some whitethorn go to counselling; others may r ach the next threshold.This is the third stage, the social phase, where friends may offer support or take sides. It is this stage, according to Duck, where a break up is inevitable. The final stage is the grave dressing phase. This is when both people involved put across their opinion of what happened during the breakup and each partner will create their own version of who was to blame in the situation. It is unremarkably a face saving situation. This approach address issues that the other approaches, the Exchange Theory especially, ignores.Duck’s approach addresses that couples are likely to take part in discussions near the relationship and where they think it is heading. The theory shows the diametrical stages that should be considered when going through a break up however, ‘considered’ is the operative word. The theory sugg ests that these stages happen in all break ups however this is not the case for all situations. Although the stages should be considered, it is likely that some couples may get stuck in a stage or even miss one out meaning that it does not cost the approach to every letter.\r\n'