Stimuli that is rewarding produces positive feelings in us, and stimuli that is punishing produces negative feelings. As some of the stimuli are other people it follows that some people make us happy, while others do not. According to the principles of operant conditioning, we are likely to repeat any behaviour that leads to a desirable outcome and avoid behaviour that leads to an undesirable outcome. This theory suggests that we enter into relationships because the presence of some individuals in directly associated with reinforcement – they produce a positive feeling for us – which makes them more attractive to us. As well as being attracted to someone who directly makes us happy, we also like people who we associate with a pleasant experience.
Outline and evaluate the Filter Model of Relationships The Filter Model was proposed by Kerckhoff & Davis (1962) in an attempt to explain how relationships are formed. The filter model argues that relationships are formed through three filters - based on social and demographic variables, similarity of attitudes and values, and the complementarity of emotional needs. Additionally, different factors are important at different times. Potential partners are filtered out using the filter model from the field of availables, the group of possible people that one can have a relationship with, this group is gradually narrowed down until it becomes a relative small field of desirables, people whom one would consider as potential partners. The filters that we use to make such decisions include social and demographics variables, this filter often exerts its influence without us even being aware of it.
Occasional arguments are good for friendship relationships. The trick is to learn how to do it fairly. Occasional arguments help us to learn how to better understand each other, gives us room to freely express ourselves, and they don’t allow problems about certain situations to build up one after another. An argument is defined as a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action, idea, or thought is right or wrong. In order to have a friendship that works or is healthy you have to argue sometimes to better understand the other person.
We are more likely to form a relationship with those people who are associated with pleasant event e.g. we are more likely to like someone when we are in a happy mood opposed to unhappy. Support for this theory comes from Griffitt and Guay, they found that higher ratings were given when the experimenter had positively evaluated the participants, thus showing the importance of positive stimuli in relationship formation. Although, the reward / need satisfaction theory doesn’t take into account cultural and gender differences in the formation of romantic relationships. Lott suggests that in many cultures are more focused on the needs of others rather than receiving reinforcement.
Although the previous includes body language such as eye contact and smiling as methods to achieve intimacy, self-disclosure deeply penetrates a person’s core within a social context. In contrast to the Relational Dialectical theory, the Social Penetration theory accommodates the idea of people counting the costs or benefits to achieving intimacy with a person before committing to the process. In fact, theorists propose, “…we can accurately gauge the payoffs of a variety of interactions…and the action that will provide the best results”. (100) Even though Altman admits that environmental factors impact the depth of self-disclosure in social penetration, cultural distinctions play a role as well. In other words, cultural diversity plays a role in the depth of self-disclosure; social psychologist (Griffin, Ledbetter, & Sparks 2016) Howard Giles’s Communication Accommodation Theory indicates a need for using communication strategies like convergence, or divergence to achieve closeness within a culturally diverse, relational context.
Overall, there are some similarities between the two theories, such as the both theorists were form the same generation, meaning that they would have been both influenced by the same ideas and had the same resources to rely on at the time, so none were at a disadvantage. Also, they both agreed in their theories that self-esteem and concept are very important in terms of an individual developing and becoming the best they can be. The differences on the other hand are the facts that Bowbly and Maslow both did their research differently, Bowlby resorted to methods such as observing how children reacted when parents left them and treated them. Whereas Maslow looked famous people’s biographies in order to determine what life events they had experienced and how it affected them later on and also pursued interviews. And finally another difference is the fact that Bowlby looked at how in the past when an individual is younger how their childhood will impact their future, whereas Maslow was more concerned with here and now.
This just means that the act is correct as long as it brings happiness to the greatest amount of people. Sidgwick and Bentham believed in similar views and are seen as act utilitarians. Act utilitarianism is when you have to decide what action would bring about the greatest good so it depends on the consequences of the action so the rightness or wrongness of something can be changed. Rule utilitarianism believes that rules should be created by using utilitarian principles
Final Paper: Letter of Advice Lawrence Hawkins COM 200 – Interpersonal Communication Inst. Angela Gillette April 23, 2012 Dear, David and Cierra; My advice to you for a healthy and successful relationship is rather lengthy and takes time to perfect, or even get good at. As you know, interpersonal communication, when used correctly, can decrease minor and major conflicts, and increase the happiness and satisfaction in relationships. As well, since we are born communicating, it is only right that we are able to do so without constraint. This letter is to explain, what I believe are, ways to effectively use interpersonal communication in your relationship.
The thought of marriage, represents two people, truly in love, who have committed to share their lives together. However there are motivations other than love that leads us to marriage. The purpose of this essay is to attain a better understanding of the Erik Erikson psychosocial theory of development and John Bowlby's attachment theory in application to my present life. This essay explores the bond my husband and I share and how being a securely attached couple contributes to our current marital happiness, focusing on four important abilities essential for intimacy; having the ability to seek out care, be able to give care, have the capability of feeling comfortable with an independent self and having the capacity to negotiate. (Busch & Hofer, 2012).
Aristotle also suggests happiness conforms to goodness of virtue (Kucukuysal and Beyhan, 2011). To be happy and good, one must make the right choices. Virtue is taught and learned. The ability to define happiness and decide what is virtuous is an individual choice based upon life teachings and experience. In order to make someone else happy, you must be happy with yourself.