1. ROLLIE & DUCK’S MODEL of relationship breakdown (2006) – put in the correct order!
Dyadic processes
In this phase the dissatisfied person confronts their partner and explains why they are unhappy
The couple discuss their feelings and discuss the future
There may be some uncertainty at this point
Discussions can be quite angry with hostility and resentment communicated
The couple reassess their goals and the various options, and review their commitment
At this stage the relationship can be saved if it is re-negotiated
The partners involve other people (eg. friends, family, colleagues) either for advice or support
The relationship may be terminated at this point
Social processes
At this stage most of the dissatisfied partner’s close social network are made aware of the situation, either that the relationship has been dissolved or that it is in trouble
This continues to be for advice and support
Some of this can be helpful, for example where friends and family suggest talking and trying to work things out
It can also be unhelpful if friends and family take sides, criticise and lay blame, and this can speed up the dissolution of the relationship
One or both of the partners may start to denigrate the other to others
Resurrection processes
At this stage both partners start to prepare themselves for new relationships
They may redefine themselves
They may also build on the mistakes that have been made in the previous relationship
They may also review the sort of relationship they want in the future
Partners attempt to re-establish their own individual sense of identity and self- esteem
Intrapsychic processes
The focus of the person’s attention during this stage of breakdown is inward
They think a great deal about the relationship and what they are dissatisfied with
For some people this involves rumination
The person considers the costs of ending the relationship, and the possible rewards
This includes thinking about possible alternative partners
This phase is accompanied by social withdrawal
Nothing is said to the partner at this stage although hints and indirect communication (ie. lack of interest in sex) may convey dissatisfaction
At this point some people will end the relationship without discussing or saying what they are unhappy about
Grave dressing processes
At this stage both partners start to justify their actions, and their dissatisfaction
They attempt to put themselves forward in a positive light without making the initial attraction, and decision to form a relationship, seem illogical
Sometimes this involve a reinterpretation of the partner’s characteristics and qualities
Both partners reflect on what happened, who was to blame, and decide on how they wish to view and communicate the reasons for the breakup to other people
Different people may be given different versions of what happened in an attempt to gain sympathy and support, and to save face
The partners may suggest that they are pleased that the relationship is over, and that they have moved on, before they actually have

2. ROLLIE & DUCK’S MODEL (2006) - 5 phases
- INTRAPSYCHIC PHASE: both of the partners are dissatisfied with the relationship. When they are unable to stand it anymore they cross the threshold and voice their opinions. The threshold being ‘I can’t stand it anymore’.
- DYADIC PHASE: Unhappiness is out into the open and confrontation may occur. Intervention teams such as counseling may take place at this point. If they fail the next threshold will be reached ‘I would be justified in leaving.’
- SOCIAL PHASE: Relationship problems are aired publically and the couple tells their own friends and family of the relationship and they may take sides. By this point the split is inevitable, the threshold being ‘I mean it.’ -

3. ROLLIE & DUCK’S MODEL (2006) - 5 phases
If breakup happens …
- GRAVE-DRESSING PHASE: No threshold for this phase, occurring after split up. Each person markets their own version of the events and the causes of it to others and its important in conveying a good image to others when trying to form a new relationship.
- RESURRECTION PHASE: Involves each person reviewing the relationship and what has been learnt and as to how a new relationship would differ in the future. -

4. L.O: Outline & Evaluate 2 models of Relationship Breakdown
Duck’s (1999) Reasons
(WHY they break up)
 Rollie & Duck’s Model (what they DO & what they THINK)

5. ROLLIE & DUCK’S MODEL (2006) - 5 phases
You need to make me an mnemonic for this!!
[BIDSGR]

6. Reasons for breakdown : Maintenance Difficulties (MD)
Duck’s (1999)
Reasons for breakdown :
Lack of Skills (LSk)
Lack of Stimulation (LSt)
Maintenance Difficulties (MD)

7. Task A break up sketch!! Work in 3s/4s
Complete the stages of Rollie and Duck’s (2006) model as a soap opera script.
Include some of Duck’s (1999) reasons for breakdown too.
You have the rest of this lesson and the homework to finish the script, which you will be acting out next lesson.

8. Neither model is very good on WHY breakdowns happen
L.O: Outline & Evaluate 2 models of Relationship Breakdown
 Lee’s Model (what people DO)
Duck’s Theory (what they DO & what they THINK)
Neither model is very good on WHY breakdowns happen

9. Why Might a Relationship Break Down?
What reasons did you come up with?

10. Why Might a Relationship Break Down?
What reasons did you come up with?

11. Lee’s Model (1984) - 5 stages:

12. Lee’s Model (1984) - 5 stages:

13. You need to make me an mnemonic for this!!
Lee’s Model (1984) - 5 stages:
You need to make me an mnemonic for this!!
[DENRT]

14. Reasons for breakdown : Maintenance Difficulties (MD)
Duck’s (1999)
Reasons for breakdown :
Lack of Skills (LSk)
Lack of Stimulation (LSt)
Maintenance Difficulties (MD)

15. Evaluation
Large sample size and a lot of information gathered BUT only relates to pre-marital relationships, what about other types of relationships, long term relationships etc? Mainly looks at events leading up to dissolution, Doesn’t explain why relationships break down Felmlee’s (115) ‘fatal attraction’ theory suggests another reason for breakup – the same characteristics that initially attract us to a person ultimately lead to dissolution – they might be exciting or different to start with, but then later be predictable, or strange.

16. Evaluation
Culturally specific- not related to non-western cultures , such as collectivist cultures Reductionist- focusing only on romantic, heterosexual relationships. This theory is not applicable to friendships, homosexual relationships etc. Cannot explain abusive relationships- abused partner may not initiate the stages of dissolution, being reluctant to reveal their dissatisfaction Individual differences- Like other stage theories, it is rigid in that it assumes every breakup goes through the same stages and this may not necessarily be the case.

17. And now for something completely different
(got it right this time, so IN YOUR COLLECTIVE FACES!)

18. Sternberg (1986): 3 components to ‘Love’
PASSION
physiological arousal, longing to be with
INTIMACY
close bond, sharing, support
commitment to long term
COMMITMENT

19. Are There Different Varieties of Love?
Not all types of “love” involve same mix of passion, intimacy, and commitment…
Passionate love
A state of intense longing for union with another
Companionate love
Affection and tenderness for those whose lives are entwined with our own

20. Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love

21. Would You Marry Someone if You Were Not in Love?

22. Cultural Variations in Willingness to Marry Without Love

23. Companionate Love: Self-Disclosure
Form of affection found between close friends as well as lovers
Less intense than passionate love
But in some respects it is deeper and more enduring
Characterized by high levels of self-disclosure