Outline and Evaluate One Theory of the Formation of Romantic Relationships (4+8 Marks) Essay

The recompense/ sine qua non mirth surmisal (RNS) was devised by Byron & Clore (1970) to explain the fundamental law of romantic kindreds, based on the principles of behavioral psychology. According to the conjecture, people form family relationships with those who ar most recognize/ satisfying to be with which happens through conditioning. The elements of Skinners operant conditioning proposes that we repeat behaviors with positive outcomes ( reinforcing stimuluss) and parry those with negative outcomes (punishments). Relationships positively reinforce by our confederate satisfying our ineluctably/rewarding us (through love or attention), tho negative reinforcement also plays a part in the likelihood of organisation as a relationship invalidate us feeling l superstarly which both(prenominal) result in us quest further contact with them and so forming a relationship.The theory also suggests that we may accessory a soul with positive feelings overdue to the eve n in which they meet this is called unmingled conditioning. This form of conditioning involves pairing a neutral stimulant with an unconditioned stimulus to arrive at a conditioned response, for modeling being at a troupe (NS) and feeling happy (UCR), because see a person (UCS) and associating this stimuli (now CS)with the happy feelings to create a CR of happiness whenever in their presence and we want to be with the person that makes us most happy, thus forming a relationship.An issue raised surrounding the RNS theory is that it fails to consider free will. It suggests that without rewards a relationship will not form provided shew from in advance(p) relationships argues early(a)wise, for example a rewards and blessedness is given in one night stands, yet no relationship is formed, plus no association canful be made through cyber relationships because the couple on have not met, yet a relationship still manages to form. This evidence goes against the theory suggestin g that separate concomitantors such as similarity, hazard and our own choices play a theatrical role in relationship formation thus proposing the theory is deterministic as tumefy as simplistic.On the contrary, research evidence has supported the RNS, one study conducted by Aron et al (2005). To begin the experiment, participants answered a questionnaire evaluation how intensely in love they were then they were shown photos of their partner during an MRI scan. It was found that dophamine-richareas of the flair (area associated with rewards) had higher(prenominal) activity when shown their partner than when shown an photograph of their friend. These findings show that we form relationships with those who are rewarding. blue temporal validity is a persuasiveness to this study because it was conducted recently. This means the couples used in the experiment have a higher ability to reflect modern twenty-four hour period relationships because the findings are more generalisabl e to modern relationships. Along with that the study is strong physical, a posteriori evidence because of the use of MRI scans. wizardry scans produce reliable, physical, solid evidence therefore have scientific proof for the consort between relationships and rewards.The importance of reward level in determining relationship merriment was also demonstrated by visiting card et al (1982) in which he asked 337 participants to asses their legitimate relationship in terms of reward level and satisfaction and found that reward level was superior to all opposite factors in determining relationship satisfaction concluding that rewards are a great factor than any when it comes to relationship formation. in time a criticism of these findings is that the reward/need satisfaction theory only explores the receiving of rewards, whereas hay (1985) found that we gain satisfaction from bad as well as receiving. well-nigh of the research into RNS theory has been conducted in the US with US participants, making it difficult to interpolate to different cultures. The theory, as well as the research, has an ethnocentric bias in the fact that it is based on relationships in westbound cultures, therefore reflect relationships of western societies, further these are very different to other cultures were people may not rush a choice in their partner e.g. arranged marriages. Lott (1994) found that women in other cultures focused more on the needs of others than rewards, suggesting that there are differences in the observe of rewards which this theory emphasizes so much about. As a result of this cultural bias, the RNS theory is not a universal story of relationship formation.