One weakness of Duck’s model and other research into relationship breakdown is that they are reductionist. The different models and research focus entirely on romantic relationships. Alternatively Argyle and Henderson looked at friendship dissolution. They carried out research into friendship rules and looked at how the violation of them would affect friendship dissolution. Rule violations found to be the most critical included jealousy, lack of tolerance, disclosing confidences, not volunteering help when needed and publicly criticising the person. Therefore by specifying one type of relationship psychologists are failing to account fully for relationship dissolution as a whole. This suggests that explanations into the breakdown of relationships are an oversimplification.
One strength of research into the breakdown of relationships is that it can lead to practical applications. The models and theories set out provide a clear set of processes that people go through during relationship breakdown. This therefore means that counsellors can help couples to identify areas where their relationship has started to go wrong and help the couple to resolve these issues. For example if the couple are in the intrapsychic phase counsellors should aim to help couples re-establish liking for each other rather than trying to correct behavioural faults. This suggests that research and explanations into the breakdown of relationships is useful as it can be used to improve the quality of people’s relationships.
Another criticism of Ducks model is found in a study by Lee. Lee came up with an alternative explanation of relationship breakdown based on his survey of 112 romantic break-ups. He discovered evidence for five distinct stages: Dissatisfaction (D), Exposing the dissatisfaction (E), Negotiating (N), Attempting resolution of the problem (R), and Termination of the relationship (T). He found that stages E and N were the most intense and exhausting parts of this process and that not all couples went through all five stages. Those who went straight from D to T, reported having felt less intimate with their partner even when the relationship was going well. For those whose journey from D to T was particularly long and drawn out they reported feeling more attraction for their former partner and the greatest loneliness following the break-up.
One weakness of the explanations and research studies provided into the breakdown of relationships is that they do not take account of individual differences. The factors identified by Duck may not apply to Non-Western relationships and is likely there will be different reasons and stages in their dissolution.
The Social Exchange theory makes use of the concepts of rewards and costs when discussing the basis of the interpersonal exchange. Rewards and resources refer to the benefits exchanged in social relationships. Rewards are defined as the pleasures, satisfactions, and gratifications a person enjoys from participating in a relationship. The costs of social exchange relationships can involve punishments experienced, the energy invested in a relationship, or rewards as a result of engaging in one behaviour or course of action rather than another. Satisfaction with an exchange relationship is derived from the evaluation of the outcomes available in a relationship. Outcomes are equal to the rewards obtained from a relationship minus the costs incurred. To account for satisfaction, both the experiences of the outcomes derived from the relationship and the expectations that individuals bring to their relationships are taken into account.
If there is a better alternate relationship, as established by the comparison level, than the one you are currently in, then it is most likely that the person will leave the relationship and partake in a more rewarding relationship.
