Relationships may differ in cultures in that they are seen as being either voluntary or non voluntary. In western cultures, most relationships can be seen as voluntary as people tend to have more chance to interact with more people therefore they have more choice in a partner. However in non western societies, interactions with strangers are more limited (due to less mobility or economic resources) therefore non voluntary relationships are more present. However there is much argument that these types of marriages work well due to low divorce rates and many couples reporting that they have fallen in love (Epstein 2002). There is support for this from Myers study with individuals living in arranged marriages in India. He found no differences in marital satisfaction when compared to individuals in non-arranged marriages in the US.
The continuity of relationships differs through different cultures. Most cultures allow divorce although there is a greater stigma attached to divorce in cultures where marriages are usually arranged meaning divorce rates are kept low. Statistics show that divorce rates in western cultures have risen in the last 50 years in western cultures with one third of marriages now ending in divorce. A reason suggests that increase urbanisation and greater educational opportunities is the root of the increase as many now search for the ‘ideal partner’.
Argyle (1986) found there were some differences in the rules of relationships in different cultures after study Italy, UK, Hong Kong and Japan. For instance he believed that there differences in the rules concerning intimacy and other rules of relationships for instance Japanese gift giving. Toomey (1986) also found that there were differences in reciprocity as this was seen as voluntary in western cultures but in some cultures (e.g. Japan) it is obligatory and seen as a moral duty.
The view that relationships in collectivist societies are not based on love has attracted much criticism. Moore and Leung (2001) compared Anglo-Australian (individualist) and Chinese-Australian (collectivist) students to see if they showed different attitudes towards romance. The results showed that 61% of the Anglo students were in relationships compared to 38% of Chinese students and that Chinese students reported significantly more loneliness. However both groups expressed positive attitudes to romantic love which implies that romantic love does exist in collectivist cultures contrary to the view of Western society but may be seen as an ideal in the society which may not be so easy to act on. However due to methodological weakness in this study, such as a sample bias due to all participants being students, it hard to generalise Moore and Leung’s finding with all of collectivist cultures.
In China, there has been a move away from arranged marriages due to the country developing with parental choice in relationships at less than 10% in the 1990s falling from 70% prior to 1949. Xiaho and Whyte support the idea of universal romantic love being present in Japan as they found that women who has married for love felt better about marriages (regardless of the duration) than women who had experience arranged marriages.
Argyles study into the rules of relationships in different cultures has also received criticism. The main problem with this study is cultural bias as the list of relationship rules were generated in the UK and may have failed to include rules that are specific to a particular culture such as Japan. Another problem is that only four cultures were studied, overlooking the rules of many other cultures which may differ. Researcher bias may have also been present due to Argyle not asking the right questions regarding the rules of relationships.
There are many problems when generalising from one culture to another when examining relationships. The first problem that can occur is researcher bias which might happen when the researchers own expectations of their own culture are reflected onto the research. Another problem is that research into cultural differences in relationships is that much of the research is dominated by “Western” psychologists and the findings of their research are assumed as universal whereas it may be ethnocentric. Cultural bias can occur when a researcher tries to study a different culture for example if there is a language barrier the findings may not translate effectively.
