Prepping for Relationships - 2026 Exams

追加: 2026-06-05

[00:00:01]Right. Hello everyone.

[00:00:03]Um so, second video going through paper three, prepping for relationships. I feel speaking to students that relationships is often people's favorite of paper three, and so they don't tend to have as many problems, but you're going to have to sit it whether you like it or not. And actually, don't get caught out by it. Um so, uh let's jump straight in. Relationships, highlighted in the green just here, had a 16-marker last year on just the filter theory. Um difficult to judge whether it's going to have a 16-marker. I think the chances are about 33%.

[00:00:44]Um uh like I said in my previous video, I do think, personally, personally, it's my opinion, um I think you are very likely. I might be wrong. I might be wrong. Happy to admit that. But I think you're very likely to get a 16-marker in issues and debates, which raises the question of where is your one remaining essay going to appear? Relationships, schizophrenia, or whatever you do in uh section D, um mostly forensics.

[00:01:14]Um there's one reason why I think it would come up more in a relationships one, certainly than a schizophrenia one, in that rela- before it came up last year, relationships didn't have a 16-marker for the two years before that. So, it's only had one 16-marker in the last 3 years. So, uh I'd say, uh maybe a bit more than 33%. Um what else came up last year? Um theories of romantic relationships and virtual. Now, there's a couple of things I want to point out here.

[00:01:48]If I just zoom into if I just click in here, virtual, sorry, sorry, theories of romantic relationship has had a question come up eight times in nine years. I I say nine out of 10 later on, that's wrong. It is um eight out of nine years.

[00:02:06]Theories of romantic relationships have come up. I think you are likely going to get a question on theories of romantic relationships.

[00:02:15]Um whereas evolutionary and parasocial has only come up three out of nine years.

[00:02:24]Um uh >> [sighs] >> Nothing's guaranteed to come up. Um so everything's come up within three years.

[00:02:33]Parasocial is the one that's not come up the longest, but again that doesn't necessarily mean it's it's definitely going to come up. So let's have a look at the general points here. Um uh I'm more con- Like I say, I'm more convinced of a 16-marker on issues and debates than relationships.

[00:02:48]Um Could come up. Could be one in both, I guess, but um yeah. Um Mm.

[00:02:59]>> [sighs] >> Uh relation- Relationships has been hit a couple of times with the eight and the 16-markers.

[00:03:07]Um only evolutionary explanations has never had a 16-marker.

[00:03:13]Only evolut- Is that right? I mean, I wrote it.

[00:03:18]Should trust myself. Yes, I am right.

[00:03:20]What a surprise. Um >> [clears throat] >> only Only yeah.

[00:03:24]How How? How has there never been a 16-marker on evolutionary explanations before? There's been one in the specification papers before anyone actually sat the actual paper, but uh they're not counted as real 16-markers.

[00:03:39]Be aware of the eight and the 16-marker section. M- To be honest, mainly with relationships and schizophrenia.

[00:03:47]But they could come up. They could go for the dreaded, but yet not done, eight-marker eight-marker eight-marker.

[00:03:54]Though I personally doubt they're going to go for that. Um right, so I mean, that's that's really the main points.

[00:04:02]Relationships isn't the hardest one.

[00:04:06]Um in terms of knowledge, in terms of evaluation a little bit different. So, here here's some Again, I'm not going to I'm not going to teach you this, but here's the main points you need to know.

[00:04:17]Evolutionary explanations, know the difference between natural and sexual selection.

[00:04:22]That's going to be quite That could be quite important, for example. So, both of them are evolutionary processes, absolutely. But, sexual selection is the idea of we pick our mates based on what we find sexually attractive.

[00:04:38]But, there's a problem there, because what we find sexually attractive may not help us survive, i.e. natural selection.

[00:04:46]So, breasts are a fantastic example.

[00:04:49]Um uh attractive breasts very nice, you know.

[00:04:55]Um essentially, the udders of humanity.

[00:05:01]Um >> [clears throat] >> I don't really think about that, do you?

[00:05:04]That breasts are just udders.

[00:05:07]Yeah, I never look at a I look at a cow in a field and think, "Woah."

[00:05:11]It's just weird, isn't it? Anyway, I'm getting distracted.

[00:05:15]Um Breasts are fantastic.

[00:05:19]But, they do not help us survive. Um a peacock plumage is the far more [laughter] uh safer option to go for. Looks fantastic, very sexy plumage on a peacock, absolutely. Does nothing for survival. If a lion jumps out at you and starts chasing you, you've got your plumage out, you're you're [ __ ] Sorry, you're you are screwed. So, this is a This is a point that's not picked up on that that much by by students. Intra and inter, do get them confused. Um Um yes, men prefer quantity over quality. Most of the time, men prefer quantity over quality. We take what's called a scattergun approach and spread our semen as far and wide and in as many people as possible to try get them pregnant. Do you know why? Because we can.

[00:06:10]Physically, not socially, I should add.

[00:06:14]>> [clears throat] >> Uh whereas women go for a quality over quantity. Why? Because they can't generate any more eggs. They're likely to get left with the baby, an ugly baby, you know.

[00:06:28]What's the point?

[00:06:30]What is the point?

[00:06:32]Your ugly baby is going to turn out to be an ugly child. That ugly child is unfortunately going to morph into an ugly adult where they will die alone, never planting their seed or never having their seed planted because they are ugly, right? So, the point being here, women tend to be more selective.

[00:06:50]Now, anisogamy often goes under the radar. This is the idea This is the idea of the differences that men and women have in reproductive resources. So, men have got plenty of resources, constantly generating, um and can do so for most of their life, whereas females tend to have scarcer, find out finite limited resources. Now, here's the key bit. Here's the key bit that nobody really picks up on.

[00:07:20]You may get asked about the This is the wording in the spec.

[00:07:25]the relationship between um sexual selection and human reproductive behavior. What you really need to know is about the relationship between the reproductive material you have and how you act.

[00:07:46]You You need You need to be able to describe and evaluate that relationship.

[00:07:52]Right?

[00:07:53]That's That's the clearest way I can say it. There is a relationship and a social anomaly and a social anomaly there is a relationship between whether you've got loads of reproductive materials and the fact you're going to be a bit of a promiscuous man. There is a relationship between those two things.

[00:08:15]There's a relationship between if you don't have that many materials and then your selectiveness, your your your sexual fussiness.

[00:08:25]So, be careful. That is, I think, a fair question for them to ask is about the relationship between those those two things.

[00:08:37]Evaluations, socially sensitive, alpha bias, um you know, stating differences between men and women gives men the right to be able to sleep with as many people as possible. Women who do sleep with a lot of people, which they are fully allowed to be able to do and should be allowed to do as their bodies, they can do with it what they want. Hashtag feminism.

[00:08:56]Um but this theory goes against that. So, it's offensive. It's very offensive. It creates prejudice, stereotypes, division in our society.

[00:09:07]Um research support, Clark and Hatfield, easy. Clark and Hatfield, very easy. 75% compared to zero practical applications.

[00:09:15]And it A good evaluation here is actually it's impossible to disprove.

[00:09:21]How do you disprove this idea that men are biologically pre-programmed to actually We can't see your evolution. We can't observe it. It's not empirical. It's Technically, evolution is not particularly scientific cuz it's not falsifiable, not empirical, it's not necessarily objective, it's Darwin's idea.

[00:09:41]Um so, yeah, fine, whatever. Uh do not confuse evolutionary explanations for factors affecting attraction.

[00:09:51]Often done.

[00:09:52]Often done.

[00:09:54]So, um Self-disclosures, give examples.

[00:10:00]Uh my advice for the self-disclosures and I don't what what This is a good place to get people. I don't think most people would be able to do a 16-marker on just self-disclosures.

[00:10:12]I think there is enough there for you to be able to do. Check my slides, they've got enough there.

[00:10:17]Um gender differences, the attributions to the um self-disclosure. So, do they do you get the sense that they self-disclose quite a lot?

[00:10:28]If I'm on a date with somebody and she tells me a story and it's a little bit too rehearsed, you know, it's a little bit too rehearsed, I'm going to think she's told other people this.

[00:10:38]So, why the why the hell would I feel special? Why would I tell you my skeletons in my closet when you're telling me something that you're happy to tell everybody else? I don't feel valued, I don't feel special. So, you know, you there's a lot here.

[00:10:50]Um also, the level of the self-disclosure, you know, um the timing of the self-disclosure. So, I think you could get a 16-marker on purely self-disclosure if I'm honest. I think the essays have been a little bit too easy so far. A little bit too straightforward. That would be something to bring it back in, a 16-marker purely on self-disclosures. I think that's fair enough. So, know the four kind of elements. There's a gender difference, the attribution, the levels, um and I um I can't remember the other one, but have a look at my slides for this. Um that that would be a pretty good essay. That would be a pretty good essay. Physical attractiveness, you've got matching hypothesis. It's got face validity. Um I think most people can attest to the idea of physical attractiveness being a major component that affects attractiveness.

[00:11:44]You know, we don't dance over to somebody because we like the look of their personality. We We go to them because they've got, according to my calculations, a 0.71 waist-hip ratio.

[00:11:52]Yes, please. Thank you very much.

[00:11:58]Maybe that's just me, I don't know.

[00:11:59]Um filter theory, huge theory, massive.

[00:12:02]Uh plenty to talk about here.

[00:12:04]The three The three filters talk about how it's temporally invalid, but I don't think I don't think this is a big big thing for this.

[00:12:12]Um fine. Now, um the theories of romantic relationship um I think you stand a very good chance of this coming up. Um my advice would be um absolute minefield for students. Um my advice would be know the similarities and the differences.

[00:12:34]Um you may be asked specifically about one of these theories.

[00:12:42]So, if I were to ask you right now, evaluate equity, but I want your evaluations to be purely about equity.

[00:12:50]Purely about equity.

[00:12:52]I don't want your points to be able to have be applied to social exchange, to be able to be applied to Rusbult. That is the key battle here. is to specify your um your answers specifically to that theory. This is the key bit. This is the key bit.

[00:13:09]So, the similarities here are that they all agree we need profit.

[00:13:14]All of them. All three of them.

[00:13:17]But if I'm asking you to evaluate equity how can you apply this to equity?

[00:13:26]How can you apply this point to equity and not make it so it fits all three theories? I don't know if this is making sense, but let me just say this one more time.

[00:13:35]Anytime you're answering a question on a particular theory, you have to make everything specific to that theory. If I read you go, "Well, you know, um it's got practical applications because it we can look at couples therapy."

[00:13:51]They do that in social exchange, they do it in equity, they do it in Rusbult. But the question was on equity. So, my point here, make it specific to what you're talking about.

[00:14:00]Um they all agree and they all take an economic view of relationships. That is, you've got certain amount of benefits, certain amount of costs, and if you're in profit, if your benefits are higher than your costs, if you're in profit, that relationship will continue. Social exchange, equity, and Rusbult all agree on this. We're not in relationships because we love them. That's just a benefit to it. That's just a benefit.

[00:14:28]That's why your parents' relationships have survived, if they have, because purely because they have kept it in profit the whole time. They all agree as well, and I'm looking at you people who are in relationships here, they all believe that we compare our relationships to other potential alternatives.

[00:14:47]Um you're going to say, "But I don't do that." And I'm going to say, "Bullshit, yes, you do." Yes, you do. Yes, you do.

[00:14:55]All three All three scientific theories say this.

[00:15:00]No offense, but your opinion that you don't don't mean [ __ ] Yes, you do. Stop looking at other people. Focus on your own relationship.

[00:15:07]Come on, what's wrong with you? Even though we all do this.

[00:15:10]Now, the trick will be knowing where they differ.

[00:15:14]So, social exchange is basic. It focuses on just profit. That's it, really. Equity builds upon it with fairness. It's not an opposing theory. It's not an opposing theory. It just builds upon social exchange. Rusbult agrees. Caroll Rusbult agrees with the other two theories. She agreed with them before she died, bless her. She agreed with them, but she just added a little bit onto equity, and that's where you get the the investment model. So, know where they differ. Your answers are going to be judged on how well applied they are to that particular that particular theory. So, if you're evaluating equity theory, I want you referencing fairness.

[00:16:04]Uh you know, um that behaviors are just as in like justice. They're they're just and fair. Um if you're talking about Rusbult's investment model, I want you talking about um maintenance uh mechanisms.

[00:16:21]Intrinsic and ex- extrinsic investments.

[00:16:24]I want you using that terminology and applying your answers as much as possible.

[00:16:28]I'm not going to go through virtual or parasocial a lot of detail. Um virtual, the only thing I'm going to say here, it is absolutely critical [snorts] that you're able to differentiate between virtual and face-to-face. That's the only thing I care about. I'm not going to go through reduced cues. I've got videos of that. Hyperpersonal model, not going to go through that.

[00:16:50]Self-disclosures, absence of gating, not going to go through that.

[00:16:53]The only thing I would say here is that you need to be able to differentiate between it. So, if you get a question on self-disclosures in virtual relationships, it absolutely has to be specifically contextualized to virtual relationships. I know that might be obvious, but it won't be for everyone.

[00:17:12]And then lastly, um parasocial, >> [sighs and gasps] >> I think a I think a fair question I think a fair question would be discuss levels of parasocial relationship.

[00:17:28]That's not absorption addiction, that's not attachment theory.

[00:17:32]Discuss levels of parasocial relationship. And in your AO1, you talk about entertainment social. It Yeah, it's okay if you score high in entertainment social. That just means you talk about your celebrity a lot. Um that's fine, that's normal. Like people that score high in entertainment social are are not mentally ill. They're not stalkers. But it's intense, personal, and borderline pathological that you it becomes a bit more of a problem. Now, how would I evaluate that?

[00:18:03]It's a questionnaire.

[00:18:05]People lie. People can lie. It's not a great way of measuring it. But uh practical applications would be it does allow us to be able to identify people who are at risk of inappropriate parasocial relationships and thus maybe put them into therapy. Right? Um it's a um So, we're not evaluating the theories here, we're evaluating how you measure parasocial relationships.

[00:18:30]Um Yeah.

[00:18:36]I'm not worried about relationships so much um with students. Issues and debates is by far the greater worry.

[00:18:42]Schizophrenia is more technical, forensics, or whatever you study in section D. Um people haven't had that much time to actually revise it. So, they're the bigger worries. Um I think relationships is the least worried I am, but maybe that means I should be most worried about it. I don't know. Uh either way, um they're the basics of relationships.

[00:19:03]I will look to do schizophrenia and forensics. Now, I'm not sure if I will get to them tonight.

[00:19:11]Good luck.