1. Pre existing doom; relationship was
destined to fail from the start. The two
individuals are not compatible in anyway
2. Mechanical Failure; two people grow apart
over time, things in the relationship break down
even though they did not intend them too
3. Sudden death; an
individual has an affair
and the other partner
finds out and ends it
Ducks extra reasons
1. Lack of skills; e.g.
communication skills
2. Lack of motivation; e.g.
not putting enough in the
relationship to keep it going
3. Lack of
maintanence;
e.g. living too
far away from
each other
Ducks model of the stages
of relationship breakdown
1. Intrapsychic; one partner begins to think they are not happy
2. Dyadic; the unhappy partner tells the other partner
that they are not happy, they decide to split up
3. Social; the couple begin to tell friends and family, may blame each other for what went wrong
4. Grave dressing; each partner will try to create the best version possible
that makes themselves look good. The relationship is 'dressed up' to look
as good as possible, so that you will be attractive to new partners
Argyle (1988) found that women blame a lack of
emotional support as reasons for breakup, while men
blamed a lack of fun in the relationship. This suggests
that the idea of mechanical failure is a good explaination
for breakups, as the couples are no longer compatible
Holtt and Stone (1988) found that
maintanence could be a problem for couples
at university. Hoever, if they met up regularly
they were more likely to stay together
Tashiro and Frazier (2003) surveyed
undergraduates and found that the
students had gone through the different
stages in Duck's model, supporting real
world validity of the model
Gender differences - Kassin (1996) woment blame stress, unhappiness
and incompatibility as reasons for break up. Men blame lack of sex.
Woment want to stay friends, while men want a clean break. This means
that ducks model does not fully explain gender differences in break down