Kerckhoff & David (1962)
Filter theory believes that choice of partners is affected by factors limiting the availability of those possible to select from. There is a series of filters that serves to ‘thin down the field’ to those available.
- Similarity of social demographic variables – focus is upon those individuals we are realistically likely to be able to meet and with whom we will have factors in common. Such individuals will generally be limited to those who live near to us, work with us, and socialize with us etc., with availability further limited to those of similar class, ethnic, religious, educational and economic background to ourselves. Such people will appear attractive, as their similarity will make communication easier, aiding the development of a relationship.
- Similarity in attitudes- focus here is upon individuals meeting and socializing and thus being exposed to each other’s beliefs, values and attitudes. Individuals who have similarity of attitudes will be perceived by each other as being more attractive and compatible.
- Complementarity – focus here is upon the degree to which potential partners meet each other’s needs, especially emotional ones. Such complementarity helps to make a relationship ‘deeper’ and thus less superficial and is regarded as the most important factor in establishing commitment towards a long term relationship.
Research
Festinger et al (1950) reported that people who lived the closest to the stairways in an apartment block had the most contact with other residents of the block and formed the most friendships with other residents, supporting the idea of social demographic variables affecting the choice of possible partners one could be attracted to. This was further supported by Clark (1952) finding that 50% of citizens of Columbus, Ohio, USA, were married to partners who initially lived within walking distance of their house.
Taylor et al (2010) reported that 85% of Americans who got married in 2008 married someone of their own ethnic group, supporting the social demographic idea that individual’s choice of partners is limited to those of a similar background.
Byrne (1961) found that strangers who had similar attitudes to participants were more liked than strangers with differing attitudes. This supports the idea of similarity of attitudes being a limited factor in who individuals find attractive. This was supported by Tan & Singh (1995) who got 21 year old participants to complete a questionnaire concerning their attitudes and then exposed them to fake completed attitude questionnaires of a ‘stranger’ finding they rated ‘strangers’ with similar attitudes as more attractive.
Evaluation
- The relative availability of potential partners due to social demographic reasons changes over time (and across cultures) as attitudes change to relationships between people of different backgrounds. In 1960 in the USA, less than 3% of marriages were inter-racial, but this has now risen considerably. There is an age factor here, with younger people more likely to marry outside their ethnic group. However, there are sub cultural differences too, with white American people more likely to marry Asian and Hispanic partners than black American people are.
- Age is another limiting factor. People tend to socialize in similar age groups and where partners are of different ages, this tends to be between younger females and older men, with a possible evolutionary explanation, as older men tend to be more resource rich and younger females more fertile. The average age difference between partners is 2-3 years, with the female partner being younger.
- Much research into the filter theory focuses on liking and relationship in general, rather than specifically on attraction and romantic relationships, making accurate conclusions difficult to achieve.
- One important consideration in filter theory is that males and females filter out different things due to having different needs. This applies to age and culture, too. Indeed, filter theory can be accused of cultural bias, as most research was performed in individualistic cultures and therefore may not apply to collectivist cultures where relationships are affected by different limiting factors.