Relationships: Duck's Phase Model of Relationship Breakdown

Many people view relationship breakdown as a one-off event that just happens when one partner decides to leave a relationship. However, social psychologist Steven Duck (2007) suggested that relationship dissolution is a process that consists of several distinctive stages.

Duck's Phase Model of Relationship Breakdown - Explained

The first phase in this process is the intra-psychic stage. This is when a person admits to himself or herself that they are dissatisfied with their relationship, and they spend a lot of time thinking about the reasons for this dissatisfaction and possible ways forward. This stage focuses on a person's internal thought process that occurs before confronting the partner. Before a person moves to the next stage, they reach a threshold of thinking  'I can't stand this anymore'.

The second phase, called dyadic, occurs when a person confronts their partner and voices their dissatisfaction. At this stage there are a lot of complaints coming from the partner initiating the break-up; common complaints involve a partner's commitment to relationships. The dissatisfied partner also rethinks the alternatives to their current relationships. The threshold that is reached at this stage is: 'I would be justified in withdrawing'.

If, up to this point, the couple generally kept their disagreements private, at the next phase they involve friends and relatives and make their distress public. This is the social phase of relationship breakdown. According to Duck, once the conflict reaches this stage, it is more difficult for a couple to mend their relationship: friends and family will take sides, intervene in the couple's relationship and offer advice, which makes reconciliation much more problematic. The threshold at this stage is 'I mean it'. The social phase usually leads to the dissolution of the relationship.

Having left their partner, both sides construct their version of why their relationship broke down, usually minimising their faults and maximising their partner's, but at the same time trying to show themselves as trustworthy and loyal in order to attract a new partner. This process is called 'grave-dressing', signifying the closure of the previous relationship and readiness to start a new one. The threshold here is, unsurprisingly, 'It's time to start a new life'.

Extension

In 2006, Duck and his colleague Rollie proposed an addition to the model: the resurrection phase. They suggested that at this stage people move beyond the pain and distress associated with ending the relationship, and experience personal growth. 

Research Examining Duck's Phase Model

Existence of the resurrection stage was supported by Tashiro and Frazier’s (2003) study; participants (undergraduates who had recently experienced a break-up) reported experiencing personal growth as a result of it, as well as emotional distress.

There is also research to indicate the importance of the grave-dressing stage, as the dissolution of a relationship is a very stressful event, and many people experience anxiety and depression while going through it. However, Tashiro and Frazier (2003) found that if ex-partners viewed the situation, rather than their own faults, as being responsible for the break-up, they often saw the ending relationships in a more positive light.

Evaluation of Duck’s Phase Model

The existence and role of the break-up phases described in Duck's model are supported by scientific research. For example, Tashiro and Frasier (2003) showed that viewing the situation, rather than own faults, as being responsible for ending the relationships, helps people to see the break-up in a more positive light and move on, just as Duck's model predicts. This strengthens the claims made by the model and highlights the application of the theory to everyday relationships.

Most of the research examining relationship breakdown is based on retrospective data, using questionnaires or interviews to ask participants about the break-up some time after it happened. People's memories of the event may not be accurate, and may also be coloured by their current situation, which means that their answers are not reliable. This means Duck's phase model, even though it seems to be supported by research, does not necessarily describe how break-up happens in real life, weakening the model's ability to present an accurate picture of relationship breakdown.

There are also significant ethical issues involved in investigating relationship breakdown, such as privacy, especially if the research involves victims of domestic abuse. There are also the ethical issues of confidentiality and protection from psychological harm, as participants may experience distress in the process of the research. This makes the topic particularly difficult to investigate, as researchers may find it tricky to conduct a study where the benefits of research outweigh a possible negative impact on participants.

The social phase is greatly affected by individual differences, especially in relation to age. Dickson (1995) found that while friends and relatives tend to see teenagers' break-ups as less serious and wouldn't put much effort into reconciling partners, the ending of relationships by older couples is seen as more distressing and those close to the couple put more effort into bringing them back together. This shows that Duck's model won't necessarily apply to all couples, and therefore suggests that the model is unable to accurately predict breakdown in different types of relationship.

However, Duck's model has useful applications, especially in relation to couples’ counselling. Couples may be advised to use different strategies depending on the phase they are currently in. For example, for a person in the intra-psychic phase it may be more useful to shift their attention to the positive aspects of their partner's personality, while for a couple in the dyadic phase communication about dissatisfaction and ways to balance relationships is crucial. This shows that Duck's model of relationship breakdown can be used successfully to help couples contemplating break-up to improve their relationships and stay together.

Issues & Debates: Duck's Phase Model

The model is based on relationships from individualist cultures, where ending the relationships is a voluntary choice, and separation and divorce are easily obtainable and do not carry stigma. However, this may not be the case in collectivist cultures, where relationships are sometimes arranged by wider family members, and characterised by greater family involvement. This makes the relationship difficult to end, which means that the break-up process will not follow the phases proposed by Duck. As a result, Duck's model is culturally biased as it assumes that break-up process is universal, which is clearly not the case.

Duck's model successfully describes how relationships break down, but not why. As most stage theories, it focuses on establishing universal principles of behaviour that would be true for all people (nomothetic approach). However, as shown above, the break-up process is greatly affected by partners’ individual differences, and cultural norms and values, so a more detailed idiographic approach may reveal individual reasons for break-up and the experiences different couples go through, giving psychologists a better understanding of the issue.