QCE Psychology - Unit 4 - Interpersonal processes

Aggression, attraction and relationships

Use the general aggression model, evaluate media-aggression claims, explain attraction, and apply Rollie and Duck's relationship-dissolution phases.

Part of the free QCE Psychology notes library for Unit 4: Interpersonal processes.

Updated 2026-08-08 - 4 min read

QCAA official coverage - Psychology 2025 v1.3

Exact syllabus points covered

  1. Make predictions using the general aggression model (GAM), with respect to single and multiple episodes.
  2. Explain how media can influence aggression, with reference to advertising, video games and social media.
  3. Describe biological and cultural explanations of attraction, with reference to Buss et al. (1990).
  4. Describe social and cognitive origins of attraction, including proximity, reciprocity, similarity and self-disclosure.
  5. Determine stages in relationship dissolution, with reference to Rollie & Duck’s phase model, i.e. intrapsychic, dyadic, social, grave-dressing and resurrection phases.
  6. Appreciate that psychology is limited in its ability to provide definitive solutions to the harmful expression of antisocial behaviour.
  7. Consider that a strength of the general aggression model (GAM) (Anderson & Bushman 2002) is that it encompasses evidence from multiple theories across multiple perspectives.
  8. Understand that the formation of relationships is influenced by cultural norms and expectations.

Interpersonal behaviour develops through interacting personal, situational, cognitive, emotional, biological and cultural processes. Models organise these influences; they do not turn one risk factor into an inevitable outcome.

General aggression model and relationship pathways

Original Sylligence diagram for psychology gam cycle.

General aggression model and relationship pathways

The general aggression model

For a single episode, the general aggression model (GAM) links:

  1. personal inputs: traits, attitudes, scripts, current state
  2. situational inputs: provocation, cues, frustration, reward or media
  3. internal routes: cognition, affect and arousal
  4. appraisal and decision: immediate or thoughtful interpretation
  5. behaviour: aggressive or non-aggressive action
  6. encounter outcome, which changes the ongoing situation

A quick appraisal under high arousal and limited resources may increase impulsive aggression. Reappraisal, alternative scripts and inhibitory control can change the response.

Across multiple episodes, repeated experiences can shape knowledge structures, expectations, desensitisation and personality-related tendencies. This creates feedback, not destiny.

Media and aggression

Advertising, video games and social media can provide aggressive scripts, cues, models and reinforcement. But claims vary from short-term aggressive cognition to serious harmful behaviour. Evidence may be experimental, longitudinal or correlational, each with different strengths.

Evaluate:

  • operational measure of aggression
  • size and duration of the effect
  • selection effects and confounders
  • realism of the task
  • publication and replication evidence
  • protective factors and individual variation

Psychology cannot provide a single definitive solution to antisocial behaviour because causes and contexts are complex. GAM's strength is integrating several perspectives.

Attraction

Biological explanations consider evolved preferences and reproductive pressures; cultural explanations consider norms, resources, roles and meanings. Buss et al. (1990) compared mate preferences across many cultures, finding both cross-cultural patterns and variation. Self-report preference is not the same as actual partner choice, and within-culture variation matters.

Social and cognitive origins include:

  • proximity: repeated opportunity for contact
  • reciprocity: liking is strengthened when liking appears mutual
  • similarity: shared attitudes or backgrounds can support validation and coordination
  • self-disclosure: gradual reciprocal sharing can build intimacy and trust

Each can have boundary conditions. Proximity without positive interaction may increase conflict; disclosure that is too rapid or unsafe can reduce trust.

Rollie and Duck's phase model

Relationship dissolution can be organised into:

  1. intrapsychic: private dissatisfaction and appraisal
  2. dyadic: discussion or confrontation with the partner
  3. social: wider network involvement and public account
  4. grave-dressing: constructing a narrative of why the relationship ended
  5. resurrection: rebuilding identity and preparing for future relationships

The model is not a rigid staircase. Phases can overlap, repeat or be skipped, and culture shapes how relationships form and end.

Worked example: predict through GAM

Integrate rather than list

An explanation of attraction should connect a factor to a mechanism. “They are similar” earns less than “shared values reduce uncertainty and validate each person's self-concept, increasing attraction, although similarity may partly reflect meeting in the same social setting.”

An explanation of relationship dissolution should identify evidence for a phase. Private rumination supports intrapsychic processing; telling friends and negotiating a public account supports the social phase.

Try it yourself

Common exam traps

  • presenting GAM as a one-way media-causes-violence chain
  • confusing arousal with aggression itself
  • treating a cultural average as a universal mate preference
  • listing proximity, reciprocity, similarity and disclosure without mechanisms
  • forcing every breakup through all phases in order
  • claiming psychology offers one definitive antisocial-behaviour solution

Sources

Finished reading? Practise this topic free

Open Psychology past questions with this Unit 4 topic carried into the question bank, then save your progress for the next review.

Practise this topic free. Free to start. No payment details are required. Exact question coverage depends on the available past-paper syllabus mapping.