Afilliation, Attraction, Close Relationships Flashcards
reasons behind the need to belong
social comparison:
- the need to understand the world and ourselves
- compare the self with similar others to see how we measure up
- upward social comparison
- downward social comparison
social exchange
- keep track of relationship costs and rewards
- exit relationship cost/reward ratio is too high relative to alternative relationships
biology and affiliation
- the social attachment “alarm” system is in the anterior cingulate cortex (same area of the brain is involved in pain detection)
- introverts experience higher levels of central nervous system arousal chronically (they seek to keep environment from pushing arousal to an uncomfortable level
- extroverts experience greater activation of dopamine pathways
socialization and the need to belong
positive correlation between a country’s individualism and its people’s need to belong
- individualists have relatively numerous, but non-intimate relationships
interdependent self
- seen more often in girls than boys
- associated with more committed relationships
- produces better money for relational events
belongingness and anxiety
- people awaiting an unpleasant experience prefer the company of others also awaiting it (“misery loves only miserable company)
- when aversion is due to expected embarrassment, people prefer to be alone
- when anticipating a fearful event, people may prefer to be with someone who has gone through is already
- this reflects a need for cognitive clarity and social support
social anxiety
- the unpleasant emotion we experience due to our concern with interpersonal evaluation and social status
- unlike other kinds of anxiety, social anxiety reduces desire to affiliate with others
when socially anxious we:
- less likely to initiate interaction
- sometimes stammer and stutter
- occasionally withdraw from interactions
loneliness
- having a smaller/less satisfying network of social relationships than we desire
- chronically lonely people use more internal, stable attributions for loneliness (changing the attributional style reduces loneliness)
- desire for quality friendships over quantity friendships
social skills deficits and loneliness
lonely people rate themselves more negatively (and expect others to see them this way too):
- less friendly
- less honest and open
- less warm
in interactions, they:
- spend more time talking about self
- show less interest in conversation partners
social relationships and technology
- the internet is now a primary way people maintain friendships and social relationships
- young adults have greater numbers of social ties than their parents
- but people rely on face to face more than long distance relationships when they are in trouble
how important are social relationships: Ted Talk
maybe you should watch it??
the need for affiliation
- desire to make and keep close personal relationships
- those with close friendships have better health than those without
- our psychological and social health is also better
- the brain may register social pain as it does physical pain
how do early parent child interactions impact future relationships
- our very first interactions have profound impact on later life
- for most of us, our parents are our first personal contact
- this relationship “lays the groundwork” for future interpersonal relationships in life
- oxytocin - the bonding hormone
- physical contact increases oxytocin levels in mother’s and in babies – leads to bonding behaviours and increased feelings of trust
- men are as hardwired to bond with children as women
attachment
- the degree of security experienced in a relationship
- Harlow’s monkeys: infant bonding
- contact comfort more important than nourishment in fostering attachment
attachment styles
Bowlby - research on humans
early interactions lead to attitudes about:
1) self esteem: am I valued and loved?
2) interpersonal trust: are other dependable?
- where you fall on these dimensions defines attachment style
Preoccupied: high interpersonal trust (low avoidance) + low self esteem (high anxiety)
Fearful-avoidant: low self esteem (high anxiety) + low interpersonal trust (high avoidance)
Dismissing-avoidant: low interpersonal trust (high avoidance) + high self esteem (low anxiety)
Secure: high self esteem (low anxiety) + high interpersonal trust (low anxiety)
four attachment styles
attachment styles assessed in “Strange Situations Test”
1) secure
- high in self esteem and IPT - 70% of babies
- tend to form lasting, satisfying relationships
2) fearful-avoidant
- low in self esteem and IPT
- unable to form close/fulfilling relationships; linked to abusive relationships
3) preoccupied
- low self esteem and high IPT
- AKA: anxious-ambivalent; crave closeness and approval, self destructive, “stage 5 clinger”
4) dismissive
- high self esteem and low IPT
- expects worst of others, fearful of getting close to others
what leads to attraction
- “attraction” refer to both romantic and social attraction (lovers as well as friends)
- proximity, mere exposure, and interaction
- proximity = physical closeness between 2 individuals
- smaller proximity leads to more repeated contacts and mutual attraction
- the impact of physical attractiveness, whether we admit it or not, looks do matter
- attractiveness affects all sorts of things, including how much money we earn
- standards of beauty are quite similar across many cultures - eg symmetry and clear skin (indicate a “hardwiring” of what we find attractive as human beings - evolutionary reason?)
- physical beauty is the easiest thing to spot in social interactions - we tend to hold a “beautiful is good” stereotype
physical attractiveness stereotype
we believes “what is beautiful is good”
- attractive people are assumed to be more successful, happy, intelligent, and socially skilled than others
- effect occurs in both individualistic and collectivist cultures
- stereotype affects observers reactions
- seen in interactions with infants, children, adults
meta-analysis indicated that this stereotype is false except for social skills
- social skills advantage may be a self fulfilling prophecy
attractiveness standards
- men place greater value on physical attractiveness of partner than women
- facial symmetry is preferred across cultures - indicated health
- averaged (features that aren’t extreme) facial features for a culture is preferred in that culture
- feature maturity is preferred for men (facial hair, strong jawline)
- feature immaturity is preferred for women (youthful)
theories
evolutionary argument
- women have a shorter time span to reproduce than men
- therefore men will seek women who look young
- women will seek men who can protect and provide for offspring
sociocultural argument
- women have historically been excluded from positions of power
- social advancement is therefore tied to a man’s status
- women’s physical appearance is her “currency” in the relationship marketplace
what leads to attractiveness: similarity
matching hypothesis:
- loge term relationships are more likely to from with:
- those we share similar attributes
- those who are similar to us in physical attractiveness
proportion of similarity:
- turns attractions into mathematics
- divide topics of similarity by total number if topics discussed
- higher the outcome (ratio), the greater the attraction
repulsion hypothesis:
- theory that we aren’t attracted to similarity, but repulsed by dissimilarity
what leads to attraction: reciprocity
- if we find out someone likes us, we tend to like them back
- not rule of thumb, but it does happen
- this, in turn, leads to higher levels of trust
the role of gender
- evolutionary theory looks at mate preference and reproduction potential
- are men more “into” beauty because it signals fertility?
- are women more into men with “stuff” because they’re better providers?
- men and women are both interested in “healthy and wealthy” mates
- men appear to be more focused then women on the sexual mating system
- women appear more focused than men on the attachment system
- both men and women have desires arising from each system
- men fall in love more quickly and fall out of love more slowly
evolutionary explanations for gender differences in love
- it is adoptive for men to establish sexual intimacy quickly (low cost of reproduction)
- it is adoptive for women to judge carefully (high cost of reproduction)
- differences in length of reproductive lives explains the relative speed of existing relationships
sociocultural explanations for gender differences in love
- historically, a man’s status was not dependant on his romantic partner’s status
- however, a women’s future was dependant in her mate
therefore: - men could afford to be more idealistic about love
- women needed to be more pragmatic
- heterosexual men may fall in love quickly because they are deprived of intimacy in friendship
types of love
passionate love:
- a state of longing for union with one’s partner
- roller coaster of emotions
- 1st appearance may coincide with puberty
- highly related to increased physical arousal
- intense circumstances may cause us to mistake physical arousal for love
companionate love:
- feeling affection for someone when your lives are intertwined
- deep sense of trust
- more stable and calm than passionate love
- present after couple has been together for a long time
