Biological explanations of the formation of human relationships (Buss et al & Baumgartner)

Question 1

Define attraction

Answer 1

Attraction is the interest in and liking of one individual by another, or the mutual interest and liking. A positive view of the person, based on shared experiences or physical characteristics

Question 2

What is the biological explanation of attraction?

Answer 2

Two biological explanations for attraction: Evolutionary Factors & Biological Processes (genetics, hormones, pheromones)

Question 3

Evolutionary Factors (Darwin’s evolutionary Theory)

Answer 3

Darwin’s evolutionary theory and sexual selection: Darwin claims that all human behaviour is a product of natural selection (ie. the best adapted or fittest individuals survive to mate to pass their genes).

Question 4

Intersexual selection

Answer 4

Members of one sex (usually females) choose members of the other sex based on a defining characteristic – choosier with a mate as they have to produce fit offspring… supporting the Parental Investment Theory

Question 5

Intrasexual selection

Answer 5

Competition within one sex (usually males) to be the “strongest” – to be able to pass on their genes to the female

Question 6

Attraction and survival

Answer 6

Attraction is dependant on the necessity of one to survive, and their ability to attract a mate and pass on their genetics.

Question 7

Biological processes (genetics, hormones, pheromones)

Answer 7

Hormones can incite relationships, as they are chemical messengers released from endocrine glands that influence the nervous system to regulate the physiology and behavior of individuals.

The hormone oxytocin, which acts primarily as a neurotransmitter, “love hormone” attaches a parent to an infant, corresponding with attachment

Question 8

Parental Investment Theory

Answer 8

According to this theory, the sex that is physiologically required to invest more in offspring evolves to be more choosy regarding mates, because mating with a low-quality or noninvesting partner is more costly –consequences such as unhealthy offspring

Question 9

Buss et al aim

Answer 9

To test 3 evolution based assumptions in a large cross-cultural sample

1. Men search for women with high reproductive value (youth and looks)
2. Women search for men who invest in offspring – with resources he can provide
3. Chastity valued

Question 10

Buss et al method

Answer 10

37 samples from 33 countries with 10,000 participants – samples were collected from different techniques

Each sample asked to complete 2 surveys:
1. Biographical data, what age do you prefer to marry? How many children? 2. How important characteristics are on a 4-point scale in terms of desirability

Question 11

Buss et al findings

Answer 11

• 36/37 Women valued “Good financial prospects” valued wealth and security
• Men preferred more fertile, younger women
• Males value physical attractiveness

Question 12

How does Buss support evolutionary explanations?

Answer 12

Supports evolutionary explanations of human behavior as males and females have specific preferences for mates, otherwise known as selective advantages are more appealing (the best one reproduces and survives) – supports parental investment theory, women prioritize men who are rich and can attribute to the success of the offspring

Question 13

Buss strengths

Answer 13

• Good reliability of data because of large number of participants – cross-cultural
• High ecological validity – how generalizable to real life settings?
• Questionnaires were sent to a diverse set of real participants from the population with translation

Question 14

Buss weaknesses

Answer 14

• Low internal validity due to questionnaire (prone to social desirability bias / self-reporting)
• No cause and effect relationship

Question 15

Role of hormones and oxytocin

Answer 15

Oxytocin: hormone involved in labor, maternal behavior, acts as a bond between human relationships

Question 16

Baumgartner aim

Answer 16

Investigate role of oxytocin in breaches of trust

Question 17

Baumgartner method

Answer 17

1. Used an fMRI in a “trust game”
2. Investors to KEEP or SHARE money with the trustee
3. If they share = $$ tripled
4. Will trustee REPAY the trust to share the gain with investor (half each) or violate the trust to keep the money for themselves? Dilemma of to trust or not to trust
5. fMRI scanner received either oxytocin or placebo through nasal spray

Second round played with computer → investors under the assumption that the trust had been broken

Question 18

Baumgartner findings

Answer 18

Participants who received the placebo DECREASED their rate of trust knowing that the trust had been broken. Those who received oxytocin ignored them and continued to invest → research suggests that oxytocin decreases fear reaction in the amygdala in response to BETRAYAL

Question 19

How does Baumgartner support hormones?

Answer 19

Supports how hormones can alter behavior and perception of trust within human relationships – links to forgiveness in long-term relationships, role of oxytocin in enhancing attachment and favoritism

Question 20

Baumgartner strengths

Answer 20

• Highly controlled → C+E relationship
• fMRI increases internal validity as researchers observe activity within the brain

Question 21

Baumgartner weaknesses

Answer 21

• A nasal spray is artificial and does not reflect natural processes
• Reductionist argument – other factors that allow people to forgive within relationships beyond hormones

Question 22

Limitations of biological explanations

Answer 22

• Reductionist approach – doesn’t consider cultural customs that can affect relationships, reduces behavior to genes and hormones
• Highly artificial and lacks ecological validity
• Nature vs. nurture for evolutionary arguments. Which behaviors are genetic and which are inherited?

Question 23

Counterclaim: psychological explanations

Answer 23

Cognitive Theories of Attraction:

Reliant on cognitive biases (Cognitive biases are unconscious thought processes that can impair judgement) and schema (particular preference - knowledge formed from preconceived knowledge that guide preferences for our relationships) based on PAST RELATIONSHIPS, even could be attributed to self serving bias (one’s need to maintain and enhance self-esteem)

Similarity Attraction Model: those whom we perceive to be most similar to ourselves are more attractive eg. age, religion, social class, physical attractiveness

Question 24

Similarity Attraction Model

Answer 24

Those whom we perceive to be most similar to ourselves are more attractive eg. age, religion, social class, physical attractiveness.

Question 25

Markey & Markey aim

Answer 25

Investigated similarity effect in choosing partners

Question 26

Markey & Markey method

Answer 26

1. Questionnaires from a large self-selected sample of undergrad students to describe psychological characteristics, values and attitudes of the ideal partner
2. Then asked to describe themselves

Question 27

Markey & Markey findings

Answer 27

Description aligned with what their ideal partner looked like – follow up study showed that most harmonious relationships share similar traits but not all

Question 28

How does Markey & Markey support Similarity Attraction Model?

Answer 28

Supports the concept of familiarity models (similarity and shared traits are what attracts people to one other, a common ground). Connection to our self-schema play a key role in what we find attractive -> if people like what we like and have similar values, this helps to validate our projection of self, increasing self-esteem

Question 29

Markey & Markey strengths

Answer 29

• Large sample increases validity

Question 30

Markey & Markey weaknesses

Answer 30

• Social desirability bias (questionnaire)
• No C+E relationship (correlational analysis)
• Not generalizable - only done on American students

Question 31

Biological explanations conclusion

Answer 31

Biological explanations is one theory for the origins of formations of relationships

→ Survival is key to evolutionary theories of attraction and desire to reproduce

→ Actual physiological processes is hard to replicate with artificial research, hard to mimic what happens in an actual relationship (we have to consider sociocultural factors, one’s upbringing, psychological factors – thought processes)