Ch 10 Attraction and Relationships: From Initial Impressions to Long-Term Intimacy Flashcards
One determinant of interpersonal attraction is proximity.
Sometimes also called propinquity
Propinquity Effect
The finding that the more we see and interact with people, the more likely they are to become our friends
The Person Next Door: The Propinquity Effect (3 of 5)
41% of the next-door neighbors indicated they were close friends
22% of those who lived two doors apart
Only 10% of those who lived on opposite ends of the hall
Functional distance
Refers to certain aspects of architectural design that make it more likely that some people will come into contact with each other more often than with others
Mere Exposure Effect
The finding that the more exposure we have to a stimulus, the more apt we are to like it
The more we are around a person, the better we like them.
Similarity
“Birds of a feather flock together” (similarity)
What about “opposites attract” (complementarity)?
Research overwhelmingly supports
Similarity
Not complementarity
Greater similarity leads to more liking
Newcomb (1961): College men became friends with those who were similar in
Demographics
Attitudes
Values
Interests and Experiences
Situations you choose to be in expose you to others with similar interests.
Then, when you discover and create new similarities, they fuel the friendship.
Close friendships are often made in college, in part because of prolonged propinquity.
Similarity in Appearance
Seek physical proximity to those similar in appearance
Seek others with similar degree of physical attractiveness
Similarity in Genetics
Friends have more similar DNA than strangers
Average friends share the same generic similarity as two people who share a great-great-great grandparent!
Similarity in Committed Relationships Versus “Flings”
For committed relationship
Choose a similar partner
Relationships based on differences can be difficult to maintain
Perceived similarity more important than actual similarity
Low level of commitment (fling)
Choose dissimilar partners
Reciprocal Liking
We like people who like us
For initial attraction, reciprocal liking can overcome
Dissimilarity in attitudes
Attentional biases to attractive faces
Physical attractiveness
Plays an important role in liking
No big difference between men and women in this regard
Physical attractiveness Gender’ differences
Gender differences?
Differences are larger when attitudes are measured
Men more likely than women to report attraction is important
Gender similarities in behavior
Physical Attractiveness (3 of 3)
The finding that we like people who like us suggests that the strategy of “playing hard-to-get” can sometimes backfire.
Recent research suggests that the strategy tends to decrease how much another person likes you, all the while potentially increasing how much that person wants to be with you.
Female Faces—What Is Attractive?
Large eyes
Small nose
Small chin
Prominent cheekbones
High eyebrows
Large pupils
Big smile
Male Faces—What Is Attractive?
High attractiveness ratings are associated with:
Large eyes
Prominent cheekbones
Large chin
Big smile
Cultural Standards of Beauty
Facial attractiveness perceived similarly across cultures
Symmetry is preferred
Size, shape, and location of the features on one side match the other side of face
“Averaged” composite faces preferred
Lost atypical or asymmetrical variation
The Power of Familiarity (1 of 2)
Familiarity may be crucial variable for interpersonal attraction.
People prefer faces that most resemble their own.
Propinquity
Gain familiarity through mere exposure
Similarity
If similar will also seem familiar
Reciprocal liking
People we who like and get to know become familiar
Assumptions About Attractive People
(1 of 3)
Benefits of beauty
Beauty has been associated with:
better health outcomes for infants in hospitals
better earnings
better teaching evaluations
winning elections
Assumptions About Attractive People
(2 of 3)
Physical beauty affects attributions
Halo Effect:
A cognitive bias by which we tend to assume that an individual with one positive characteristic also possesses other (even unrelated) positive characteristics
Assumptions About Attractive People
(3 of 3)
“What is beautiful is good” stereotype
The beautiful are thought to be more:
Sociable
Extraverted
Popular
Sexual
Happy
Assertive
Culture and the “What Is Beautiful Is Good” Stereotype
Korean, American, and Canadian cultures share these:
sociable, extroverted, happy, popular, well-adjusted, mature, poised, sexually warm, responsive, friendly
Additional American and Canadian cultures share:
strong, assertive, dominant
Additional Korean culture traits:
sensitive, empathetic, generous, honest, trustworthy
Attractive People and the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy (1 of 2)
Highly attractive people:
Do develop good social interaction skills
Report having more satisfying interactions with others
Self-fulfilling prophecy
The beautiful receive a great deal of social attention
Helps them develop good social skills
Attractive People and the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy (2 of 2)
Can a “regular” person be made to act like a “beautiful” one via the self-fulfilling prophecy?
Yes!
If men talking to women on the phone believe she is attractive
Elicit warmer, friendlier responses
Same for women
Evolution and Mate Selection (1 of 5)
Evolutionary Psychology
The attempt to explain social behavior in terms of genetic factors that evolved over time according to the principles of natural selection
Evolution and Mate Selection (2 of 5)
Evolutionary approach to mate selection
Men and women are attracted to different characteristics in each other that maximize reproductive success
Women are attracted by men’s resources
Reproductive success: raising offspring to maturity
Greater resources increases chances of survival
Evolution and Mate Selection (3 of 5)
Evolutionary approach to mate selection
Men are attracted by women’s appearance
Reproductive success: maximize number of offspring
Symmetrical faces indicates positive health and “good genes”
Evolution and Mate Selection (4 of 5)
Evidence for evolutionary approach:
Asked more than 9,000 adults in 37 countries desirable marriage partner characteristics
Women: valued ambition, industriousness, and earning capacity more than men
Men: valued attractiveness more than women
Top characteristics for both the same:
honesty, trustworthiness, pleasant personality
Evolution and Mate Selection (5 of 5)
Evidence for evolutionary approach (cont.):
When women are near their ovulation and fertility peak:
Greater preference for men who exhibit signs of reproductive fitness
Symmetrical face, masculine face, muscular physique
Alternate Perspectives on Sex Differences
Gender differences are status differences
Women often have less power and wealth
Difficult to disentangle “nature” from “nurture”
“Evolved” gender differences due to dating paradigms where men approach and women are approached
Making Connections in the Digital World
How are attraction and social connection affected by modern technology?
Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram, Tinder, text, virtual reality
Example: Field experiment of 100 real-life interactions
Pairs with mobile device rated connectedness and empathy lower than pairs without devices
Attraction 2.0: Mate Preference in
an Online Era
Propinquity
In Internet world, not that many degrees of separation
Similarity
People seek others with similar “popularity” in online dating sites
Familiarity
Liking decreased after meeting (compared to liking based on online profile)
Inaccuracy of online information
The Promise and Pitfalls of Online Dating (1 of 2)
Benefits
Aggregates a large number of profiles
Provides opportunity for communication
Matching users based on analyses of compatibility
But success rate not higher than other “old-fashioned” methods
The Promise and Pitfalls of Online Dating (2 of 2)
81% provide inaccurate information in their profile for at least one characteristic
Lies about weight, age, height
No gender differences
Deceptive, misleading photos
The Promise and Pitfalls of Online Dating (2 of 2)
81% provide inaccurate information in their profile for at least one characteristic
Lies about weight, age, height
No gender differences
Deceptive, misleading photos
Companionate Love
The intimacy and affection we feel when we care deeply for a person
Do not experience passion or arousal in the person’s presence.
Passionate Love
An intense longing we feel for a person, accompanied by physiological arousal
When our love is reciprocated, we feel great fulfillment and ecstasy, when it is not, we feel sadness and despair
Companionate Love
Nonsexual relationships
Close friendships
Sexual relationships
Psychological intimacy without “heat” and passion
Passionate Love
Intense longing for another person,
characterized by:
The experience of physiological arousal
The feeling of shortness of breath
Thumping heart in loved one’s presence
Passionate and Companionate Love Across Cultures
Americans value passionate love more than the Chinese
The Chinese value companionate more
Taita of Kenya value both equally
Culture and Love (1 of 3)
Love is a universal emotion
Cultural differences about love
Think about
Define
Experience
Example:
Romantic love viewed as more crucial in individualistic cultures compared to collectivistic ones
Japanese amae
Totally passive love object, indulged and taken care of by one’s romantic partner
Chinese gan qing
Achieved by helping and working for another person
Korean jung
Connection that ties people together
Romantic love universal
Cultural rules alter:
Experience
Expression
Memory
Attachment Styles in Intimate Relationships
Attachment Styles
The expectations people develop about relationships with others, based on the relationship they had with their primary caregiver when they were infants
There are three styles of attachment:
Secure
Anxious/Ambivalent
Avoidant
Secure Attachment Style
Trust, a lack of concern with being abandoned
View that one is worthy and well-liked
Anxious/Ambivalent Attachment Style
Concern that others will not reciprocate one’s desire for intimacy
Results in higher-than-average levels of anxiety
Avoidant Attachment Style
Suppression of attachment needs, because attempts to be intimate have been rebuffed
People with this style find it difficult to develop intimate relationships
Measuring Adult Attachment Styles Avoidant (2 of 3)
25%
Somewhat uncomfortable being close to others
Find it difficult to trust them completely,
Difficult to allow myself to depend on them
Nervous when anyone gets close
Love partners want me to be more intimate than I feel comfortable being
Measuring Adult Attachment Styles Anxious (3 of 3)
19%
Others are reluctant to get as close as I would like.
I often worry that my partner doesn’t really love me or won’t stay with me.
I want to merge completely with another person, and this desire sometimes scares people away.
Early Attachment Styles Stay With Us
(1 of 2)
Key assumption of attachment theory:
Attachment style learned in infancy becomes schema for all relationships
Secure Attachment:
More likely to develop mature, lasting relationships
Attachment Style Is Not Destiny
If people had unhappy relationships with their parents, they are not doomed to repeat this!
People’s experience in relationships can help them learn new and more healthy ways of relating to others.
People may develop more than one attachment style over time.
This is Your Brain… in Love (1 of 2)
Recruited college students in love
IV: Participants brought in two pictures
Beloved and acquaintance
DV: Images on fMRI scanner
Results? When looking at their beloved
Participants who self-reported higher levels of romantic love showed
Greater activation in the brain’s ventral tegmental area (VTA) and caudate nucleus
Reward and motivation brain circuits – also fires when people eat chocolate!
Assessing Relationships: Satisfaction and Breaking Up
Theories of relationship satisfaction:
Social Exchange Theory
People’s feelings about a relationship depend on perceptions of rewards and costs, the kind of relationship they deserve, and their chances for having a better relationship with someone else
Is an economic model of costs and benefits!
Social Exchange Theory (1 of 3)
Basic concepts
Rewards
Positive, gratifying aspects of relationship
Costs
Negative aspects of relationship
Outcome
Comparison of rewards versus costs
Comparison level
Expectations
People’s expectations about the level of rewards and punishments they are likely to receive in a particular relationship.
Relationship satisfaction depends on your comparison level.
Social Exchange Theory (3 of 3)
Relationship satisfaction also depends on your perception of the likelihood that you could replace it with a better one!
Comparison Level for Alternatives
People’s expectations about the level of rewards and punishments they would receive in an alternative relationship
Investment Model of Commitment
People’s commitment to a relationship depends not only on their satisfaction
Also depends on investment and what would be lost by leaving it
Will People Stay in Love?
To predict whether people will stay in an intimate relationship, we need to know:
Their level of satisfaction in the relationship
What they think of the alternatives
The degree of their investment in the relationship
Theories of Relationship Satisfaction
Equity Theory
Equitable relationships are the happiest and
most stable
Rewards and costs are roughly equal
Equity Theory (1 of 2)
In inequitable relationships, one person feels:
Over-benefited
Lots of rewards, few costs
Devote little time or energy to the relationship
In inequitable relationships, one person feels:
Under-benefited
Few rewards, high costs
Devote a lot of time and energy to the relationship
Inequity is more important to person who is under-benefitted
Exchange and Communal Relationships
Exchange Relationships
Relationships governed by the need for equity (i.e., for an equal ratio of rewards and costs)
Communal Relationships
Relationships in which people’s primary concern is being responsive to the other person’s needs
Communal Relationships and Equity
Communal relationships unconcerned with equity?
Not necessarily
Distress when intimate relationships inequitable
Equity takes different form in communal relationships
Partner more relaxed with what concerns equity at any given time
Feel imbalanced, then relationship may end
The Process and Experience of Breaking Up: Endings Are Common
American divorce rate is nearly 50% of the current marriage rate.
Romantic relationships between unmarried individuals end every day.
The Process of Breaking Up (1 of 3)
Is the breakup moral?
If you find yourself in a romantic relationship and your partner seems inclined to break it off, try to end it mutually.
Your experience will be less traumatic because you will share some control over the process (even if you don’t want it to happen).
The Process of Breaking Up (2 of 3)
Relationship dissolution not a single event, but process with many steps
Four stages (Duck, 1982)
Intrapersonal: thinks about dissatisfaction
Dyadic: discusses breakup with partner
Social: breakup announced to others
Intrapersonal: recover by thinking about why and how
it happened
The Process of Breaking Up (3 of 3)
Fatal Attraction
30% of breakups
Qualities that attract are the qualities that are disliked the most at break up.
This phenomenon demonstrates importance of similarity.
Behavior in Troubled Relationships (1 of 4)
Destructive Behaviors
Actively harming the relationship
Abusing the partner
Threatening to break up
Actually leaving
Passively allowing relationship to deteriorate
Refusing to deal with problems
Ignoring the partner or spending less time together
Putting no energy into the relationship
Constructive behaviors
Actively trying to improve the relationship
Discussing problems, trying to change
Going to a therapist
Passively remaining loyal to the relationship
Waiting and hoping that the situation will improve
Being supportive rather than fighting
Remaining optimistic
The Experience of Breaking Up
(1 of 3)
Can we predict the different ways people will feel when their relationship ends?
Responsibility for breakup important factor
“Breakers”: high level of responsibility
Least painful, upsetting, stressful
“Breakees”: low level of responsibility
Miserable—lonely, depressed, angry
“Mutuals”: same level of responsibility
Not as upset as “breakees” but more stressed than “breakers”
Other factors that affect experience of breakup:
Gender
Women report more negative reactions than men
Do people stay friends after break up?
Heterosexual men not interested in friendship, regardless of role in breakup
Women more interested in remaining friends, especially if “breakee”
More interested in remaining friends if satisfaction and investment in the relationship were high
