Chapter 10 - Attraction and Relationships Flashcards
- Distinguish between communal and exchange relationships (textbook)
See textbook!
- Describe how proximity influences relationship formation, and describe the roles of functional distance and the mere exposure effect
a. Describe the perceptual fluency and classical conditioning explanations of
the mere exposure effect
Proximity
* One powerful factor determining whether two people will develop a
liking for one another is sheer proximity (physical nearness)
* More likely to meet, get to know, and form a friendship or romantic relationship with someone who lives near you or sits next to you in class or at the office
-example study: dormitory
- Functional distance: degree to which architectural
design encourages or inhibits social interaction
Mere Exposure Effect
The idea that repeated exposure to a novel stimulus, such as an object or a person, leads to greater liking of that
stimulus
-example: chinese letters: the more exposed, the more highly rated
-example: student in class: * The more often the
confederate attended class,
the more positively she was
rated
Why?
-Perceptual fluency explanation
* Easier to process information about familiar stimuli (greater
fluency)
* Pleasant feelings associated with more fluent processing
-Classical conditioning (Zajonc, 1968)
* Encounters with novel stimuli put us on our guard
* Repeated exposure to a stimulus without any negative
consequence signals that the stimulus is safe and
nonthreatening
* The comfortable feeling of safety associated with the stimulus
after multiple exposures renders it more pleasant
Mere exposure effect
will not occur for
stimuli that are
initially disliked
- Define liking gap and explain why it might occur
- The liking gap: an illusion where people underestimate
how much their conversation partners like them
(Boothby et al., 2018) - Possible explanations (target)
- Overly focused on mistakes
- Higher standards for self than others
- Overestimate how much their feelings are on display in social interactions
- Describe signal amplification bias
- Signal amplification bias:
tendency to perceive that one’s overtures communicate more
romantic interest to potential
partners than they actually do (Vorauer et al., 2003) * Driven by fears of rejection - Why does it happen? * Expect that target will take the inhibition produced by fear of rejection into account when interpreting the target’s behaviour
- Define self-disclosure and describe the role it plays in relationships
- Self-disclosure: the act of revealing personal, intimate
information about the self - Fosters feelings of liking, connection, & trust in both
targets and receivers (Collins & Miller, 1994)
“Fast Friends” Paradigm
Aron et al., 1997 - Developed paradigm for quickly inducing feelings of
closeness in strangers - Ps work in dyads and take turns answering three sets of questions that require gradually escalating intimacy of selfdisclosure (both within and across sets)
- “Given the choice of anyone in the world, whom would
you want as a dinner guest?” - “What is your most treasured memory?”
- “What is the last time you cried in front of another
person?” - Increases closeness (compared to control “small talk” condition)
- Subsequent development of friendship outside the lab
(Slatcher et al., 2010) - Why does it work?
- Gives the partner opportunity to demonstrate responsiveness
(making the speaker feel heard, understood, & cared for) - Sharing information about the self with another recruits some of the same neural and neurochemical mechanisms involved in processing basic rewards like tasty food (Tamir & Mitchell,
2012; Tchalova & MacDonald, 2020)
** Inappropriate self-disclosure may backfire
* Individual variability in comfort levels with disclosure
* Self-disclosure most effective when it’s reciprocal*
- Describe how similarity and complementarity influence relationship formation
Similarity:
* Friends and romantic partners tend to be similar in
demographics, attitudes, values, interests, & personality traits
* Issue of directionality
* Additional support for similarity hypothesis from longitudinal and “bogus stranger” paradigms
* But when it comes to initial romantic attraction, perceived rather than actual similarity may be more influential (Tidwell
et al., 2013)
Complementarity:
* Complementarity: tendency to be attracted to people with characteristics that differ from, and complement, one’s own
characteristics
* Evidence limited and inconsistent:
* Only makes sense for certain types of traits
* Status exchange hypothesis: posits that interpersonal
attraction may grow when two persons derive status from different domains
- Describe the social benefits of physical attractiveness, including the influence of
the halo effect and self-fulfilling prophecies
- Physically attractive
people enjoy more
popularity as friends and
potential romantic
partners - Host of other benefits
— e.g., earn higher salaries,
have work evaluated more
favourably, more likely to
receive help in an
emergency, and receive
lighter sentences in court
Halo effect: tendency to
assume that physically
attractive people possess
other positive qualities * “What is beautiful is good”
* Physical attractiveness is
associated with culturally
valued traits: “What is
beautiful is culturally good”
(Wheeler & Kim, 1997)
Self-Fulfilling Prophecies
* Recall the study by Snyder
et al. (1984) we discussed
earlier in the term:
* Ps spoke on the phone with
a woman they believed to
be attractive or unattractive
* Third-party raters rated the
“attractive” woman as
warmer and more sociable
- Describe the effects of facial averageness and facial symmetry on attractiveness
a. Describe evolutionary theories on the appeal of facial averageness and
facial symmetry
- Faces that are “average” are seen as more attractive
- Tend to perceive a composite image of many faces “averaged” together as more attractive than
the individual faces of which the composite is comprised - Bilateral (twosided) symmetry contributes to
attractiveness - True of other species as well (Markow & Ricker, 1992)
Why?
* Evolutionary explanation: indicators of reproductive
fitness: capacity to pass on one’s genes to next
generation
* Pronounced asymmetry may be indicative of issues during prenatal development (e.g., injuries in utero, infectious disease
experienced by the mother)
* Declining health in macaques associated with declines in facial symmetry (Little et al., 2012)
* Some evidence that facial symmetry is linked to better health in humans as well (Thornhill & Gangestad, 2005)
* Perceptual fluency explanation:
average (“prototypical”) and more symmetrical faces are easier to process,
and ease of processing is associated with feelings of pleasantness
- Distinguish between evolutionary and cultural perspectives on gender differences in mate preference
Evolutionary Perspective:
* Argues that men and women seek different characteristics in potential mates because of the large asymmetry in the
minimal parental investment of men and women
* For males, the minimal parental investment required to produce offspring is sperm
* Minimal time investment, minimal biological cost
* For females, the minimal parental investment is much
greater
* Eggs are biologically more costly than sperm, as they
contain the actual biology machinery required to sustain the developing embryo
* Pregnancy, producing a placenta, lactation, and an
extended period of infertility following childbirth
* Females invest more, so they should be more selective than
males
* Since females must invest more, they should prefer males that can best ensure survival of offspring
* Females may select mates based on their ability to
provide resources to potential offspring
* In humans, women may view such characteristics as social status, wealth, intelligence, ability, and ambition as attractive
● Males invest minimally so they should be less selective
about mating
● Males may select mates primarily on their ability to bear offspring.
● Males may prefer females who are younger and more
physically attractive because those are cues of greater
fertility
Culture:
* Evidence that men and women have different
preferences for potential mates may be due to social
(rather than innate, evolved) factors
* For instance, across cultures women may find status and resources attractive in men because women have less access to status and resources (Wendy & Eagly, 2002)
* In cultures where there is greater gender equality, women place less importance on a man’s status and resources
* However, gender equality does not affect importance placed on female attractiveness
- Explain why ideal mate preferences may not always predict actual mate
preferences
- Do ideal partner preferences actually
predict attraction? (Eastwick et al., 2011) - Amount of interest Ps expressed when evaluating a potential romantic partner’s written profile depended on the extent to which
profile was a (mis)matched
participant’s idiosyncratic
preferences - But amount of match/mismatch no
longer associated with romantic interest after live interaction
??don’t fully understand
- Recall Asch’s work on person perception (1946):
- Person perception is not a simple matter of summing up of traits
- Rather, we form impressions as a gestalt—a unified whole that cannot be reduced to the sum of its parts
- Interpretations of a target’s traits shift depending on the
overall structure of which they are part - Eastwick study: Ps did not change extent to which profile traits characterized their ideal partner, but reinterpreted what it means for the live confederate to possess those traits
Recall our discussion of affective forecasting
* Not always good at predicting how we will feel about a certain outcome
* Construal-level theory:
* Psychologically distant events are thought about in
abstract terms (higher-level construal)
* Events that are close at hand are thought about in
concrete terms (lower-level construal)
- Describe the impact of Harlow’s research on understanding of love and
attachment
Before: “studying love has no place in science” “mother-child bond is all just conditioning”
Harlow:
* Love and affection can, and should be, studied scientifically
* Point of departure for study of love: the affectionate bond of a child for its mother
Monkeys:
* Faced with novel, fear-producing situations, infants prefer to cling to the
cloth, but the wire, surrogate mother
* Use her as a “secure base” for exploration
* Monkeys raised by wire surrogates—or
without a mother at all—exhibit high levels of terror and distress in unfamiliar
situations
* Exhibit severe social issues later in life
- Harlow’s research revolutionized understanding of attachment and contributed to overhaul of standards for neonatal care
- At the time, dominant model of neonatal care centered around germ theory
- Contemporaneous discourse about women’s obligations to
stay home
Harlow: men have what it takes to care for children
- Describe Bowlby’s attachment theory
- Observations of orphaned children
- Warm, intimate, and continuing relationship with the mother (or
another caregiver) is essential for healthy child development - Took evolutionary perspective
- Infants cannot survive without caregiver to protect them from harm—some mechanism must be in
place to keep infants close to
caregivers - Posits the existence of a universal, evolved biobehavioural system
(attachment system) that
motivates maintenance of
proximity to caregivers
(“attachment figures”) in
infancy/childhood, thus
promoting survival
- Describe Ainsworth’s strange situation and the three patterns of attachment she
observed
a. Describe the antecedents of each attachment pattern
What?
* Ainsworth devised laboratory paradigm for studying attachment dynamics as described by Bowlby
* Infants brought into
unfamiliar (“strange”)
laboratory environment
* Experiment divided into
series of “episodes”:
Separations and reunions
with the mother
* As predicted by attachment theory (and consistent with Harlow’s findings), infants generally exhibit distress when mother leaves
the room
* Also observed emergence of three different kinds of behavioural patterns infants display upon the mother’s return, which could be
reliably linked to differences in prior maternal care
* Secure pattern of attachment
* Two types of insecure patterns of attachment:
* Anxious/ambivalent
* Avoidant
Secure Pattern
* Distressed by mother’s departure
* Seeks contact with the mother upon her return; readily soothed and reassured by her presence
* Uses mother as a secure base to explore
-Antecedents:
* Secure pattern of
attachment thought to
derive from history of
positive interactions with a
responsive caregiver
* Bids for proximity and
reassurance are sensitively
and consistently attended
to
Anxious/Ambivalent Pattern
* The “clingy” baby on the video
* Highly distressed by mother’s departure
* Continues to cry and exhibit distress even when contact
is restored
* Ambivalence toward the mother
* No interest in exploration, not able to use mother as a
secure base
-Antecendents:
caregiver is inconsistent
* Leads to hyperactivation of the attachment system (if I ramp up my bids for proximity, maybe caregiver will respond)
Avoidant Pattern
* The “sullen” baby on the video
* Appears indifferent to the mother upon her return
* May play with toys but does not actively involve the
mother as securely attached babies do
-Antecedents:
caregiver is rejecting, discourages closeness
* Leads to deactivation of the attachment system (if I don’t
come off as too needy, maybe the caregiver won’t reject me)
- Describe internal working models as they apply to attachment
- In the course of their attachment interactions,
individuals are thought to develop schemas or internal
working models of themselves and their attachment figures - Guide subsequent interactions with attachment figures as well as other people
- Model of self: Am I loveable?
- Model of the other: Can others be relied on?
- Distinguish between the three attachment types and two attachment dimensions
as they have been assessed in adults
a. Describe the emotional and interpersonal consequences associated with each attachment style
- Bowlby: the attachment system remains active “from the cradle to the grave”
- Increasingly sophisticated cognitive capabilities & growing capacity for symbolic representation with age
- Less reliant on physical closeness—can turn to memories, mental images, & symbolic reminders of close others for comfort
- Hazan & Shaver (1987): can apply attachment theory to the study of romantic love
- Similar dynamics (e.g., airport study)
- Internal working models provide continuity between early and later attachment-related feelings and behaviour
Secure
I find it relatively easy to get close to others and am comfortable depending on them and having them depend on me. I don’t often
worry about being abandoned or about someone getting too close.
* Have learned close others can be relied on for support
* Comfortable seeking support when distressed
* Can draw on mental representations of close others for support during times of distress
* Believe that distress is manageable
* Appraise events as less stressful & and appraise self as capable of dealing with the situation
* Willing to acknowledge distress
* More willing to confront novel & threatening situations
* More effective at providing support to relationship partners
* Have more stable & satisfying relationships than insecurely attached individuals
Anxious/Ambivalent
I find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I often
worry that my partner doesn’t really love or won’t stay with me. I want to
merge completely with another person, and this desire sometimes
scares people away.
* Have an intense need to feel close and accepted but hold serious doubts about their ability to sustain their partner’s love and loyalty
* Hypervigilant for signs of relationship threat & interpret ambiguous cues as threatening to the relationship
* Greater proneness to experience negative emotion, inability to detach themselves from psychological pain
* Attempts to minimize distance from attachment figure
* Elicit support through clinging and controlling
behaviour
Excessive reassurance seeking:
* Seeking assurances of love and self-worth after
assurances have already been provided
* Doubt assurance because they have been forced -
leads to demoralization
* Linked to depression
Avoidant
I am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others; I find it difficult to trust them completely,
difficult to allow myself to depend on them. I am nervous when anyone gets close, and often, love
partners want me to be more
intimate than I feel comfortable being.
* Uncomfortable with closeness, selfdisclosure, being vulnerable
* Seek independence & self-reliance
* Research suggests that distancing from others & suppression of negative affect is a reaction to rejection fears
* Defenses can break down under conditions of high cognitive load or
prolonged strain
