Close Relationships Flashcards
Participants rated the importance of a series of characteristics
- Physical attractiveness
- Earning potential
- Friendliness
Do people’s dating preferences predict who they want to date?
- No!
- There was no relationship between what people said they wanted before the event and who they wanted to date after the event.
- Picking partners might be different than picking other things.
People’s preferences did not predict who they actually selected. - Similar studies since then -> similar findings
- Predicting romantic attraction more” random” than we may believe.
- May feel as though destined to be together (they’re all they ever wanted) but this seems the result rather than the cause of liking someone.
- Predetermined lists of preferences discount the “dyadic” process.
Non-verbal signals of romantic interest
Smiling, increased eye contact
* Pupil dilation (Pronk et al., 2021)
Synchronized gestures and mimicking (Karremans & Verwijmeren, 2008)
Touch on face, neck, torso (vulnerable body parts)
Less distance, oriented toward each other.
Speech (e.g., matching volume and speed of speech, vocal warmth, relaxed speech, laughter)
Has technology changed how people meet partners?
2022 -> increased by 30%
In 2022, dating online particularly common among:
* Younger adults (18-19) -> 53%
* Non-heterosexual (e.g., gay, lesbian, bisexual) -> 51%
In 2022, 10 million people active in online dating in the UK.
Some online dating sites market themselves as having “matching algorithms” that help find a compatible partner, BUT:
* Don’t reveal their “algorithms.”
* Reviewed studies suggest that matching based on self-reported preferences may not work. * Experts (e.g., Joel et al., 2017) suggest:
Meet others to find out!
Be the partner you want to be (e.g., responsive)
Why can online dating be disappointing?
Do we have to kiss a lot of frogs?
May not feel as attracted to others when finding out who they ‘really’ are, as opposed to who we thought (or wished) they are.
Dating -> conclusion:
* Dating more and more online, mutual liking difficult to predict -> dyadic process.
* Signs of romantic interest WHEN people meet.
Interdependence theory
what determines satisfaction and commitment? social exchange theory applied to intimate relationships. Social exchange theory applied to intimate relationships. In a broad sense, interdependence theory aims to explain the structure of people’s relationships that make them satisfied and committed, in other words, explaining romantic partners’ interdependence (how dependent they are on each other). Explaining people’s satisfaction and behaviors based on aspects of the relationships, such as the exchanges that take place of rewards and costs.
Rewards and costs determine satisfaction and commitment (i.e., whether to stay … or leave)
* Rewards = Desirable relationship experiences
* Costs = Undesirable relationship experiences
Rewards could be desirable relationship experiences such as your partner doing something thoughtful or planning a fun activity for you to do together, and the security and support that a relationship provides. And costs could be undesirable experiences like having an argument or making personal sacrifices once a while.
Rewards and Costs
Can be tangible / material.
* e.g., making dinner, financial assistance
Or intangible / social
* e.g., feeling loved, knowing your partner is dependable, jealousy.
Costs are particularly influential.
* Pay more attention to costs, remember costs more than rewards (Baumeister et al., 2001)
Roughly 5x greater influence
* “Magic” 5 to 1 ratio (Gottman & Levenson, 1992)
* Predicts relationship satisfaction.
What makes people stay in unhappy relationships?
Investment Model -> Commitment
Satisfaction -> how happy are you?
Alternatives -> How happy would you be in another relationship/or alone?
Investments -> What have you put into this relationship that you would lose if the relationship were to end?
In a meta-analysis, which summarized the results across 52 studies (and nearly 12000 participants) demonstrated that satisfaction was the strongest predictor of commitment, but investments were a strong predictor as well as perceiving fewer alternatives.
Then, commitment was a fairly good predictor of whether people stayed in their relationship or left (although not a perfect predictor)
Note: this model also applies to organizational commitment (Le & Agnew also studied “non-interpersonal” domains such as commitment to job, sports, school).
Meta analysis of satisfaction
In a meta-analysis, which summarized the results across 52 studies (and nearly 12000 participants) demonstrated that satisfaction was the strongest predictor of commitment, but investments were a strong predictor as well as perceiving fewer alternatives.
Then, commitment was a fairly good predictor of whether people stayed in their relationship or left (although not a perfect predictor)
Note: this model also applies to organizational commitment (Le & Agnew also studied “non-interpersonal” domains such as commitment to job, sports, school).
Investments -> pros and cons
High investments -> may enable couples to weather the inevitable stormy times.
But they can also trap people in unhealthy relationships.
Women with high investments and poor alternatives more likely to return to abusive partners. High investments may enable couples to weather the inevitable stormy times. So, for example, my partner might be less satisfied in our relationship at this moment since I am so busy with work this semester, but his high level of investment might drive his commitment and lead him to wait out these rougher patches so that we can get through to times that are much more satisfying. But we also know from research that investments can also trap people in unhealthy relationships.
For example, research with women from battered women’s shelters has shown that women with high investments were more likely to return to abusive partners than women who haven’t invested as much into their relationships.
*So, investments are a tricky thing – they can help us get through rocky times but can also lead us to stay committed to relationships that we might be ultimately better off ending.
Commitment in relationships
Commitment helps to protect and maintain relationships:
Derogate alternatives (e.g., committed individuals rate attractive people as less sexy than single individuals) (Lydon & Karremans, 2015)
Commitment motivates thoughts, perceptions, and actions that help us protect and maintain a relationship: -people who are more committed are more likely to derogate alternatives—in one study they rated attractive people as less sexy and good looking compared to single individuals (so it’s possible they see their alternatives as less attractive)
What is accomodate in commitment?
Accommodate -> respond more constructively when dissatisfied (e.g., bite their tongue during a fight, try to work things out.
Strongly committed partners also respond more constructively when something bad happens in the relationship—they might let smaller things go (bite their tong sometimes to prevent unnecessary conflicts from arising) and try harder to work on things.
Other behaviours in commitment
Make sacrifices when conflicts of interest arise (Righetti & Impett, 2017)
* They are also more willing to make personal sacrifices for their partner and to maintain their relationship, so they’re more willing to forgo their own self-interest.
So, if when we revisit the investment model of commitment, we see that commitment predicts pro-relationship behaviors, which is likely WHY people’s relationships are more likely to last, so why people will also stay in a relationship.
And of course, the more we invest in a relationship by doing what’s in the best interest of the relationship then this will also feed back into the investment component here that in turn again predicts commitment. And the more people do things that are good for a relationship, they will likely also enjoy that relationship more, which again will also fuel their commitment, so their willingness to do what’s best for the relationship. So this becomes a pattern that helps sustaining relationships.
Attachment in relationships
Attachment styles built and expressed in relationships.
An intimate emotional bond to a particular individual who is seen as providing protection, comfort, and support.
John Bowlby – Attachment Theory
* Began by observing infant/caregiver relationships.
* Attachment system - form bonds with others, become distressed if they are unavailable.
* Evolutionary function of the attachment system: keep caregivers close to infants.
The attachment system is an innate behavioral system. And includes a set of behaviours that promote attachment to specific individuals who will care for and protect the vulnerable infant. And this behavioral system is most activated when an infant is in danger or distress – so the goal is to regulate emotional distress and restore felt security.
Responsive Caregiving is essential. So according to attachment theory, responsive caregiving is essential – providing your child with a safe haven when they are in distress and also providing a secure base for them to explore the world and know that you will be there.
Individual differences in attachment
Learn in early childhood what to expect from others.
Develop beliefs and expectations about
* Others: whether they will be responsive to our needs
* Self: whether we are worthy of love
These beliefs influence our thoughts, feelings and behavior in relationships.
