Factors Affecting Attraction: Physical Attractiveness Flashcards
What is the matching hypothesis?
People choose romantic partners who are roughly of similar attractiveness to each other. To do this, we have to make judgment about our own value to a potential partner.
What does the evolutionary theory suggest?
We should always seek the most attractive mates (as a sign of genetic fitness).
Why do people compromise in picking partners?
Because we may be rejected by these people. We are likely to become matched to someone who most matches what we want. We all desire the most physically attractive partner possible for all sorts of evolutionary, social, cultural and psychological reasons. In the real world, however, we balance this wish to avoid being rejected by someone ‘out of our league’
What are the three stages of the matching hypothesis?
- The more sociably desirable a person is in terms of physical attractiveness, social standing, intelligence, etc, the more desirable they would expect a dating or marriage partner to be.
- Couples who are matched are more likely to have happy, enduring relationships than couples who are mismatched in terms of social desirability.
- A person rates a potential partner for attractiveness, and compares it with their own level of attractiveness. This comparison determines whether they will pursue the person as a potential mate.
What research shows that those who are physically attractive are liked the most?
Computer Dance Study (Walster): 752 students brought welcome week tickets for a computer dance. When they bought the ticket they were told that information they gave about themselves would be fed into a computer and this would provide an ‘ideal match’ date. In fact they were randomly matched. When students were giving their data, an unseen observer marked them on attractiveness. After spending two hours with their dates, students were asked how much they liked their partner. Men asked out a partner if they found her attractive, regardless of personality or how attractive they are.
Limitation: online dating research has not supported its assumptions.
Taylor et al found online dates sought dates with partners who were more attractive than themselves and did not consider their own level of attractiveness. This research involved actual dating choices (meeting people online is becoming increasing popular) yet it does not support the matching hypothesis. It may therefore be that the matching hypothesis no longer explains preferences regarding physical attractiveness in a useful way.
What is an honest level of genetic fitness?
Symmetry. Shackelford and Larsen found that people with symmetrical faces are rated as more physically attractive. It is thought that this is an honest signal of genetic fitness because being symmetrical requires robust genes. Therefore a partner who selects a person with a symmetrical face is more likely to produce offspring with robust genes who survive to reproduce themselves. Explanations based on physical attractiveness are evolutionary ones - we have evolved a liking for attributes that signal high quality.
What are neotenous features?
These are baby-like features (e.g. widely separated eyes and small nose) which are thought to trigger protective and caring instincts. Therefore explanations based on physical attractiveness are evolutionary ones - we have evolved a liking for physical attractiveness because it is a signal of high quality.
Why is physical attractiveness important beyond the formation stage?
McNulty et al found that the initial attractiveness continued to be an important feature of the relationship after marriage.
What does the halo effect describe about how physical attractiveness is generalised to other personal attributes?
It is proposed that we hold preconceived ideas about other attributes of attractive people and those other attributes are overwhelmingly positive because of the person’s physical attractiveness. This is known as the halo effect.
What is an example of the halo effect?
Dion et al found that physically attractive people, are consistently rated as strong, kind, sociable and successful compared with unattractive people. It is suggested that certain characteristics, in this case physical attractiveness, have a disproportionate effect on judgements of other characteristics.
What does the matching hypothesis suggest?
That we match our own attractiveness level to others. Walster et al’s matching hypothesis states that we choose partners that are of the same level of attractiveness to ourselves and to do this we need to assess our own value to a potential partner. For example, if we judge ourselves as 6/10 then we are likely to seek a mate of a similar level of attractiveness.
Why is choosing a partner essentially a compromise?
Whilst evolutionary theories suggest we should seek the most attractive Mayes we have to also balance the potential for being rejected because the partner we aim for is ‘out of our league’ in terms of attractiveness.
Evaluation strength: Research support for the halo effect
Palmer and Peterson found that physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgement and competent than unattractive people. This has implications and suggests politicians might be elected merely because they are considered physically attractive by enough voters. This shows that the halo effect can be observed in real-life situations.
Limitation: not everyone considers physical attractiveness as important.
Those who scored highly on the MACHO scale (sexist attitudes) were more influenced by physical attractiveness when judging like ability from a photograph and basic biographical data. As low scorers were less sensitive to this influence, it would seem that there are individual differences in the importance placed upon physical attractiveness. This suggests that the effects of physical attractiveness can be moderated by other factors and may not be as significant a consideration in relationship formation for all partners.
