Lecture 6: Attraction and Partner Selection Part 3 Flashcards
1
Q
why might similarity be attractive?
A
- Validation for our interests, beliefs, & opinions
- We can better predict the behaviour of similar others
- Can participate in shared activities
- We expect those who are similar to us to
be more likely to like us - Interactions may run smoother
2
Q
effect of similarity on initial attraction
A
Attitudinal similarity predicts attraction for people we don’t know (or with whom we are newly acquainted)
3
Q
“Bogus stranger” paradigm
A
responses are manipulated to be either similar or dissimilar to one’s own responses
4
Q
effect similarity in speed dating studies
A
- There is limited evidence of a link between attraction and similarity in a speed-dating content
- To the extent that similarity matters in this context, perceived rather than actual similarity may play a larger role
5
Q
similarity in married couples
A
- 1,000 married couples provided information about themselves on 88 characteristics
- More similar on 66/88 traits compared to pairs matched at random
6
Q
what is the directionality of the similarity-relationship link?
A
- Similarity predicts friendship development among newly acquainted
- Similarity does not increase over the course of marriage
- Length of marriage does not moderate spousal similarity
7
Q
types of similarity
A
- Demographic similarity (ex. Age, race, education, religion, etc.)
- Attitudes and values
- Personality
8
Q
for what type of similarity is the link most strong and why?
A
- Link between similarity & attraction seems to be stronger for attitudes/values and some demographic characteristics than for personality
- As we saw, some personality characteristics are more uniformly desirable than others
9
Q
similarly & satisfaction
A
- Similarity between partners’ personalities explains only small amount of variation in satisfaction
- Having a partner with desirable personality traits (ex. agreeableness, conscientiousness, low neuroticism) more important than matching
- Couples similar on unappealing traits less successful than couples who are less alike on these traits
10
Q
neural homophily study
A
- Measuring neural activity while individuals view naturalistic stimuli (e.g., movie clips) thought to offer view into thought processes as they unfold
- In this study, neural responses to movie clips more similar among friends than those further removed in a real-world social network
11
Q
previous research on neural homophily
A
inter-subject correlations of neural response time series during viewing of complex dynamic stimuli associated with similarities in subjects’ interpretation of those stimuli
12
Q
homophily
A
the tendency of nodes to connect to other similar nodes
13
Q
why do we think opposites attract?
A
- Perception vs. reality: perceptions of similarity may be more important for liking than objective similarity
- Discovering dissimiarities can take time
- We may pursue partners that represent our ideal selves
- Dissimilarity may decrease over time
- Some types of similarity may be more important than others
- Matching is a broad process
14
Q
complementarity
A
- Perhaps we are attracted to people who possess the qualities we lacl
- There is little support for this idea
15
Q
happiness of egalitarian vs. traditional couples
A
- Members of egalitarian couples are happier than more traditional couples
- This may help explain results of some studies showing higher satisfaction in gay and lesbian couples
16
Q
humour in relationships
A
- There is no gender differences in preference for a partner with a sense of humour, but men do not rate funny women more highly
- There are different interpretations of what it means to have a sense of humour
- Men like women who laugh at their jokes and women like men who make them laugh
17
Q
do preferences predict attraction? speed-dating study
A
- Before the event: they rate the importance of physical appearance, earning potential & attractive personality in an ideal romantic partner
- During the event: they rate each interaction partner on the above characteristics and indicate their level of desire
- Ideal preferences failed to predict desire at the event
18
Q
promises of online dating
A
Online dating platforms claim to have sophisticated algorithms that can match you with a perfect partner based on the large amount of data they collect
19
Q
efficacy of online dating study method
A
- Participants completed over 100 self-report measures, including personality, attachment, mating strategies, values, ideal partner preferences
- Desire for each partner was assessed during a speed dating event
- Statistical model: Can account for interactions between predictors
- Parses variance in romantic desire into 3 components
20
Q
3 components of romantic desire
A
actor variance, partner variance, and relational variance
21
Q
actor variance
A
the overall tendency to desire others
22
Q
partner variance
A
the overall tendency to be desired by other people
23
Q
relational variance
A
people’s desire for specific partners
24
Q
efficacy of online dating study findings for actor desire
A
- Predicted 4-18% of variance in actor desire
- Consistent predictors: desired warmth/responsiveness, one’s own expected selectivity
25
efficacy of online dating study findings for partner desire
- 7-27% variance in partner desire
- Consistent predictors: self-reports of one’s own mate value and physical attractiveness
26
efficacy of online dating study findings for relationship desire
Could not predict variance in relationship desire
27
fatal attraction
we may be originally attracted to some traits we don’t have but then become increasingly irritated by those traits
28
efficacy of online dating study caveats
- Generalizability: relatively homogenous sample (undergraduates)
- Desire was measured after a single 4-minute interaction: Results may look different for long-term romantic compatibility
29
do we have a type?
- Collected self-reports of personality from individual’s current and former partners
- Found evidence of unique (distinctive) similarity between current partner’s profile & ex-partner’s profile
- Controlling for normative similarity
(this suggests that the key finding is not due to shared environments)
- There is some evidence that more extraverted and open-minded participants are less likely to be in a relationship with a partner distinctively similar to ex-partner
30
Major histocompability complex (MHC)
genes play a significant role in immune system; help recognize and respond to pathogens
31
MHC and offspring
Selection of MHC-dissimilar mates may confer benefits for offspring
32
MHC study
- Women were asked to rate odours of t-shirts previously worn by a group of men
- Odours of men with dissimilar-MHC antigens were seen as more attractive
- Moderated by oral contracptive use
- There were subsequent replications, but they were not consistent
33
context and attraction
- Preferences feel like a stable part of our identity
- One reason why attraction may be somewhat unpredictable is due to the effects of context on attraction
34
normative similarity
reflection of how people describe themselves in general ad self-partner similarity
35
Capilano Suspension Bridge Study
- Men who saw an attractive woman on a scary bridge were more likely to call her than those who saw her on a safer bridge.
- The men also wrote more romantic and sexual content in their stories if they met the woman on the scary bridge than the safe one
36
Two factors of romantic attraction
1. Physiological arousal
2. Misattribution of arousal: attributing physiological arousal to the wrong source
37
two-factor theory of romantic attraction
- We will experience passion if we can assign physiological arousal to the target
- Nature of arousal (negative or positive) does not matter
- This effect may not generalize to contexts where physiological arousal is frequent and/or anger-provoking situations
- Theories of aggression suggest that misattribution of arousal from a negative event may contribute to interpersonal aggression
38
two-factor theory of romantic attraction shock study
- Brought participants in for a study of “electric shock on learning and pain”
- They completed the task with an attractive confederate
- Two conditions: expecting either a weak or strong shock
- Measured attraction to the confederate
- Those expecting a strong shock reported more attraction to the confederate
39
two factor theory of romantic attraction positive vs. negative arousal study
- Is the effect contingent on type of arousal or attractiveness of confederate?
- Manipulated the type of arousal
- Negative: description of mutilation & killing
- Positive: comedy tape
neutral/no arousal: description of the circulatory system of a frog
- Then, they watched a video of a woman made up to look either attractive or non-attractive
- Regardless of the type of arousal condition, participants experienced the confederate as more attractive than in the no arousal condition
- For the low attractiveness confederate, this effect seems to flip
