Lecture 6: Attraction and Partner Selection Part 3

Question 1

why might similarity be attractive?

Answer 1

• 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

Question 2

effect of similarity on initial attraction

Answer 2

Attitudinal similarity predicts attraction for people we don’t know (or with whom we are newly acquainted)

Question 3

“Bogus stranger” paradigm

Answer 3

responses are manipulated to be either similar or dissimilar to one’s own responses

Question 4

effect similarity in speed dating studies

Answer 4

• 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

Question 5

similarity in married couples

Answer 5

• 1,000 married couples provided information about themselves on 88 characteristics
• More similar on 66/88 traits compared to pairs matched at random

Question 6

what is the directionality of the similarity-relationship link?

Answer 6

• Similarity predicts friendship development among newly acquainted
• Similarity does not increase over the course of marriage
• Length of marriage does not moderate spousal similarity

Question 7

types of similarity

Answer 7

• Demographic similarity (ex. Age, race, education, religion, etc.)
• Attitudes and values
• Personality

Question 8

for what type of similarity is the link most strong and why?

Answer 8

• 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

Question 9

similarly & satisfaction

Answer 9

• 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

Question 10

neural homophily study

Answer 10

• 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

Question 11

previous research on neural homophily

Answer 11

inter-subject correlations of neural response time series during viewing of complex dynamic stimuli associated with similarities in subjects’ interpretation of those stimuli

Question 12

homophily

Answer 12

the tendency of nodes to connect to other similar nodes

Question 13

why do we think opposites attract?

Answer 13

• 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

Question 14

complementarity

Answer 14

• Perhaps we are attracted to people who possess the qualities we lacl
• There is little support for this idea

Question 15

happiness of egalitarian vs. traditional couples

Answer 15

• 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

Question 16

humour in relationships

Answer 16

• 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

Question 17

do preferences predict attraction? speed-dating study

Answer 17

• 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

Question 18

promises of online dating

Answer 18

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

Question 19

efficacy of online dating study method

Answer 19

• 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

Question 20

3 components of romantic desire

Answer 20

actor variance, partner variance, and relational variance

Question 21

actor variance

Answer 21

the overall tendency to desire others

Question 22

partner variance

Answer 22

the overall tendency to be desired by other people

Question 23

relational variance

Answer 23

people’s desire for specific partners

Question 24

efficacy of online dating study findings for actor desire

Answer 24

• Predicted 4-18% of variance in actor desire
• Consistent predictors: desired warmth/responsiveness, one’s own expected selectivity

Question 25

efficacy of online dating study findings for partner desire

Answer 25

- 7-27% variance in partner desire - Consistent predictors: self-reports of one’s own mate value and physical attractiveness

Question 26

efficacy of online dating study findings for relationship desire

Answer 26

Could not predict variance in relationship desire

Question 27

fatal attraction

Answer 27

we may be originally attracted to some traits we don’t have but then become increasingly irritated by those traits

Question 28

efficacy of online dating study caveats

Answer 28

- Generalizability: relatively homogenous sample (undergraduates) - Desire was measured after a single 4-minute interaction: Results may look different for long-term romantic compatibility

Question 29

do we have a type?

Answer 29

- 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

Question 30

Major histocompability complex (MHC)

Answer 30

genes play a significant role in immune system; help recognize and respond to pathogens

Question 31

MHC and offspring

Answer 31

Selection of MHC-dissimilar mates may confer benefits for offspring

Question 32

MHC study

Answer 32

- 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

Question 33

context and attraction

Answer 33

- 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

Question 34

normative similarity

Answer 34

reflection of how people describe themselves in general ad self-partner similarity

Question 35

Capilano Suspension Bridge Study

Answer 35

- 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

Question 36

Two factors of romantic attraction

Answer 36

1. Physiological arousal 2. Misattribution of arousal: attributing physiological arousal to the wrong source

Question 37

two-factor theory of romantic attraction

Answer 37

- 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

Question 38

two-factor theory of romantic attraction shock study

Answer 38

- 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

Question 39

two factor theory of romantic attraction positive vs. negative arousal study

Answer 39

- 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