Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

PSYC20009 > Lecture 7: relationships > Flashcards

Lecture 7: relationships Flashcards

1
Q

seeking connectedness is also known as ….

-> what evidence suggests this?

A

the need to belong = the need to form and maintain strong, stable interpersonal relationships

  • > occurs early in development
  • > across cultures
  • > people readily form social attachments and resist dissolution
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what is Relational models theory (Fiske)

  1. communal sharing (CS)
  2. authority ranking (AR)
  3. Equality matching (EM)
  4. market pricing (MP)

what are they? examples

A

different relationships are governed by different rules of interaction/exchange

  1. shared identity: family, romantic partners
    - sharing, empathy, community, care
  2. linear ordering: bosses/employees, student/teacher, military
    - hierarchy, order, respect, discipline
  3. even balance:
    colleagues, housemates, peer groups
    - 1 to 1 reciprocity, equality
  4. proportionality rule of exchange
    customer/sales, business partners
    -input/output ratios, equity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Relational models theory

mixed models

  1. romantic partner
  2. parent-child

-> can they change?

what other theories does it combine to give a more broad overview?

A
  1. mostly CS, also EM
  2. CS and AR
  • > different stages of the same relationship can be characterised by different exchange rules
    e. g. start EM -> CS

equity theory (MP and EM); Clark and mills theory (CS and EM)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Importance of relationships and well-being
- close relationships

> Impact on mortality risk
Holt-Lunstad

A

-> social support
> emotional and physical coping resources (e.g. money, run errands)

Impact on mortality risk
Holt-Lunstad:
range of factors linked to mortality
-> social support has impacts on mortality risk that equal to or outweighs risks such as smoking, obesity, vaccinations, air pollution etc

= social support protects us

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

The costs of loneliness

-> risks associated

A
  • > feeling isolated

- > increase risks of negative health conditions; cognitive decline and impaired EF

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

relationship formation: getting acquainted

  1. what factors influence attraction and liking?
A

attraction = desire for a voluntary relationship

liking = positive evaluation of a object/person

    • physical attractiveness
      - similarity
      - positive interaction
      > proximity, familiarity and mimicry
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

relationship formation: getting acquainted

  1. physical attractiveness
    - >beauty is good effect
  2. self-fulfilling prophecy
    > Snyder, tanke, Berscheid
A

-> vary across time and culture

  • > some general:
  • symmetry

Beautiful is good effect

  • > stereotype that physically attractive people are warm and friendly
  • > can become self-fulfilling
  1. phone conversations between women and men
    - > men told the woman was either attractive or unattractive

attractive = men were more sociable, more warm, bold and humorous
> the ‘attractive’ women then reciprocated
= increased mutual liking (both rated one another highly)
= self-fulfilling

= this can reinforce the stereotype

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

relationship formation: getting acquainted

  1. similarity
    - condon and crano

-> why does this increase liking/attraction?

A

-> similar others attract = similarity-attraction principle

  • > participants gave attitude judgements
  • > give judgement about another person: either similar or dissimilar to them

= as attitude similarity increases, people become more attracted to the person they are judging

= also asked how much do you think that person likes you? the more similar, the more they said that the person would like them (reciprocal attraction)

= correlation between inferred attraction and own attraction of .6
= out perceptions of how much others are attracted to us is related to how much we are attracted to them

why?

  • > common ground = more likely to have a positive interaction
  • > similar others validate our beliefs and attitudes = positive reinforcement
  • > inferred reciprocal attraction -> we believe they will like us
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

relationship formation: getting acquainted

  1. proximity
    - Festinger, Schachter and Back

-> why does proximity increase attraction?

A
  • we tend to like the people we frequent interact with
    > we frequently interact with people we are close to (proximity or propinquity = same thing!)

STUDY
living quarters
how room allocation (proximity) would influence liking

top 3 social contacts rated
-> 63% lived within 2 apartments

= physical proximity plays a role in development of liking

why?

  • > increases frequency of interaction
  • > proximity increases familiarity = mere exposure effect
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Familiarity leads to liking (the mere exposure effect)

- Moreland and beach study (lectures)

A

females who attended more classes (15 compared to 5 or 10 times) they were rated more attractive

= female viewed as more attractive
= female viewed as more similar to the person who is rating

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Positive interaction: mimicry

Chartrand and Bargh

  1. study 1 (shaking and rubbing)
  2. study 2 (confederate mimics participant)
A

face 2 face interaction = non-verbal processes to impact liking

  1. study 1
    - > interact with confederate
    - > turn-taking picture description task
    - > confederate told to either rub face or shake foot
    - > would the participants mimic this behaviour?

= when the confederate rubs face, participants are more likey to rub face (rather than shake their foot)

= when the confederate shakes foot, participant more likely to shake food (rather than rub face)

= participants non-consciously mimicked the confederate
= participants had no notion that this is what was being measured - they did it nonconsciously

  1. study 2
    - > confederate instructed to subtly mimic behaviours of participant
    - > this increased participant liking of the confederate

= mimicry increases liking

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

from acquaintance to friend and beyond: building close relationships

  1. self-disclosure
  2. consequences of self-disclosure (2)
    - > depth: wortman
A
  1. revealing information about oneself
    - > facts, thoughts, feelings

self-disclosure increases in:

  1. breath: more topics
  2. depth: levels of intimacy
  3. a) self-disclosure increases liking
    - > mutual self-disclosure can increase perceived similarity

= depth needs to be calibrated to relationship stage:
-> confederate who made early disclosure was liked less compared to later disclosure

b) signals trust in relationship partner
> mutual trust can strengthen relationship
= working together towards a common goal is easier when the relationship partners know about each others’ preferences and abilities

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

from acquaintance to friend and beyond: building close relationships

  1. who self-discloses?
    > Reis
  2. gender
  3. culture
A
  1. -> college students rate intimacy and frequency of disclosures

= female disclose more (highest)
= male - male interaction is low on intimate self-disclosure
= male-female interactions are higher

    • > individualistic cultures more than collectivist cultures
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

interdependence and close relationships

  1. what is interdependence?
  2. what is a close relationship?
A
  1. when each partner’s thoughts, feelings and behaviours influences the other
    = increases likelihood of a close relationship
  2. a relationship involving strong, frequent interdependence:
    > cognitive, behavioural and affective

= NOT defined in terms of positive feelings (can be associated with high levels of conflict)

= its about how intertwined 2 people are

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

interdependence and close relationships

  1. cognitive interdependence
    - > IOS scale: Aron
A

overlapping of representations of the self and other

  • > other in self (IOS)
  • > 2 circles, how closely they overlap: 1 representing you, 1 representing the other person
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

interdependence and close relationships

  1. behavioural interdependence
    - > Aron study
A

influence on other partner’s decisions, activities and plans
-> move from EM to CS
= the way you decide on what to do is based on need rather than equality

-> giving becomes less contingent on the possibility of reciprocation
> participants given money to share
> between you and best friend vs you and stranger
> condition: the other person will know how you’ve decided to share the money (role known)

= more likely to give money to themselves in the stranger condition compared to with their friend -> more likely to give their best friend more money

= when other person is a best-friend, knowledge of them knowing of your role or not doesn’t make a difference
= when other person is a stranger, knowledge of them knowing of role = more money is given to them compared to when they don’t know their role

= expectation of reciprocation matters with strangers but not with interacting with best friend = best friend = CS model
= stranger = EM model

17
Q

interdependence and close relationships

  1. Affective interdependence
A

intimacy = positive emotional bond that includes understanding and support

increasing closeness = BEYOND reciprocal disclosure to deeper relations of:

  1. acknowledgement
  2. acceptance/understanding
  3. emotional responsiveness
  4. increasing sensitivity and care

= calibrated to the needs of the relationship partner

= affective interdependence is one of the primary bases of the important social support functions played by relationships

18
Q

commitment

-> deinfe

A

interdependence for the long-haul
-> long-term orientation towards a relationship with the intention to maintain it over time

  • > commitment develops over time
  • > projects interdependence into the future
19
Q

Rusbult investment model of commitment (3)

A
  1. satisfaction level: net cognitive, affective and behavioural benefits provided
    = positively associated with commitment
  2. quality of alternatives
    = negatively associated with commitment
    (higher quality of alternatives = less committed to relationship)
  3. investment size: resources put into the relationship
    = positive associated with commitment

= more satisfaction and investment, with fewer viable alternatives increases commitment

20
Q

satisfaction doesn’t translate into commitment:

  • > you can be satisfied and not committed
  • > you can be dissatisfied and committed

Rusbult and Martz

A

100 women interviewed (fleeing abusive relationships - in a shelter)

  • > more likely to be committed and stay if fewer viable alternatives and higher investment
  • > satisfaction had LESS impact
21
Q 
Love 
definitions 
-> what is love?: Fehr and Russell
- types 
-prototypical
A

types of love
top = friendship, sexual, paternal, brotherly, sibling, maternal

prototypically of types of love:
top = maternal, paternal, friendship, sisterly, romantic, brotherly, familial

= many types/ large variety

22
Q

components of love
-> Sternberg: triangle theory of love (3)

-> kinds of love

A
  1. intimacy : closeness, connected, interdependent
  2. commitment: long term orientation to relationship
  3. passion: physical and sexual attraction, intensity of emotional connection

Consummate love (perfect) = high 1, 2 and 3

romantic = 1 and 3

companionate = 1 and 2

fatuous (pointless) love = 2 and 3

23
Q

relationship threat and conflict

threats to relationships (2)

  • Baxter (8) “rules” of love
A
  1. external:
    - financial
    - gender roles
    - rivals
  2. internal
    - illness
    - change/mismatch/expectations

BAXTER

  • > accounts of breakups
  • > extracted relationship rules: if breached lead to breakups
  1. autonomy = acknowledge individual identities (F>M)
  2. similarity display = express similar attitudes, values
  3. supportiveness = enhance one another’s self worth and self esteem
  4. openness = open, genuine, authenticity (F>M)
  5. loyalty/fidelity
  6. shared time
  7. equity (F>M)
  8. romance: inexplicable ‘magic’ (M>F)
24
Q

managing conflicts (relationships)

  1. whats accommodation?
  2. types of accommodation
A
  1. -> resolving conflict: processes of responding to a negative action by the partner
    • > destructive accommodation = Gottman’s ‘four horsemen’:
  3. criticism
  4. contempt
  5. defensiveness
  6. stonewalling

= negative outcomes (dissolution) is likely to occur if conflict is approached in this way

  • > constructive accommodation =
    1. open discussion
    2. patience
    3. forgiveness

= maintain AND strengthening of relationship, deepening of the bond

= conflicts aren’t the problem, its the accommodation strategies used that is the problem

25
Q

consequences of accommodation strategies

  • > Rusbult
    1. constructive x active
    2. constructive x passive
    3. destructive x active
    4. destructive x passive
A
  1. voice: discuss, seek help, change
  2. loyalty: wait, hope, support
  3. Exit: abuse, scream, threaten, seperate
  4. Neglect: ignore, avoid, let fall apart
26
Q

fostering constructive accommodation

-> constructive accommodation is aided by

  • implicit theories: knee
  • Incremental vs entity theories: kammrath and dweck
A
  1. commitment
  2. idealisation of partner
  3. implicit theories: beliefs about how the world works

Implicit theories
> growth vs destiny
> people who believe in growth = constructive accommodation is used

Incremental vs entity theories

incremental =  personality can change and improve over time 
entity = personality is fixed

INCREMENTAL
=fosters active constructive processes

ENTITY
=fosters passive constructive processes
= more likely to use neglect

PSYC20009 (10 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions