Matching Hypothesis

Question 1

Who came up with the matching hypothesis?

Answer 1

Walster et al

Question 2

When did Walster et al come up with the matching hypothesis?

Answer 2

1966

Question 3

What does the matching hypothesis state?

Answer 3

that people tend to choose partners who are as attractive as themselves

Question 4

What is the name of the study Walster et al (1966) does?

Answer 4

The Computer Dance Study

Question 5

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Method - advertising

Answer 5

the “computer dance” was advertised for new university students and tickets were sold to 376 men and 376 women.

Question 6

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Method - attractiveness

Answer 6

the people selling the tickets would secretly rate the person on their looks

Question 7

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Method - partnering

Answer 7

the participants were told a computer was going to match them on shared interests when in reality it was completely random

Question 8

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Method - Hight

Answer 8

No men were partnered with women taller then them

Question 9

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Method - collecting data

Answer 9

Participants were contacted four to six months later to find out if they’d tried to go on any further dates with their dance date

Question 10

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Results - Similarly attractive

Answer 10

participants paired with similarly attractive partners were not significantly more liked by their dates than those paired with a partner who had a different rating

Question 11

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Results - More Attractive

Answer 11

participants who were rated as more attractive were more liked by their date

Question 12

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Results - Further Dates

Answer 12

more attractive participants were also more frequently asked out on further dates then less attractive participants

Question 13

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Results - no correlation

Answer 13

there was no correlation between similarity in attractiveness in a pair

Question 14

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Conclusions

Answer 14

the matching hypothesis was not supported - the results showed that people prefer attractive partners, regardless of their own attractiveness

Question 15

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Evaluation - Usual Dating

Answer 15

it was different from usual dating - the participants didn’t choose one another and they didn’t have to ask each other on a date

Question 16

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Evaluation - Ecological Validity

Answer 16

the study has low ecological validity because the partners didn’t choose each other or ask someone out meaning they can’t be applied to real life

Question 17

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Evaluation - Reliability

Answer 17

the way the participants were judged on their looks can’t be classed as reliable

Question 18

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Strengths - Murstein (1972) - Method

Answer 18

asked 99 real couples and 98 fake couples to rate themselves. an independent judge also judged them

Question 19

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Strengths - Murstein (1972) - Results

Answer 19

people in relationships had a positive correlation between their attractiveness

Question 20

Walster et al (1966) - The Computer Dance Study: Weakness - Walster et al (1966)

Answer 20

the results of Walster et al study didn’t support the matching hypothesis