Physical Attractiveness Flashcards
What is recent research showing about women’s approach to partner physical attractiveness
Physical attractivness is just as important for women as it is for men, in situations of choosing a short-term partner. When choosing a partner for ‘serious relationships’ physical attractiveness is less important to women as it is to men
What is the matching hypothesis
Developed by Walster and Walster, it claims that when initiating romantic relationships, individuals seek out partners whose social desirability is roughly equal to their own
What must a person do in order to choose a partner with the matching hypothesis
An individual must assess their own value in the eyes of a romantic partner and then select the best available candiadates who would most likely be attracted to them. Although both are theoretically attracted to the most socially desirable potential partners, by opting for those of similar social esirability they can maximise their chances of successful outcome
What did the matching hypothesis initially refer to and what is it associated with now
Initially it was meant to include a wide range of ‘assets’, but over time it has been associated specifically with physical attractiveness
What did Walster et al refer to matching hypothesis partners as being
‘Realistic’ choices, as both partners are influenced by the chances of having their affection reciprocated
What was the procedure of Walster et al’s study
He advertised a ‘computer dance’ for new students at Minnesota Uni. From a large number of students who purchased tickets, 177 males and 170 females were randomly selected to take part in the study.Four student accomplaces surrepticiously rated each participant for attractiveness, and the participants were asked to fill out a lengthy questionaire which they were told would be used to assign them their ideal partner for the dance. This was actually done completely randomly, and during the intermission part of the dance, participants were asked to fill out a questionaire about their partners, with a follow up questionaire distributed six months later
What were the findings of Walster et al’s study
The study did not support the matching hypothesis, as once participants had met their dates, regardless of their own physical attractiveness, they responded more positively to physically attractive dates and were more likely to try and arrange dates with them if they’re physically attractive. Factors like personality and intelligence did not affect liking the dates or any subsequent attempts to date them
Why might preferal mate differences not predict real life partner choices
Eastwick and Finkel used evidence from speed dating and backed this up with longitudinal follow up procedures 30 days later. Prior to the speed dating sessions, participants showed traditional sex differences when stating the importance of physical attractiveness and earning prospects in an ideal partner. However these failed to predict what inspired their actual behavior at the event, and no significant sex differences emerged in the degree to which judgements of targets influenced romantic interest in those partners
Who studied speed dating to determine if preference differences affected real life partner choice
Eastwick and Finkel
What is evidence that matching attractiveness may not be that important in inital attraction
Taylor et al showed that, in a study of online dating patterns, there was no evidence that daters decisions were driven by a similarity between their own and potential partners physical attractiveness. Instead they found evidence of an overall preference for attractive partners. This suggests that people don’t take their own physical attractiveness into account in intial stages of attraction, but aim for someone more attractive than themselves
Who provided evidence that physical attractiveness is not important in initial attraction
Taylor et al
Why might many studies fail to find evidence of matching in terms of physical attractiveness
Sprecher and Hatfield explain the lack of reseach finding evidence of matching on physcial attractiveness as people coming to a relationship offering many desirable characteristics, with attractiveness only being one. A person can compensate for lack of physical attractiveness with other desirable qualities such as a charming personality, kindness, status, money etc. This tendency to compensate with other desirable traits is called ‘complex matching’. and it suggests that people are able to attract partners far more physically attractive than themselves by offering compensatory assets
Who created the idea of complex matching
Sprecher and Hatfield
What are the implications of sex differences in the importance of physical attractiveness
Meltzer et al claim that if physcial attractiveness plays a stronger role in men’s long term relationship satisfaction than women’s, women may feel increased pressures to maintain their physical attractiveness in order to maintain long term relationships. However physical attractiveness is not the only predictor of marital satisfaction for a man, as both men and women desire partners who are supportive, trustworthy abd warm, and people with these partners tend to be more satisfied in relationships.
Who claimed women have to be attractive to have a long term relationship (not really)
Meltzer
