Relationships

Question 1

Define physical attractiveness

Answer 1

How appealing we find somebody (usually the face).

Question 2

Cunningham (1986) - physical attractiveness

Answer 2

Studied the type of faces men found attractive. Varied the size of facial features (eyes, mouth, nose).
Most men attracted to women with young children (neotenous).
Attracted to some mature features (prominent cheekbones, narrow cheeks, dilated pupils).

Question 3

Waynforth (2005) - physical attractiveness

Answer 3

Women were more attracted to masculine facial features - square jaw, small eyes, symmetrical face. Especially in short term partners.

Question 4

Bruce and Young (1998) - symmetry

Answer 4

Scientists believe symmetry is equated with strong immune system and healthy genes. They used computer generated models and found that women and men have preferences for symmetrical faces.

Question 5

Singh (1993) - physical attractive body shapes

Answer 5

Cross cultural preferences for 0.7 WHR in women (hour glass figure).
V shape for men 0.85-0.9 WHR, (wide shoulders, narrow hips) - Gross, 2001.

Question 6

Pawlowski (2008) - physically attractive body shapes.

Answer 6

Both sexes prefer 5% longer than average legs.

Question 7

Evaluation strength - Langlois et al. (2000)

Answer 7

919 studies = found there was an agreement between cultures as to what was and wasn’t attractive.

Question 8

Evaluation limitation - culture

Answer 8

Consensus that what is deemed attractive is the same from culture to culture. Peru = elongated necks, western culture = thinner.
What is deemed attractive is subjective.

Question 9

Halo effect - Dion et al. (2012)

Answer 9

According to attractiveness stereotypes, we perceive attractive people as also having more attractive personalities.
Physically attractive people are strong, kind, sociable, successful etc. having these characteristics makes them more attractive - self fulfilling prophecy.

Question 10

Halo effect - Clifford and Walster (1973)

Answer 10

Teachers judge attractive students as more intelligent than unattractive students.

Question 11

Halo effect - Dion et al. (1974)

Answer 11

Adults and nurses punish unattractive children more harshly than attractive ones.

Question 12

Halo effect - Hammermesh and Biddle (1994)

Answer 12

Attractive people make more money.

Question 13

Halo effect - Hosoda et al. (2003)

Answer 13

Attractive people get better job ratings from bosses.

Question 14

Computer Dance Study - Walster (1966) procedure

Answer 14

Looked into the importance of physical attractiveness was on a first date.
During freshers week at an American uni - 376 male and 376 female volunteers, payed $1 each.
4 judges secretly assessed student’s physical attractiveness and pp’s given a questionnaire to fill in.
Allocation done randomly but no man was assigned a taller woman.
Dance held two days later and pp’s filled in an end questionnaire about how much they enjoyed the date.

Question 15

Computer Dance Study - Walster (1966) results

Answer 15

Physical attractiveness was the most significant factor in how much the date was enjoyed for both men and women.

Question 16

Strengths of the Computer Dance Study

Answer 16

• pp’s didn’t know they were part of an experiment = genuine reactions, no bias or demand characteristics.
• Field study, based on ‘real’ events.
• Other research has similar findings:
  Walster (1969) - student chose a date and all chose a date with someone of similar physical attractiveness to themselves.
  Murstein (1972) - supports matching hypothesis with respect to longer term relationships (engaged couples rated as similar in physical attractiveness).

Question 17

Weaknesses of the Computer Dance Study

Answer 17

• Artificial research - Students were new to the university and therefore not representative of students generally nor general population.
• Criticised about the concept/idea of attractiveness. Do the older researchers have different views on attractiveness to young students.
• Ethical issues - no informed consent, deception, failure to protect participants from harm.

Question 18

Matching Hypothesis - Murstein (1972) Assumptions

Answer 18

Argues that individuals attraction towards each other in the formative stages of a relationship depends on the available cues that indicate social desirability.
Physical attractiveness a major factor in determining courtship desirability.

Question 19

Matching Hypothesis - Murstein (1972) procedure

Answer 19

Used 99 couples in a relationship compare to randomly assigned couples.
Used photographs of couples recently engaged cut apart and got pp’s to rate individuals in terms of attractiveness.
The real couples were ranked more alike in terms of attractiveness.

Question 20

Research support for the matching hypothesis

Answer 20

Palmer and Peterson (2012)
Physically attracted people were ranked more politically knowledgeable and competent.
Halo effect = results persisted even when people knew the attractive people didn’t have any expertise.
Implications -> dangerous for democracy if politicians judged as suitable for office based off attractiveness.

Question 21

Research challenging the matching hypothesis

Answer 21

Taylor et al. (2011)
Activity logs of popular online dating site. Kept original hypothesis and found that people sought dates with people more attractive than them.
Undermines the validity of matching hypothesis - contradicts central prediction about matching attractiveness.

Question 22

Counter point for research challenging the matching hypothesis

Answer 22

Feingold (1988)
Meat analysis of 17 studies.
Significant correlation in rankings of physical attractiveness between romantic partners.
Just because online daters seek more attractive potential partners doesn’t mean they get them. Dating selection may be just as ‘fantasy’ as in lab research.

Question 23

Weakness of the matching hypothesis - Individual differences

Answer 23

Evidence that some people do not attach as much importance to attractiveness.
Touhey (1979) - measured sexist attitudes of men and women (MACHO scale) and found lower scores relatively unaffected by physical attractiveness when judging the likability of potential partners.

Question 24

Filter theory definition

Answer 24

The number of available males and females we can potentially form relationships with are lessened by a number of factors.

Question 25

Filter theory factors

Answer 25

1. Proximity
2. Physical attractiveness
3. Similarity
4. Complement of needs
5. Competence

Question 26

Filter theory levels

Answer 26

1. Social demography
2. Similarity in attitudes
3. Complementarity

Question 27

(1) Filter theory - Social demography

Answer 27

The first level.
Factors influence the chance of potential partners meeting (proximity, social class, level of education, ethnic group, religion).
More likely to form a relationship with someone socially or culturally similar (homogamy).

Question 28

(2) Filter theory - Similarity in attitudes

Answer 28

Important in relationships less than 18 months. Early stages agree over basic values encouraging greater and deeper communication, promotes self-disclosure.
Byrne (1997) - law of attraction, if similarity doesn’t exist, the relationship will fizzle out.

Question 29

(3) Filter theory - Complementarity

Answer 29

Ability to meet each others needs by having traits that others lack. More important in relationships longer than 18 months.
Later stages = opposites attract, together forming a whole.

Question 30

Filter Theory study - Kerchkoff and Davis (1962)

Answer 30

94 student relationships both less than and greater than 18 months long.
Given self report questionnaires.
Less than 18 months long = similarity most important.
Greater than 18 months long = complementarity most important.

Question 31

Weakness of the filter theory - homosexuality

Answer 31

Markey and Markey (2013)
Only examines heter
Lesbian couples of equal dominance were the most satisfied.