relationships- 3 Flashcards
outline the relationship between sexual selection and human reproductive behaviour
Sexual selection provides an evolutionary explanation for reproductive behaviours
-behaviours that increase reproductive success are passed on through genes, leading them to become common
what is intersexual selection
one gender makes mate choices based on a specific characteristic of the other gender- most relevant for female reproductive behaviour
explain ‘female choosiness’
females have higher levels of parental investment than males
- women can have fewer children than men
- greater energy investment in each child
- females have a lot to lose if they select a sub-standard partner
what is the sexy son hypothesis
preference for partners with desirable characteristics may have been sexually selected because such characteristics can be inherited
-a son will have to compete against other men to be selected by “choosy” women, allowing him to pass on his genes
what is intrasexual selection
members of the same sex compete for members of the opposite sex
-most important for explaining the evolution of male reproductive behaviours
how does intrasexual selection lead to male reproductive behaviours
Male aggression – more aggressive males were able to dominate less aggressive males, and so secure access to reproductively fit women
A lack of male choosiness – reproductively fit females are more scarce, In this competitive environment, males who were less choosy would reproduce more than the choosy males
Mate guarding - Because women can have fewer children, they are in high demand, leading to competition between males for the opportunity to reproduce with them- helps males outcompete other males
limitation- human reproductive behaviour in terms of sexual selection-socially sensitive
easily misunderstood- potential for harmful social
-e.g. presenting reproductive behaviours like female choosiness as sexually selected, could be interpreted as implying they are universal, leading to stigmatization against individuals who deviate from these behavioural norms
-claiming a reproductive behaviour has been sexually selected might suggest it is “natural” /morally correct.
- none of the research findings on this topic can be applied to homosexual relationships
-still beneficial- understand the biological basis for such behaviour
strength- sexual selection and human reproductive behaviour- research support
Clark and Hatfield- male and female students approached other students with: ‘ I have been noticing you around campus. I find you very attractive. Would you got to bed with me tonight?’ Not a single female student agreed but 75% of male students said yes
-findings fit with human reproductive behaviour predicted from sexual selection explained by female choosiness
-conducted in naturalistic conditions- participant behaviour is more likely to be naturalistic, meaning the research has ecological validity
- 2 decades old, societal attitudes and behaviours have changed- lack temporal validity
what is attraction
initial stage in a relationship when partners develop a desire to spend time with each other
what is universally attractive
facial symmetry- indicates a partner has ‘good genes’ that could be passed on to children
-asymmetrical features- may be caused by disease, indicating an impaired immune system and ‘weaker genes’
-halo effect- universally shared bias to view physically attractive people as attractive in other unrelated domains too- kinder
-men and women differ in their attitudes to how physical appearance affects attraction
why do men care more about physical attractiveness
when choosing long-term partners, men place greater importance on physical attractiveness than women.
-women’s greater parental investment, which leads them to consider a range of characteristics (e.g., financial resources) when making judgements about attraction
what features do men find attractive
-youthful physical appearance- association between youth and fertility, women have a shorter window of fertility-women who look physically younger seem a more reproductively successful partner
-low waist to hip ratio- good physical health and fertility
-neotenous features (e.g., big eyes)- elicit a nurturing impulse from the male (just as actual children do)
- women with more neotenous features will attract more caring mates, meaning their offspring are more likely to survive
what features do women find attractive
- tall men- indicates an ability to provide physical protection
-desire for height may have been sexually selected due to high parental investment
what is the matching hypothesis
Walster’s matching hypothesis - individuals seek out partners whose social desirability matches their own
- individuals must first assess their own attractiveness and then seek partners who would be attracted to them.
-evolutionary perspective- want to avoid potential rejection and future possibility of our partner cheating on us with a more desirable mate
strength- physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction- research support
Feingold meta-analysis- 17 studies, significant correlation in ratings of physical attractiveness between romantic partners
-people tend to find other people attractive when they match their own level of physical attractiveness- provides support for the predictions of the matching hypothesis
-large sample sizes- highly representative
limitation- Research into the role of physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction- socially sensitive
Sieber and Stanley- research which could lead to harmful social consequences for participants and/or people connected to the research is socially sensitive
- Research into physical attractiveness involves judgments about who is and isn’t attractive
-cause distress to participants in the research, might also be used to justify discrimination against people not judged as attractive in society
-can help people understand the reasons why they find certain features physically attractive-may help them re-evaluate whether their perceptions of what is and isn’t attractive are appropriate
what is filter theory
Kerckhoff and Davis filter theory proposes that despite a seemingly huge pool of potential romantic partners, a series of social and psychological processes (filters) lead us to become attracted to a select number of people
what is the first filter in filter theory
social demography- wide range of social factors that influence the chances of potential partners spending enough time with each other that an attraction can develop- determining whether a relationship will even start
-geographical location, social class, sexuality and religion
-illustrate the importance of homogamy in attraction
what is the second filter in filter theory
similarity in attitudes- psychological characteristic: a persons attitudes
- views on politics or social issues, as well as values (e.g., the importance of having children).
- important in the early phase of a relationship- best predictor of the relationship becoming stable
- illustrates the role of homogamy in attraction
third filter in filter theory
complementarity of needs- whether partners view each other as having characteristics that complement their own-fulfil each other’s needs
-complementarity isn’t the same as ‘opposites attract’, successful long-term relationships rely on harmonious qualities, rather just a level of similarity
-heterogamy also plays a role in attraction- shows how homogamy and heterogamy both contribute to attraction in romantic relationships
strength- filter theory- research support
-longitudinal design Kerckhoff and Davis- for couples dating under 18 months, similarity in attitudes was the most significant predictor for one partner’s feeling of intimacy towards the other, but for longer term relationships complementarity mattered more
-support filter theory’s prediction that as a relationship develops, complementarity of needs supersedes similarity in attitudes in determining the level of attraction within a romantic relationship
- These findings are especially credible - longitudinal design, provides a full chronological view of events, allowing the researchers to make stronger claims about the causal relationship between the variables in filter theory and the development of attraction
limitation- filter theory- simplistic
-ignoring other aspects of romantic attraction, such as physical attraction
- research into romantic relationships could benefit from the use of a more holistic account
-since people are individuals, there is enormous variation in what people find attractive- nomothetic approach seeking to establish general laws about how variables contribute to attraction may not be a valid approach
-highlights the value of an idiographic approach
what is self-disclosure
process of communication -one person reveals information about themselves to another
-can include basic biographical information, as well as thoughts, feelings, aspirations, failures, successes, fears, and likes and dislikes
how does self- disclosure affect attraction
Altman and Taylor’s social penetration theory (SPT) states that relationships can only develop if there is an exchange of information
- act of self-disclosure can increase attraction- by revealing personal information, the discloser signals trust and want to establish a closer relationship.
-relationship can move beyond the superficial towards the intimate
how does the breadth of self- disclosure affect attraction
-Increasing breadth of disclosure- partners disclose more information across a range of topics
-allows partners to better know the varied aspects of a person-according to SPT, this will increase the level of attraction as it acts as a signal of trust
what does social penetration theory predict about factors affecting self- disclosure
SPT predicts- attraction in a relationship will develop if partners increase both the breadth and depth of their disclosures
how does the depth of self- disclosures affect attraction
-moving from disclosure of ‘low risk’ information to ‘high risk’ information, that might potentially lead to betrayal, mistrust and separation
-according to SPT, the disclosure of such sensitive information acts as a signal of trust, which affects attraction
what is disclosure reciprocity
-after one person reveals personal information of a certain depth, the other person in turn discloses information of the same depth
how does disclosure reciprocity affect attraction
Failure to reciprocate can lower attraction, as it signals the non-reciprocating partner does not trust the other.
-can induce positive feelings by leading partners to increase the breadth and depth of their self-disclosures, which, as SPT predicts, will signal greater trust and so increase attraction in the relationship
how does timing of depth disclosures affect attraction
Mistimed disclosures may reduce attraction- create an unwelcome pressure to reciprocate disclosure of similar depth- where the necessary level of trust has not yet been established in a relationship
strength- role of self disclosure in attraction- research support
Laurenceau , longitudinal design- studied diaries of 96 married couples and found that participants who recorded high levels of self-disclosure in their relationship also reported greater feelings of intimacy as a couple
-these findings demonstrates the importance of self-disclosure as a factor affecting attraction in romantic relationships
-expected from SPT as higher levels of self disclosure signify trust, which leads to closer relationship based on mutual attraction
-longitudinal design, provides a full chronological view of events, allowing researchers to make stronger claims about the causal relationship between self-disclosures and intimacy
limitation- role of self- disclosure in attraction - simplistic
Explaining attraction only in terms of a single factor, like self-disclosure, may mean ignoring other aspects of romantic attraction, such as factors outlined by filter theory
-research into romantic relationships could benefit from the use of a more holistic account, that seeks to account for the way multiple factors work together to explain what we find attractive, rather than reducing attraction to a small set of variables
-since people are individuals, there is enormous variation in what people find attractive- questionable whether taking a nomothetic approach is valid
-highlights the value of an idiographic approach
