Relationships P3 Flashcards
Psychical attraction
- facil symmetry
- neoteny
Research and role of neoteny
- baby like fetures conger feelings of protectivness
- prefernce supported corss culterly
- Cunningham’s cross- cultural study found similar correlations between scores on neotenous features and attractiveness ratings for White American, Hispanic and Asian students
Research and role of facial similarity
- Symmetry: honest (hard to fake) signal of good genes
- Associated with better health, i.e., genetic fitness
- Preference for symmetry supported by range of lab + cross- cultural studies
- Langlois: strong correlation of +0.7 in humans between symmetry and ratings of attractiveness in digitised pictures
Explain reason and evidence why there would be a cross cultrual agreement in attraction
- Based on evolution: traits that enhance survival and reproduction preferred
- Symmetry +signs of health => survival of partner / offspring
- Langlois: x- cultural meta- analysis, judgements of attractiveness correlated strongly between cultures: +0.94
Explain reason and evidence why there would be a cross cultrual disagreement in attraction
- Individual differences could be idiosyncratic / variable
- Cultural differences due to ‘mere exposure’ effect or socialisation
- Zhan: x- cultural study: cultural differences in preference for some facial features, e.g., Europeans prefer pouty mouths
Role and reserch of halo effect in attraction
- Halo effect: tendency to attribute other positive qualities to physically attractive people so, people treat attractive people more positively
- Supported by a range of lab + cross- cultural studies
- Wheeler & Kim cross- cultural study: attractive people seen as more trustworthy and concerned for others by Korean and self-assertive and dominant by North Americans
Matching hypothesis
- want the most attractive partner possible
- We want to avoid rejection from more physically attractive people
- Most aim to get the most attractive person consistent with their own attractiveness
- Mismatched couples have jealousy + resentment issues, so are more likely to break up
Walster computer dance experiment
- When not guaranteed a date unless recipient of their request agreed, pps tended to request a date with someone of similar attractiveness
- People aim for most attractive partner consistent with their own attractiveness
Berscheid’s adaptation of Walster computer dance
- When not guaranteed a date unless recipient of their request agreed, pps tended to request a date with someone of similar attractiveness
- People aim for most attractive partner consistent with their own attractiveness
Feringolds meta anlysis
- +0.39 correlation of attractivness in people in coples
- +0.5 in long term coples
- people end up with someone moderatly similar in attractivness
Self disclosure
Filter therory stages
- social demographic
- Similarity it attitudes
- Complemetratiy
Comparison level for alternatives
Comparison level
Stages of relationship
Le and Agnew meta analysis VERY IMPORTANT MAKE SURE U UNDERSTAND IT COMPLETELY
- Rewards / costs and commitment correlate +0.68
- Comparison levels and commitment correlate -0.48
investment 0.46 (IM gives better explantion than SET)
OR - Rewards / costs explain 30% of variance in commitment
- Comparison levels explain 15% of variance in commitment
- Rewards / costs is a moderately strong factor in commitment
- Comparison levels are a small factor in commitment
N of studies = 52
N of ppts = >1000
5 different countries
Equity theory
Utne equity theory study
Walster
Limit to relationship studies
Duck’s phase model of relationship breakdown
- Intra - pyschic, personaly questioning disatifaction
- Dydadic, disscussion with the partner
- Social, disscussion with friends
- Grave dressing, creating a more digestable story, public consumption
5th stage of Duck’s phase model
Resurection - apply lessons learned in new relationship, Rolli and Duck
Strength of Duck’s phase model (2)
Model is based on esearch evidence
- survey evidence of seperated coples
- analysisng data for patterns
Real life application
- relationship cousellor
- differnt strategies appropriate in differnt stages
Limitation of Duck’s phase model (3)
Quality of evidence
- self report method
- retrospective
- may give social desirable responce
Cultrial bias
- only westerncultures
- differnt in collective cutlrures, arranged marriges
- family may be more involved in collectivus culters
Description, not explantion
- incomplete
- donst explain why inital problems occur
- however Ducks model isnt trying to explain this
Buss study on sexual selection (AO3)
- cross cultrial study of 37 countries
- 10,000 ppts
- survey/self repot asking about sexual prefernces
- women were more concerned about resources (36/37 countries)
- men were more concerned about attrativness and youth, fertility, (37/37 countries)
- Difference in importance now reflects preferences that would have led to reproductive success in the EEA
Clark and Hatfield study on sexual selection (AO3)
- got students of the oppostie sex to offer sex to students
- 75% of men said yes
- 0% of women said yes
- show women are more choosy
- this is hypothesied beacuse women invest more in thier children as can only have so many so want a partner to provide
- confounding variable tho cos women fear violence
- Difference in willingness now reflects preferences that would have led to reproductive success in the EEA
- Casual sex for males increases chance of reproduction
- Casual sex for females leads to risk of pregnancy to partner with poor genes / weak investment in offspring
Critisism of sexual selcetion about gender stereotype reinforment
- Reinforces stereotypes about men and women
- That women want / should want fewer sexual partners than men
- Reinforces sexual double standards: slut shaming
OR - That men are / should be the main provider of resources
That women are / should be the main carer for children - Reinforces stereotypes about ‘real’ men and women
absorbtion addiction model for parasocial relationships
differnt levels of parasocial relationships (celebrity attitude scale)
attatchment theory as an explanation for parasocial relationships
McCutcheon study of predictive validity of celebrity attidtude scale as measure of parsocial relationships
- More anxiety in relationships at higher levels
- Types in model associated with variables we would expect (predict) they would be
- Suggests model has predictive validity
Maltby study of absortion addiction model
*Girls with intense parasocial relationship had poor body image
*Absorption: identify with celebrity / want similar body?
*Addiction: to celebrity and losing weight?
McCutcheon study of absorbtion addiction model
- Those who scored high for impulsiveness were more likely to have strong attachments to celebrities
- Parasocial relationships and impulsivity both involve lack of self- control and escalation of behaviour
- Similar to addiction
Dinkha’s study of attatchment theory of parasocial relationishps
McCutcheon study of attatchment theory of parasocial relationishps
Rusbult’s investment model
- comparison level for alternatives
- investment
- satifaction
–> commitment level –> probility of persictance
high - stay together
medium - relationship maintainece mechanism
low - break up
how is rusbult’s investment model differnt to SET
has CLalt and satifaction like SET but however adds third elemnt of investment size makes independant impact on commitment
Rusbult’s two types of investment
Intrinsic - resources put directly in the relationship such as money or energy
Extrinsic - resources closely related to relationship such as houses, friends and children
Methological evalustion of Le and Agnews meta anlysis/ studies of investment model or SET
- one limitation is that it is a correlational studie and connot be sure that satifaction inceasres commitment or vice versa, this weakens scientific credibility
- one strength is that it is a meta anlysis of 52 studies and 11,000 pps this enchaces scientific credibility
how might SET or IM explain abusive relationships
- both about the perception of quality of alternatives
- IM includes investment wheras SET doesn’t
- Rusbult and Martz found that victims of domestic abuse who returned to thier partner reported more investment and fewer alternatives
- therefore IM has more explanatory power that SET
reduced cues theory
- reduced non verbable cues such as facial expression and tone of voice
- deindividualisation
- disinhibitation
- lack of ability to infer meaning reduces self disclosure
- leads to aggresive behavoir
- reduced desire in self disclusre
hyperpersonal model
- animonity
- less acountable/ consequences
- selctive seld presentation
- hyperhonesty
- hyperdishonesty
- inceare in self disclousre
the role of the gate
reducded cues theroy Ao3
Zimbardo
- dressed in uniform or somthing
Walther and Tidwell (limmitation)
- ppl online also use cues such as timing and styles
Ruppel at al
meta analysis i think
agrees with reduced cues theory but only just
hyperpersonal modle AO3
Whitty and Johnson
Joinson (2001)
absence of gating AO3
McKenna and Bargh
McKenna 2002
