SP Lecture 10: Attraction and relationships Flashcards
what is the most predictive for a break up
dissatisfaction and frustration (deze meer dan ‘the feeling that the love is gone!’)
what is related to coping after a breakup
external attribution (denken dat het de partner’s schuld is)
people are generally less happy after the
end of a relationship than before a break-up
dus mensen zijn gelukkiger in de relatie dan er na
experiment break up en self concept clarity
vragen: “In general, I have a clear sense of who I am and what I am” and “Sometimes I think I know other people better than I know myself”
-> mensen die een break up hadden ondergaan, hadden dit minder dan mensen zonder break up
-> dus self-clarity decreases na break up
social support heeft een positieve invloed op
physical health!
hoe leidt social support/sterke relaties tot minder fysieke problemen?
- buffer voor stress
- related to healthy behaviours
- helps finding solutions to problems
social relationships misschien zelfs wel meer invloed dan..
sigaretten, alcohol, flu vaccine, exercise, lichaamsbeweging etc
Representation in relationship science
nonbinary people helemaal niet
64% van de studies wordt sexual orientation niet gevraagd
en waar wel: maar heel klein beetje representative ….
Attractiveness depends on a number of physical and psychological determinants, but is difficult to predict very precisely
oke
what is seen as attractive differs over…
time and culture
wat laat studie zien over attractive ness and dates
Only physical attractiveness predicts intention to go on second date
3 heuristics bij attractiveness
- what is beautiful is good: we associate other desirable characteristics with attractiveness (essays of attractive women -> rated more positively by men)
- what is good is beautiful: we find people we judge more positively, more attractive
- we make what is beautiful, good -> it is a self-fulfilling prophecy
Ranking of partner preferences in 37 countries
(Buss, 1994) would show gender differences in
preference for attractiveness vs earning
potential. however…
- The predicted preferences and actual behavior differ in a speed dating session.
- Gender differences disappear during measurement after actual interaction
-> dus na interaction tijdens speed dating session = geen gender differences meer
- Both men and women value physical attractiveness for hookups
- Both men and women value agreeableness for committed relationships
oke
faces are seen as more attractive when they are more…
- average
- symmetrical
waardoor symmetrical faces?
evolution: symmetric = healthy
waardoor average faces?
Average faces (and other prototypical objects) are processed with more processing fluency and therefore higher rated
–> dus gewoon makkelijker om te processen door ons brein
predictors of attractiveness in women
- BMI/weight predicts attractiveness
- Evidence for a “golden” Waist-Hip is controversial
- Also a lot of variation between and within cultures, over time
predictors of attractiveness in men
- No protruding belly; V-shaped upper body; BMI at the lower limit of normal spectrum
-> Evolution: Signals access to resources
wat voor effect heeft culturalization of SES op attractiveness
There appears to be a globalized preference for thinness, except among individuals from low SES regions (Swami, 2015)
temporary affective state and attraction
- Hungry men have a preference for heavier women (Swami & Tovee, 2006)
- After disease-related prime stronger preference for symmetrical face
individual differences men and hourglass
meer traditional = meer hourglass preference
less wealthy =
liever medium of big
wealthy =
liever thin of medium
relatie tussen similarity and attractiveness
similarity in:
- attractiveness
- speech patterns
- preference for faces that are merged with your own face
physical determinants: proximity and familiarity
- The most popular students on campus live close to the stairwell
- Students living closer to each-other like each-other more
3 factoren van attraction + physical determinants
interaction, similarity, liking
more interactions with…
similar people
we see more similarities in …
people we interact with often
interaction increases…
liking, which increases interaction
we like … people more
similar
we think that likable people are more similar to us
oke
3 factors waar we matching leuker vinden
- attitudes
- demographic factors (SES, countryside etc)
While people tend to form friendships with others who are similar to them, the range of available people to choose from limits this similarity. Therefore, the larger and more diverse the pool of people to choose from, the more likely it is that your friends will have similarities with you.
dus similarity is limited by variety
do opposites attract?
no, only when people are looking for a fling
reciprocity and attraction
we like people that like us too. but only if that person does not show this liking towards all other people as well (=selectivity)
why does similarity increase liking?
- valuing me and mine -> we view similar others as desirable because we tend to think our features are desirable
- mastery -> meer begrijpen over de dingen waar jij geinteresseerd in bent als je met mensen omgaat die hier ook geinteresseerd in zijn
- connectedness -> when people share something with us, we feel connected to them
- familiarity
Men have sex apparently more frequently and with a wider
variety of partners and start having sex at a younger age (e.g.
Baumeister et al, 2001; in Fisher, 2013).
* Men also show more interest in casual sexual encounters than women
oke
sexual strategies theory
- Preference of men to reproduce as much as possible
- Women can only be pregnant once ‘at a time’.
- Men would therefore benefit from a need for different partners, a
faster transition to sexual contact and an active search for sexual
partners.
Sex differences disappear (Alexander & Fisher,
2003) or are even found in the opposite
direction (small effect, Fisher, 2013) if a bogus
pipe line (fake lie detection test) procedure is
used.
why?
because people answered along the lines of their gender stereotypes -> bias, desirable answers. when they were told that they would know when people lied, the sex differences dissapeared.
also, differences in the way questions are interpreted: bv vragen of je geinteresseerd bent in iemand = bij mannen interesse in one night stand, en bij vrouwen interesse in relatie
dating via telefoon…
interactive, asynchronous:
- More control
- More uncertainty
- Less visibility
cmc =
computer-mediated communication
wat is er meer in cmc?
self-disclosure!!!!
wat is self disclosure
Over je diepe gevoelens praten: self-disclosures include facts about one’s life and situation, as well as inner thoughts, feelings, and emotions (Morton, 1978). Both the depth of self-disclosure (the level of intimacy of the information) and the breadth (the range of topics) increase as a relationship develops
Disclosing something about yourself makes both strangers and friends like you more
oke (daarom doen salesmen dat vaak)
There is a strong gender difference in the intimacy level of self-disclosure. Both in
person and online, women self-disclose more than men, particularly by revealing their
feelings and emotions
oke
studie over intimacy and gender
In this study, college students filled out brief questionnaires
rating the intimacy of all their social interactions within a
given time period. As the figure shows, interactions involving
a female participant or a male participant and a female
partner—that is, any interaction that involved a female—
tended to be more intimate and self-disclosing than interactions
between two males. (Data from Reis, 1986.)
anonimiteit van media factoren
- more self-awareness
- less informative interaction
- disinhibition: more extreme behaviour
- more self-disclosure (talking about feelings)
waar leidt asynchronicity toe
- More control over self-presentation
- More idealization of other
availability van online dating
- Availability of potential partners -> large pool
- Availability of information about potential partners
- Data & Matching Algorithms
wat gebeurt er door grote hoeveelheid possible partners
- paradox of choice (The paradox of choice is the idea that having too many options can lead to feelings of anxiety, dissatisfaction, and regret. This paradox suggests that while having more choices may seem like a good thing, it can actually make it harder for us to make decisions and feel satisfied with our choices.)
- choice stress
Evaluating many dating profiles stimulates a mindset that
hinders a smooth interaction in a (always uncomfortable) first
social interaction.
oke
welke 2 mindsets heb je en hoe verschillen ze
- In a deliberation mindset (or assessment mindset) we are more concerned with evaluating different options
- In an implementation mindset we are more concerned with the effective and enjoyable pursuit of important goals
dus ik denk dat we met online dating meer deliberation/assessment mindset implementeren, maar dat dit slechter is dan de implementation mindset
Matching via algorithm may work, although…
the added value lies mainly in filtering
persons with ‘relationship-unfriendly’
properties.
-> dus vooral selecteren op mensen die gewoon in het algemeen niet perse desirable zijn voor een relatie, ipv mensen die bij jou niet desirable zijn.
More spontaneous affective response that
occurs with direct contact does not always
correspond to explicitly formulated preferences
“Relationship desire could not be predicted
from initial conditions despite the use of
cutting-edge statistical methods and a vast
catalog of psychological variables that have
been widely cited in the field of relationship
science.“
wat is het ‘stappenplan’ van een relatie
initial communication and interaction -> initial attraction -> adaption, coping, interacting (hier invloed individual en external factors) -> long-term relationship quality -> long term relationship longetivity
wat is de reasoned approach bij relationships
satisfaction?
social exchange theory
- maximizing rewards of relationship
- minimizing costs
- comparison with ideal relationship and other possibilities/alternatives
cryptoboy mindset
equity theory
Fairness & aligning investments with returns.
The Equity theory, proposed by Hatfield et al in 1978, suggests that individuals strive to maintain a state of balance or equity in their social relationships. Specifically, they seek to maintain a balance between the inputs (e.g. time, effort, resources) they contribute to a relationship and the outcomes (e.g. rewards, benefits) they receive from it. When individuals perceive that the ratio of inputs to outcomes is unequal compared to others, they may experience feelings of inequity, which can lead to changes in behavior aimed at restoring balance.
commitment =
the extend to which someone sees the relationship as a long-term bond.
commitment predicts relationship stability
rusbult commitment investment model
rewards, costs, comparison level -> satisfaction + investment in relationship, quality of alternatives -> commitment -> stability
Reinforcement affect model (Byrne & Clore)
- if someone is the source of a pleasant event, we like them
- if we are in a good mood when we meet someone, we like them
- doing many fun things
- meeting them in hot room -> minder appreciation
Dus gaat echt over associating the other person with contextual events
-> we need a balance in favor of positive events!
self-disclosure and intimacy
- Disclosing information about yourself and gaining understanding and acceptance in
return, is related to feeling appreciated; experiencing social support - Social support is important in dealing with setbacks
in welke cultuur is self-disclosure belangrijker?
belangrijker in individualistic cultures, door differences in relational mobility
cognitive interdependence in relaties
Cognitive representation of self merges with that of the partner
* Reduced effect of actor-observer differences in attribution
* Attribute positive outcomes to partner, negative outcomes to environment
voor wat voor bias zorgt cognitive interdependence
Correlation between relationship satisfaction and general indication of bias
* (e.g. underestimate satisfaction with previous relationships, overestimate
emotional impact future break-up)
behavioural interdependence
Mutual influence on decisions, activities and plans
In a communal relationship people more concerned with
eachothers wellfare than exchanging rewards…
In a study demonstrating this point, participants divided up a set amount of money
between themselves and another person (Aron and others, 1991). As Figure 12.4 shows,
people gave themselves considerably more than they gave to a stranger. When the other person was their best friend, however, they gave the friend just about the same amount as they gave themselves, even when the experimenter arranged that the friend would not know the source of the money. People really want to benefit a close friend just as much as they want to benefit themselves. Indeed, one’s best friend is part of “me and mine.”
It should be noted that the term
“romantic relationship” is used loosely.
(…) most college students, who are the
respondents in most psychometric
studies of love, would be hesitant to
describe all of their (…) relationships as
“romantic” or “loving” (e.g., as
opposed to “something to do on a
Saturday night”).
oke
verschillen in getting married for love
bij arranged: ‘love score’ blijft stabiel, redelijk hoog
bij married for love: eerst hoog, dan na 2-5 years marriage opeens een drop.
waardoor verschillen in arranged and married for love?
door verschil compannionate vs passionate/romantic love
compannionate love
- Friendship based love
- Based on affection, trust and a deep sense of friendship
- Determinants: Equality, proximity, reciprocal self-disclosure
- Develops relatively slowly, but may be more sustainable
- Could form the basis for developing romantic love
passionate/romantic love
- Intense attraction, (sexual) desire, euphoric feelings, etc.
- Fear and despair when things go wrong
- Related to reward structures in the brain: acctivation of ventral areas that are also activated duricg the experience of (dopamine controlled) kicks, such as cocaine,
gambling, drinking - Excitement and arousal, usually from surprise and uncertainty
- Characteristic of the beginning of a relationship, less typical in
later phases
