Week 4 - Interpersonal Relationships Flashcards
What is Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs?
We need to fufil certain needs in our life to achieve self-actualisation - being the fullest version of yourself
self-actualisation esteem love/belonging safety physiological
Forming Relationships - Proximity: Study (Festinger et al.)
People form social bonds with others who they are in close proximity to:
Festinger (1950s) - MIT student housing shows that as proximity increases, more likely to be friends - just by being close to other people we try and form
Forming Relationships - Familiarity: Study (Moreland et al.)
We form social bonds with people we are familiar with
Moreland et al.: Confederate came to class of students 0/5/10/15 times. Perception of confederate was measured.
- Despite no student saying they recognised her
- More visits to classroom = higher scores on “would you be friends with her”
If you’re in the same room with someone = greater sense of understanding and familiarity
Forming Relationships: What are aversive conditions? (Kenrick and Johnson)
We form social bonds on people if we have been through aversive (traumatic) situations with them
Study: Participants summoned to lab with partner to fill questionnaire in normal or loud conditions
- When separated, asked to complete a study of impressions of the partner
FOUND: Partner was rated much higher over a stranger in LOUD conditions
Social Connections for Health: Study - Cohen et al. (1997)
We form social bonds with people for health
Cohen - exposed adults to cold virus and explored infection rates
FOUND: people with ‘low social connectedness’ more likely to experience common cold symptoms compared to people who rated they had ‘high social connectedness’
What is the ‘social cure?’
Social group ties are especially important to protect people from cognitive decline etc., particularly those with brain injuries
–> Supporting individuals to create and maintain social connects should be an important focus for public health
Social Exclusion: What is the need to belong?
Human beings are motivated by a fundamental “need to belong”
To maintain normal psychological functioning we need:
- Frequent, affectively pleasant interaction with the same individuals
- That occur in a framework of long-term, stale caring and concern
Non-satisfaction has negative implications (relationships without interaction and vice versa)
Social Exclusion Studies: Cyberostracism (Williams et al.) and ‘The KKK won’t let me play (Gonsalkorale (2007))
Cyberostracism - Developed the “cyberball paradigm” - found that when the human participant was excluded from the game by the robots –> negative mood and threatened needs increased
‘The KKK won’t let me play’ - Found that even when excluded by a despised outgroup (low social standing) …still led to lower feeling of belonging and self-esteem
Anticipated Social Exclusion: Baumeister (2002)
Explored ANTICIPATED social exclusion effects on cognition functioning
- Participants filled out questionnaire
- Then told they were going to have future belonging (will have a rewarding relationship), future misfortune (accident prone) or future alone (will end up alone)
THEN had to do an IQ test…
–> appears to be downstream consequences of being told you’ll be alone
Evolutionary Perspective - Social Inclusion
Social inclusion is basic to survival among social animals
- Organisms that are better socially integrated into their group are more likely to survive into adulthood, reproduce, and successfully raise off-spring
Finding a connection: How is mate choice motivated by ‘reproductive fitness’ for males and females?
Men:
- Reproduction is easy
- Primary concern: knowing the child is theirs
- Looking for: indicators of fertility, quantity rather than quality
Women
- Reproduction is costly
- Primary concern: ensuring child is provided for/survives
- Looking for: indicators that a man can provide for offspring
Do men and women look for different qualities? (Multiple Studies)
Wiederman - Men more ‘shallow’
Pedersen - Most men and women want to settle in a long term relationship
Alexander and Fischer - No differences under a ‘polygraph’ condition, but men under non-polygraph conditions exaggerate their sexual history
Eastwick and Finkle - examined preferences for attractiveness/personability
- In abstract: traditional gender differences
- In speed dating: no differences
Similarity Effects: Do we choose partners based off similarity?
Similarity as the basis of friendship - married couples resemble each other in many ways
Do opposites attract? Evidence: Not really
- Byrne (1971) - attitudes, values, personality, habits, income, intellect (similarity MATCHES attraction)
Explaining similarity effects:
- Balance Theory - being with someone that is balanced with the things you like
- Social Comparison Theory (Festinger) - better for our self-esteem if we compare ourselves positively with our partner
What is the Repulsion Hypothesis (Rosenbaum)?
Not similarity that makes you attracted to someone, but dissimilarity that repulses you