Class Notes (836,580)
Canada (509,856)
Psychology (7,783)
PSYB10H3 (544)
Lecture 8

PSYB10 Lecture 8 Initial Attraction and Close Relationships

13 Pages
101 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYB10H3
Professor
Elizabeth Page- Gould
Semester
Fall

Description
PSYB10 Lecture 8 – Initial Attraction and Close Relationships Why Do We Like Other People? - Proximity - Familiarity - Similarity - Reciprocity - Attractiveness - Misattribution of Arousal - Scarcity Proximity - Can be referred to Propinuity - Propinquity Effect The more we see and interact with other people, the more likely we are to become our friends MIT Westgate West Apartments - Festinger, Shachter, & Back (1950) -  Friendships among MIT married couples’ dormmates - Results (% close friends by neighbor type): - Next-door Neighbors: 41% - 2 doors apart: 22% - Opposite hallways: 10% - Apartments 1 and 5 had more friends from 2nd floor Why does proximity promote attraction? - Availability/accessibility - Because it suggests similarity! - Mere exposure Familiarity - Mere-Exposure - The more exposure you get to a neutral object, the more you will like it. - If there are negative qualities of the object already in the mind, you will not like it more. Research on Mere-Exposure - Moreland & Beach (1992) - Method: - Confederate sits in front row of class for 0 - 15 classes - At end of semester, students rate liking of Confederate - Results: -  Liking by exposure Mere-Exposure to Faces - Mere-Exposure to Your Own Face - We tend to prefer our mirror image over photograph image - Friends prefer photograph image Similarity or Complementarity? - Complementarity - “Opposites attract” - Baby seems we never ever agree / You like the movies / And I like T.V. / I take things serious / And you take 'em light / I go to bed early / And you party all night (Abdul, 1988) - Similarity - “Birds of a feather flock together” - Research supports the idea that similarity promotes liking Newcomb (1961) - Method: - Randomly assigned 1st-year college roommates - Measured all sorts of personality traits, attitudes, etc. - Look at friendship formation after first year - Results: - Similarity predicted friendship formation - Demographics, attitudes, values, personality traits, and communication styles Reciprocal Liking - We like people better who like us. - Pick up subtle liking cues such as: eye contact, leaning in, mimicry, attentive listening - Less true for people with low self esteem/negative self-concept. Curtis & Miller (1986) - Method: - Randomly pair participants - Tell one participant (P1) that their partner (P2) either does or does not like them - P1 and P2 interact, and post-interaction liking is measured - Results: Liking of Partner Physical Attractiveness Walster et al., (1966) - Method: - 752 freshmen met up at a blind-date dance - Assigned to random pairs - Who wanted to go on a date again? - Results: Desire for second date driven by: - Partner’s Attractiveness - Independent of rater’s attractiveness - NO personality effects What is attractive? - Research looking at yearbooks, pageants, etc: - Men: - Large eyes, strong cheekbones, large chin, big smile - Women: - Large eyes, small nose, prominent cheekbones and narrow cheeks, high eyebrows, large pupils, big smile - “Baby Facedness” - Features: - Large eyes, rounder face and nose - Baby-faced people: - Are more persuasive - Perceived to be more trustworthy - Evoke liking and caregiving behaviours Which face is most attractive? - Langlois & Roggman (1990) - Composite faces rated more attractive than individuals - Composite faces: faces made by morphing 2 or more faces together. - Why? - Composite faces will be more familiar and more prototypical - Composite faces are also more symmetrical Attractiveness - This seems somewhat hard-wired - Babies stare at ‘attractive’ faces longer - There is a fair amount of cross-cultural consistency in attractiveness judgements Why Does Beauty Promote Attraction? - Beautiful-is-Good Schema - Beauty creates a “halo effect” - Occurs most for social competence - More sociable, extraverted, popular - More sexual, happy, friendly - There is a kernel of truth here “Beautifulness-is-Good” Stereotype - Tendency to associate attractiveness with “goodness” - Stereotypes across cultures Matching Hypothesis - We seek partners that are of similar attractiveness to us, and are more satisfied with these partners - Evidence for Matching Hypothesis - Couples of similar attractiveness were more likely to continue dating after a blind date UCLA Dating Study - Recruited dating partners & took a picture of each - Other students rated each partner’s attractiveness - 6 months later, researchers contacted dating partners to ask about their relationship - Results: Similarity in attractiveness predicted: - Satisfaction in relationship - Relationship longevity - Lower break-up rate at 6-month follow-up Scarcity - If potential mates are not plentiful, we may shift our standards of attractiveness  “Closing time” studies (Gladue & Delaney, 1990) - Approached people in bars - People asked to judge attractiveness of same-sex and opposite-sex targets (both photos and other people in the bar) - Time until closing time used as an independent variable - Attractiveness ratings of opposite-sex targets increased as the evening progresses (9:00 PM < 10:30 PM < 12:00 AM) - Holds even when statistically controlling for alcohol intake Moving from Attraction to Close Relationships - Evolutionary Perspectives on Mating - Need to Belong Biological Basis of Close Relationships - Reproductive Investment - Polygamy and Monogamy - Human Mating Evolutionary Fitness Potential to pass on your genes/successfully procreate - Ability to survive to mating years - Ability to maximize the number of offspring that survive to their mating years Reproductive Investment of Each Sex - The “investment” of time, resources, and risk involved in having each child  Typically varies between the sexes - The sex which bears the most reproductive costs is “choosier” Sexual “Choosiness” - Choosy Sex - Bears the most reproductive costs/investment - Usually the female, but not always - Sex with least reproductive costs: - Should want more partners - Will be in competition for mates more often - Displays greater physical variation - Polygamy - Several members of one sex mating with one individual of the other sex - Polygyny - Several females mate with one male - 90% of mammals - Polyandry - Several males mate with one female Sexual Dimorphism - Pronounced difference in the size or bodily structures of the two sexes - Seen in polygamous animals Monogamy - Reproductive partnership based on a more or less permanent tie between partners - Sexes are close to indistinguishable based on physical characteristics Biological Basis of Monogamy - Co-occurrence of Oxytocin and Dopamine in Nucleus Accumbens  Dopamine - Reward neurotransmitter  Oxytocin - “Attachment Hormone” that is also a neuropeptide - Monogamous animals - Oxytocin and Dopamine receptors share nucleus accumbens - Activation of one activates the other - All 5% of monogamous animals share this anatomical feature - Polygamous animals - No oxytocin receptors in nucleus accumbens Homosexuality - Reproductive partnerships between members of the same sex - Wide displayed across the animal kingdom - Usually associated with disproportionate number of male and female mating adults Are we Polygamous or Monogamous? Polygamous Humans? - Polygamy evidence: - Sexual dimorphism - Great physical variation - 85% of traditional cultures allow some kind of polygamy Monogamous Humans? - Monogamy evidence: - Co-occurence of Oxytocin & Dopamine in human brain - Great physical variation among both sexes - 98.9% of men and 99.2% of women report hoping to settle with 1 life partner in the end Need to Belong - Motivation of Belonging - Harlow’s Monkeys Motivation of Belonging - Belonging is a basic human motivation - Sociometer theory - Human “survival tactics” require several people - E.g., building shelters, hunting game, agriculture - Human children are helpless for several years Need to Belong: - Compared to those who are isolated from others, people with strong social networks are: - Happier - Healthier - Greater life satisfaction Social Isolation - Long-term isolation is a form of official torture/punishment in every society - Social ostracism/rejection is an unofficial way to enforce social rules in every society - Effects observed in other primates as well What if a Monkey Is Socially Isolated? -
More Less

Related notes for PSYB10H3

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit