Class Notes (839,112)
Canada (511,191)
Biology (2,229)
BIO230H1 (243)
all (9)
Lecture

Lecture Notes.docx

8 Pages
94 Views

Department
Biology
Course Code
BIO230H1
Professor
all

This preview shows pages 1,2 and half of page 3. Sign up to view the full 8 pages of the document.
Description
Lecture 1 - Darwin = indiv’s with particular heritable characteristics are more likely to produce offspring that survive (adaptation)  adaptations that promote organism’s survival are adapted  Sexual selection = adaptations that increase access to mates selected  intrasexual (adapt. for competition within sex for mates) and intersexual (adapt. for selection by other sex) - Inclusive fitness theory  Key to selection is survival of genetic material, not necessarily survival of offspring - Indiv humans are vulnerable  groups allow for sharing food collection and distribution, access to mates, shared defense against predators and out groups, shared raising of offspring  Those motivated to belong should be more likely to survive - Need to belong  need frequent interaction with others in stable bond marked by affective concern (form small groups); this need is universal, as well as distress for ending relationships - Motivation for physical closeness seen in earliest placental mammals (ex. Social connections promote offspring survival for baboons); humans share motivational systems w/ other animals - Humans are unique b/c of info processing capabilities  combine cognitions to construct representation of self, construction of culture, etc. - Desire for connection strongly influenced by cognition and culture Lecture 2 - Culture and passion  pos in NA, ambivalent in China, madness in Greece - Study = newly falling in love, unmedicated OCD, and controls  Measured serotonin density in blood – lovers matched OCD patients more than controls  Lower serotonin associated with obsession - What leads to attraction  Target factors = physical attractiveness o Physical = college students randomly assigned as dates, ratings done by researchers of attractiveness, rate how much they like their partner  attractiveness best predictor if they wanted to go out again o Symmetry and averageness universal facial features o Face = women (baby = small chin, high brows, large eyes, full lips; adult = high cheekbones, narrow cheeks, thick long hair) and men (adult = large jaw, broad forehead, prominent cheekbones - mix of masculine and fem. preferred) o Bodies: women = waist-to-hip ratio of 0.7 (more important in less sexually egalitarian cultures like Greece and Japan), breasts; men = waist-to-hip ratio of 0.9, shoulders, height  men prefer women with larger breasts when accompanied by smaller waists (women prefer men with broader shoulders...slimmer waists) o Personality: kind, understanding, intelligent, etc. – affects perceptions of physicality  Buss = judge attractiveness from photo, then presented with blurb about personality and photo – asked both times how attractive found the person  Those w/attractive traits found more attractive second time now, vice versa  stronger effect for found women less attractive originally o Ovulation: women feel more attractive and desirable near ovulation  Take pic at near-ovulation or when not fertile (after cycle) and attractiveness judged – those close to ovulation found more attractive  Contraceptives wipe out these results  T-shirt worn by no one, women near ovulation, or far from ovulation - Male saliva sample before to test testosterone – sniffed shirt three times over 15 mins. - Higher testosterone for men smelling ovulating shirts (also smelt more pleasant than clean or non-ovulating)  Reported tips daily over 2 months, compared ovulating to on pill women; fertile women not on pill had huge increase in tips ($85 increase in tips)  Perceiver factors o Physical attractiveness – standards for partner, perceptions of others’ attractiveness – those with low comparison standards fine with those below standard level o Misattribution of arousal = bridge study, hot woman on bridge and ask men to fill out a survey, pass along her #  highly suspended bridge had more guys calling than the safe bridge, misattributed arousal of excitement of bridge to hot chick  False heart-rate feedback = shown pics, hear heart beat (fake), judge attractiveness based on speed of their heart rate – lasted over time, still rated those people as more attractive few weeks later o Clark and hatfield  both sex’s approached on campus, asked if interested in: going on date half men and women agreed; going back to place more men and some women agreed; having sex lots of men and no women agreed o Men place more value on physical attractiveness, women place more on status o Speed dating  same values as above; in the end, women rated importance of attractiveness more accurately than men, women wouldn’t be as hot as men originally wanted – empathy gap (hard to judge hot emotions when in cold state) o Ovulation: comes into play when perceiver is a woman, focuses more on resources and good genes  prefer more masculine features more when ovulating (deep voice, arrogant, muscular)  women wanted to cheat more when partners were assymetrical and less attractive during ovulation (not looking at status here) o Male counterstrategies: when partners ovulating, men more attentive, express more love; if larger status-sexiness difference promoted jealousy  Interpersonal factors o Similarity/matching = like those like us, matching hypothesis (pair up with those equally attractive) – perceived similarity in long-term relationship more important than actual o Attractive men use self-effacing humour or humour in self-descriptions (not true for women), women’s interest in dating measured by degree of laughter – men look for women appreciating jokes, women look for men producing jokes o Reciprocity = likes another who likes you, ingratiation (trying to get someone to like you can’t be too obvious/too normative), self-disclosure increases liking o Nonverbal mimicry = mimic those we want to like us, but not overtly (chameleon effect) – increases liking o Selectively hard to get is most attractive  speed dating, if showed interest in everyone than wasn’t attractive, but if show interest in a few then more attractive o Secrecy = footsie study (if game was a secret then reported more attractiveness) – in long-term though, secrecy bad b/c affects commitment (negative affect)  Situational factors o Proximity = like those most easily accessible (those living closest functional distance liked each other more) o Familiarity = like more if seem familiar, mere exposure effect (repeated exposure increases liking - ex. Women attending more lectures more liked by class) – prefer true photo compared to mirror image (participants preferred mirror image) o Perceived scarcity = closer to closing time there’s less people there so rate people there as more attractive o Culture and food = prefer heavier women when food is scarce o Red = more attractive but not more likeable (for men judging women) - Evolutionary perspective = parental investment theory (sex investing more in offspring more choosier for who their mate is) – women need someone willing to invest resources - Men sensitive to fertility cues (look for youth, physical attractiveness, waist-to-hip women) – women sensitive to social status cues (older age and dominance) - Social role theory = diff biology leads to different role adaptation, socialization to encourage role-consistent traits, men associated with status and power (women’s direct route) – look for role you can’t accomplish yourself (alternative to evolutionary theory)  Sex differences in preference for status reduced in more female empowered cultures - Early gender socialization = girls seen as softer, friendlier, express emotion; boys encouraged for self-assertion and controlling emotion; in picture, girls are frightened, boys angry Lecture 3 - Social self based on how others see you (looking-glass self) - Chosen beliefs facilitate acceptance – influence of internally represented significant relationships on the experience of the self - Baldwin = grad students primed with scowling advisors, catholic women primed with scowling Pope  grad students must evaluate their research ideas, subliminal message with supervisor having happy or frowning face, felt worse about ideas if frowning – catholic women asked how good they are and sub primed with pope frowning or stranger frowning, less honest/less moral if pope was the one scowling - Baldwin  ½ women visualize older family member, ½ women visualize close friend, then read short piece of erotica; less pleasurable if visualized family (effects stronger with mirror in room)  Private beliefs may be tailored to gain acceptance from important others - Self-esteem as gauge of acceptability (reflects acceptance from others) – rejection lowers self- esteem, success in socially-valued domain raises it - Seek to expand potential by growing, do this in close relationships b/c include other in our sense of self, expand sense of identity; grow more if we absorb other’s strengths (grow with more resources, seeing world from new pov, identity growth (process partner as part of self) - Cognitive confusion of self and partner when in close relationship sometimes  Aron et al; asked how much certain words describe you and your partner; RT slower for unshared traits (speed of rxn to unshared traits predicts relationship maintenance and closeness longitudinally)  Faster rxn time, more likely to be together 3 months later and closer they report to be \ - Transactive memory = come in as partners and engaged in memory task (either with own partner or other’s partner), shown facts and have to recall as many as possible, couples tended to have high agreement and generally understand which is better at certain things - couples have better memory performance together when given structure, impromptu couples did better when not given a structure - Self-other overlap motivated by desire for closeness, Slotter and Gardner = single people had pre-ratings done (is me/isn’t me), some thought it was dating profile and others thought job profile  in romantic context, showed slower RT when presented with test b/c incorporating other’s traits into yourself (after non-rom have faster RT)  Confusion of self and other even in absence of actual closeness – potential for clos. Good - People feel good after upward comparison with partners, positive emotion predicts overlap over time (self-other overlap) - more + emotion showed more self-other overlap - Rapid self-expansion early in relationships fuels positive affect  Broaden and build theory = + emotion primes openness and exploration(increases cognitive flexibility and perspective taking) - Lewandowski and Ackerman = measured 5 potentially unmet needs (ex. Sex, companionship)  Controlling for these needs, inclusion of other in self and potential for future expansion predicted susceptibility to infidelity - Marriage intervention, Reismman, Aron and Bergen = couples required to engage in exciting/pleasant/no a
More Less
Unlock Document

Only pages 1,2 and half of page 3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

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