Psychology Chapter 13: Liking, Loving and close relationships:
• Dyadic relationships: relationship that develops between two people.
• The very close first dyadic relationship is formed between a mother and her child
• As we move into adolescence relationships start to get more aimed towards
• Interpersonal attraction: the study of attraction between two people.
• It is shown that birds flock together (similar people are more likely to like each
other than opposite people), and also we prefer good looking birds or good
• A relationship cannot develop between two people until they do not meet. This
meeting can occur faceface, over the internet (shaadi.com), through a friend or
• Propinquity: nearness or proximal in physical space allowing for the opportunity
to meet another person.
• When someone is lonely it is often suggested that they go and joing and groups
and interact with other people. This interaction can lead to the formation of new
• Physical proximity (faceface) plays an important role in interpersonal
communication and attraction than internet or email.
The likelihood of meeting:
• Living in a large building and having many neighbors but you are more likely to
interact with certain neighbors more than others.
• How often the paths of two neighbors cross is called spatial ecology: the
physical layout of buildings and distance separating different buildings, rooms
and other spaces.
• Reseachers studied the effects of spatial ecology with respect to friendship.
• In an experiment done, random students were assigned apartments and they used
the rules of spatial ecology to predict friendships.
• There were certain people who are more likely to cross paths with other students
just due to the orientation of the rooms. (rooms 2 and 3 are right next to each so
they are more likely to see each other and socialize).
• While farther physical distances made it harder to talk and see each other. (the top
floor 6 and 10) were located at the corners and only had 1 other neighbor. Since
they were farther away they were also less likely to interact with each other.
• Functional distance: compared to physical distance, closeness of two places in
terms of the opportunity to interact.
• Although floors 5 and 1 were also located in the corners, they were directly in
front of stairs. Which means that although the second floor people were physically farther away, they were still likely to interact since they would be directly
assessed to the 5 room people when coming or going up/down. (functional
distance). More likely to see people farther away than people on their own floor.
• The results showed a clear effect of proquity when they were asked how often
people saw others. People who were named the most often were those people
who were closer with the FUNCTIONAL and PHYSICAL proximity.
• When it came down to MUTUAL FRIENDSHIPS FUNCTIONAL PROXMITY
determines it a lot better than physical.
• Therefore people who lived in the corners with the stairs were better friends (due
to more contact and seeing each other more often) functional proximity than
were people who were closer physical proximity.
Meeting does not guarantee liking:
• Neighbors do not always get a long with each other
• Your neighbor could may as well do a bunch of things that might make you hate
them ex(don’t cut the grass or if they cook Indian food and it staaanks)
• Researchers have suggested that propinquity could have very easily produced
disliking for our neighbor than it could have produced liking which can lead to
• In an experiment conducted when residents were asked to indicate which three
neighbors they liked and which three they hated it was found that they neighbors
that were closer in proximity were actually liked more than the farther neighbors.
• However interesting enough it was also shown that the disliked neighbors were
also the ones who lived in close proximity. When asked why they disliked their
close neighbors residents responded that they had done something that spoilt
their living environment. (not cutting the grass example).
• Therefore propinquity does to guarantee that two individuals will like each other.
• One reason why propinquity works is because by near or by meeting a person
people are able to exchange personal information.
• This exchanging of information leads to people to either know that they are
similar to different than the other person.
• If you really want to establish some basis on friendship with another person it is
important to find out what the other person thinks and feels about a certain issue
or problem (how are the leafs> their views and opinions)
• Most people will just comment on the weather or comment on the leafs game but
that does not really lead to friendship until you actually find out what the other
persons feelings and intentions are.
• Attitude similarity effect: the idea that people find others more attractive and
likeable who are more similar in their beliefs and attitudes. • In an experiment done, when students either heard a person through a tape,
watched him on TV or reading about him it had no effect. The more similar the
person was to themselves they more people liked him.
• It doesn’t need to be based on deep similarities but even having the same first
letter can do the trick. (most likely to marry a person who has the name first letter
as you.. Wtf)
• The reverse is also true liking someone also leads to more favorable similarity
perceiving. When people were asked to remember positive times they had with a
friend (someone they liked) people reported being more similar to themselves
than when they wrote a negative event that occurred in the friendship.
• It is suggested that it is not that we are attracted to similar others but rather
repulsed by dissimilar others.
• When a person first meets someone a person automatically assumes that they are
similar, however as we get to know more information our assumptions are either
built on or they are either rejected if we find out they are actually different.
• This is called the Repulsion hypothesis: the idea that people find others less
attractive and less likeable if they differ substantially in their attitudes and beliefs.
(people are not necessarily attracted to people who are similar to themselves they
just repel people who are different seen as we first meet someone we
automatically assume we like them until we actually get to know more.
• In order for the development of a close dyadic relationship people must be
willing to reveal increasingly personal and intimate details about themselves
• This is called SelfDisclosure: the process of people revealing to another person
INCREASINGLY (don’t want to start off with too much info) personal and
intimate details about themselves.
• People who are willing to disclose intimate details about themselves are generally
liked better than those people are less included to selfdisclosure.
• We tend to like other people who disclose information and we are also liked more
when we disclose our feelings.
• Higher satisfaction with friends because people were able to disclose more
information and the friend was able to disclose information back to them than a
nonromantic sex partner.
• People also differ in how much they can elicit personal information from others.
Some people can get people to open up than other people.
• Researchers designed the OPENER SCALE to measure individual differences in
people’s ability to get OTHER people to open up and engage in intimate self
disclosure AND also to engage in intimate selfdisclosure themselves.
• In an experiment good openers and bad openers were paired together in 4
different combinations it was actually found that good openers were more willing
to share intimate feelings with just about anyone while the low disclosure people
would only reveal to partners to had a GOOD rather than poor openers. (prob.
because the good openers make the low openers open up more Facial Beauty:
• Even before you strike up a conversation with a stranger you have already taken
in a great deal of information about the person.
• One of the first things you notice when you meet another person face to face is
• Most of us respond to attractive looking people more favorable than unattractive
• This starts from a young age as even babies show more preference for attractive
looking strangers than unattractive. The also prefer attractive dolls than un
• It seems to be that adults have not learnt that do not judge a book by its cover or
beauty is only skin deep. People do judge books by their covers and that
attractiveness is not in eye of the beholder.
Shared perceptions of beauty:
• A common assumption is that standards of beauty are culture specific and that
children within a particular culture gradually learn what is and what is not
• However not really true because even small children also show a preference for
people that adults have deemed as attractive.
• When people are asked to rate the attractiveness of a strangers face, they show
• This consistency even cuts across cultural boundaries. That is that all people
white, black, indian, paki, Asian all have an agreement when looking at other
white, black indian, paki and Asian people photograph.
• It seems that people of all age groups and people of all cultural backgrounds seem
to share a common view of what is and what is not ugly. Thefore the facial
features and attractiveness is UNIVERSAL
Components of facial features:
• What deems a goodlooking person or attractiveness?
• Facialmetrics involves the analysis of how long your nose it, you ear is, slant on
our forehead, height of cheekbone etc.
• Facialmetrics can be used to analyze facial beauty.
• By using facialmetrics Women have rated men more attractive when they have
prominent cheekbones, large chin, and a width smile.
• It has been reported that women like men whose height of the eyes do not deviate
much from the average
• Men on the other hand rate women as more attractive when they have Large eyes,
small nose and chin and high eyebrows and prominent cheekbone’s and a large
• The size of the targets eyes: smaller eyes are generally perceived as more
masculine and less nurturance. Average faces are attractive faces:
• Recall that women like men whose eyes do not deviate too much from the
• Evolutionary pressures and natural selection generally favour average rather than
extreme population features.
• Faces will be judges more attractive the more closer they are to the average
population of faces. (example: a person who has a facial deformity with a missing
eye will not generally be seen as very attractive because his facial features are far
form the norms).
• People from a young age form cognitive schemas that capture the central or
• In an experiment done researchers took multiple faces and made one large
picture. (a large composite picture)
• It was seen that the composite pictures comprising of 32 and 16 faces were more
beautiful than the individuals who made them.
• The average faces represent the best example or prototype of what a face looks
like. Perhaps because of their apparent familiarity , people find such prototypical
faces as very attractive.
• People also differ in height, weight body shape, color, skin color and odor.
• Body Types: some people are lean and muscular while others are big and fat.
• One aspect of body types that shows a consistent relationship to rated
attractiveness is the waisttohip ratio the ratio of the waist to the hip.
• For most adult women the waist is narrower than the hips so we would expect a
ratio of less than 1.0
• Obviously women vary with some having very large waists relative to their while
others have a smaller waist relative to their hips.
• Adult men have the waist and hip ratio that is relatively the same in circumference
so their ratio will be much closer to 1. (like women there are some exceptions)
• In an experiment done it was shown that MALE university students rated females
to be more attractive when they had a LOW waist to hip ratio. (therefore they are
more likely to be seen as a having a curvy body type less fat in the waist relative
to the hips, therefore more curvy.
• In another experiment it was shown that FEMALE students were more likely rate
males are being more attractive when they showed a Waist to hip ratio close to 1.
No curvy body present and are more likely to be lean
• It was also shown that men who had a waist to hip ratio close to 1 were more
dominant and displayed leadership abilities. This result was only shown when a
female observer was present and could be a result of the fact of intraspecific
competition. (trying to impress her)
• Why did the high waisthip ratio predict dominant behaviour? One possibility is
that these types of men have increased TESTOSTERONE LEVELS. (a hormone
associate with aggression) Weight:
• In some areas of the world it is seen that being plump is attractive and good (seen
as possessing wealth and food)
• In north America it is seen as being seen as SKINNY as ideal and there is a stigma
for being overweight.
• Why do these values different across cultures? Due to the media and culture.
Members learn the culture and prefer that body type
• Unlike Facemetrics and facial features which was UNIVERSAL, Body attributes
such as Body Weight is actually cultural specific.
• It is seen that the men should be taller than the female in heterosexual couples
• Through a study done it was shown that average men (1.8m) were rated as the
most attractive while men that were too tall (1.9 m) and short men (1.7m) were
rated as less attractive.
• Medium height is ideal. The man should be tall but not too tall.
• People who have pleasant body odors are judged to be more attractive than those
• We are especially hard on people who smell bad and KNOW they smell bad but
do nothing about it.
General points: people who disclose intimate feelings are more likely to be viewed as
being attractive. Bodily features also affect interpersonal attraction.
The Evolutionary significance of Good Looks:
• Why does a persons weight matter when it comes to perceptions of
• It is seen that when a women is in pre puberty she has a body shape similar of
that of a boy (a waist to hip ratio) close to 1 but when she gets older the waist
ratio decreases giving a signal to males that she ready to have babied and
• Males as they get older will get more muscular and their waist to hip ratio
stays the same (at 1.0 or very close). This tells females that the males is in
good health and capable of reproducing.
• Therefore they are more likely to be attracted by females signaling the
survival of key genes.
• It serves as an outward visible signal of reproduction potential
• Indeed in some cultures where food is more scarce being plump is a signal of
greater reproductive potential. In North America where food sources are not
scarse, thinness may be a signal of relatively better reproductive health. • Facial attractiveness is also strongly related to perceived health of the persons
• We also prefer faces that display SYMMETRY Both the right and left side are
• This symmetrical preference is CROSS cultural and even occurs in children
• It may be possible that a person who has nice skin and a symmetrical face (no
defects or bad genotypes) can actually display that the person is in good
overall health. It can be found that women who were had fewer health
problems and men who had more money were more likely to be deemed
• therefore good health (facial symmetry and good skin) and reproductive (waist
to hip ration and body weight) all contribute to evolutionary means of good
Social benefits of good looks:
• the principle of don’t judge a book by its cover doesn’t really work
• people regularly make the inference that WHAT is beautiful is good the
inference that attractive people posses other desirable traits and abilities in
addition to good looks.
• Example: kids who judged photographs of attractive people were also more likely
to say that those kids were smarter, and were less stress on parents since they are
probably better well behaved. (in addition to good looks they also have other
• This study was seen in children as well. (across all age groups)
• The what is beautiful is good stereotype does not apply to every personal quality
as unattractive people and attractive people are judged no differently in
INTEGRITY or CONCERN FOR OTHERS.
• Since this data was collected in an Individualistic society of Canada people
display concern for others at a less values trait.
• When this same thing was done in Korea (a collectivist society) the more
attractive people were judged higher in integrity than the more unattractive people
• Therefore it can be seen that for integrity although not displayed by the what is
beautiful if good stereotype in individualist societies (since these societies do not
rely heavily on social interactions) while this stereotype was quite evident in
• Are these cases that good looking people have posses other desirable
characterisitcs in addition to their good looks true? YES and NO
• Yes since good looking people are more sexually experiences, more social skills,
and more confident in social situations they are more likely to have these positive
• No both good looking and unattractive people DO NOT differ in intelligence, or
• So it is seen that good looks benefit in social settings but when it comes to health
or intelligence there is no major difference observed. Psychology in your life:
• When looking at court room decisions it was actually seen that victims or the
person who committed the crime were let off or either acquitted just for how they
• The judge said that he would’ve convicted 14% of all suspect despite that the jury
said was innocent.
• It was seen that people who are unattractive suspects are seen as being
DANGEROUS OFFENDERS and are actually more likely to receive sentencing.
• The attractiveness bias was also shown in Lab setting where people who have
good looks were let off – stated as being less guilty and less deserving
• HOWEVER it can backfire when people intentionally use their good looks to let
them off in a situation the sentencing can be longer. (kinda like bribing but using
your good looks doesn’t work)
• People take offense when criminals use their good looks to take advantage of
• The decision in a case is strengthened and built upon EVIDENCE however in
situations where the case is ambiguous or information is lacking the good looks
can actually play a big role and can technically get yourself out of longer
• How do feelings of our initial sense of liking or attraction eventually grow into a
deeper and closer relationship?
• Early in our life we developed very close relationships with the adults who cared
for us. (parents)
• We don’t develop close friendships with everyone we meet
• We will focus on children friendships as the basis of children friendships can also
be applied to adults:
Friendship among children:
• In most cases children are in the contact of other children and spend much of their
time in the company of other children propinquity allows children to meet.
• Of the many dyads that can be formed only a relatively few will result in close
• Friendships: dyadic relationship involving mutual liking
• The process that is used to establish that two people are friends is the Sociometric
rating system: within a group of acquaintances each person is asked to name
everyone who she/he considered to be a friend. Two peers within that social
network are then considered to be friends if each nominates the other as a friend.
• Children that are more similar are more likely to be friends when they are alike in
age, sex, ethnicity, race and interests. • In young children when four different children were brought to play together and
then asked which of the children was preferred as a playmate the child that had
similar playing styles was chosen.
• In adults this style is comprised of similarity of attitudes, goals, life and
• Similar visible signs such as age, sex, and race can be easily identified but
implicit attitude similarity in children occurs the same way that it occurs in adults
the process of selfdisclosure; children who are successful at communicating with
another and sharing information about themselves are more likely to develop a
close friendship. The friendship will continue to grow as long as the children
cooperate and reciprocate their feelings back.
• Some children enjoy many friendships while others seem to have a few.
• Popular children: children who are named frequently using the sociometric
• they are good at maintaining positive relationships with their peers to avoid and
tend to avoid drawing attention to themselves
• they can join in to the play without disrupting anyone (very adjusting)
• they communicate clearly about their feelings and sensitive to others interest
• Popular children can be aggressive as they can be assertive but it doesn’t disrupt
the activities of others.
• They engage in frequent disruptive aggressive behaviours.
• These children are called rejectedaggressive children: children who are
unpopular because they commonly engage in disruptive behaviours.
• They brag and call attention upon themselves
• They are uncooperative in peer groups and are relatively insensitive to others
interests and needs (no fucks given)
• Rejected withdrawn children: children who are spurned by their peers due to
social awkwardness and immaturity.
• they just never seem to fit in and they develop low selfesteem, avoid playing
with others and frequently become victims of bullying attacks.
• In an experiment done it was seen that boys who were rejected were more
aggressive than the popular boys. It was also seen that although both boys started
off by displaying the same levels of conversation, by the 8 week, the popular boys
were social conversing twice as much than the unpopular boys.
• In this same experiment conducted with grade 2 boys same results were seen.
However when they took the popular boys and put them into an environment with
people who they didn’t know they then emerged as popular again while the
rejected boys came out rejected again despite being put into a new environment.
HOW peers exert their influence: • It is a common observation that children and adolescent go along with their
• In an experiment conducted people were asked if they would go a long with the
antisocial behaviours of their peers. (cheating, stealing and minor destruction of
• Results showed that peer conformity increased form the 3 grade9 grade but
decreased from the 1112 grade
• Until early adulthood children show increasing peer conformity
• The average age in the 1112 graders was 18, which shows a developmental trend
towards greater autonomy in late adolescence. (more independent)
• Peer conformity is a result of Normative social influence. Normative influence
occurs because of social pressures, rewards, and norms.
• Children want to fit in (social pressures) may cause for these normative influence.
• People can also exert influence in more subtle ways than peer pressure in fact
simply by thinking about significant others can automatically activate goals and
elict actions related to those individuals.
• In an experiment done it was seen that children were asked to identify goals
related to their mother half said to please her academically by doing well.
• 8 months later the participants came back and answered a variety of questions
which was priming. Half the participants were asked questions about their mother
while the other half were asked random neutral questions.
• They then had to create as many words as they can from a set of scrambled letters.
It was seen that when the goal was present and those who were primed with the
mother generated the most words than those were primed with a neutral word.
• By thinking about their mom students were more motivated to do well.
• Therefore it is seen that the mom generated an influence generated the
motivation to do well.
• Just by thinking about a significant person in ones life can automatically activate
goals related to that person.
• When the goal was absent at the start of pleasing their mothers the priming had
no effect. Seen by close bars on pg 522
Friendships among adults:
• In adults it was seen that predicted success of friendships were more likely to
emerge as a result of propinquity a good friendship was more likely to develop
between roommates and dormmates than between 2 people who lived farther
• We do not know too much in social psych about how adults move form the initial
interaction to close friends.
• As the relationship developed over time people reported increasing levels of
intimacy in their personal exchanges.
• First they would talk about things such as how was the weather and hows life but
as the relationship developed conversations got more intimate talks about their
current sexual activities. • Therefore Selfdisclosure is definitely very important part of the growing
• It was seen that both women and men agree that intimacy in samesex friends is
more likely when the friends engage in such behaviours as selfdisclosure and
providing emotional support.
• More common in Women then men. Men desire less intimacy in their partner than
women or men fear that emotional expressiveness will be negatively perceived by
• Although they both do it women at a higher level (especially when the self
disclosure results emotional support WOMEN WILL TALK ABOUT
EVERYTHING men are def more selective in what they chose to discuss with
• Nobody likes to feel rejected but yet social exclusion can start early in social life.
• Social relationships are so integral and important in our lives that when other
reject or exclude us, it creates feelings that can be best described as painful.
• The pain that we experience is deeply rooted into our brains.
• In an experiment conducted when 3 people were playing 3 way catch and one
person was constantly rejected and was isolated.
• At that moment his brain was also being analyzed using fMRI. The response in
the brain was VERY SIMILAR to the experience of PHYSICAL PAIN
• It has been suggesting that Physical pain and social pain operate through the same
pain system and share common physiological mechanisms.
• This could have been evolutionary that aided humans to respond to threats of
exclusion. (probably assisted in survival someway ?)
• Therefore both physical and social pain operate on the same pathway If one is
activated so is the other one.
• Babies develop very intimate feelings with their mothers and distress can be
aroused when babies are separated from their mothers. (doesn’t have to be
mothers can be someone who they are attached to)
• When they are distressed only the person who they are attached to can remove
those feelings of distress.
• Attachment theory: Bowlby’s theory, concerning the development and the
effects of the emotional bond between an infant and its caregiver, also used to
account for the relationship that develops between close friends and lovers
throughout the life span.
• Bowlby focused on ETHOLOGICAL approaches which focus on the innate
behaviours that have been shaped during the course of evolution.
• Positive attention form adults to CUTE babies results in the babies providing
positive response from the infant. • And before you know it a close relationship is developing. Both the infant and
the adults are biologically prepared to develop attachments. (unfolds over time
and depends on how each members of the dyad learning how to respond
appropriately to the other).
• Strange situation: developed by Ainsworth a procedure that involves several
brief episodes during which the experimenters observe a babies response to
strangers, when separated by their mothers and reunions with their mothers.
• The mothers and baby are introduced to the experimental room that contains a
variety of toys and play objects.
• The mother and baby are left alone for a few minutes and their behaviour is
• Then an experimenter enters and starts to talk with the mother. Leaving the baby a
lone. The mother then leaves and the stranger sits quietly allowing the baby to
explore and play with the toys.
• The mother then returns for a reunion with the baby and leaves the baby alone in
• After a few minutes the mother says bye bye and leaves again
• The baby has been left alone for a while (the baby is prob. scared and distressed)
and the stranger comes in and comforts the baby.
• The mother than comes in for the final reunion, what happens?
• The results showed a range of emotional responses: protest, despair, and
• SECURE: the most common pattern was Secure attachment: when the baby
actively explores the room when left alone with the mother and when the mother
leaves he gets upset and when she returns he gets happy again.
• He may even seek close physical proximity with her in an effort to relieve
• Secure attachment as the baby is using the mother as a safe haven and secure base
from which it feels safe to explore a novel situation.
• RESISTANT: Insecure attachment: who prefer to stay close to their mothers
rather than exploring the room, they become upset and angry when the mother
leaves the room and upset and angry when she returns.
• When the mother leaves they are very angry. And angry when she returns also. It
seems that although they want to cling onto their mothers they DO NOT want any
physical contact initiated by her (probably angry with her for leaving them).
• Insecure attachment: Do not use their mother as a safe haven and safe base of
which to explore a situation.
• Resistant insecure attachment: the pattern where the baby prefers to stay close
to the mother rather than exploring the room actively, and crys when the mothers
leave and cry when the mothers come back. They remain close to the mother
when they come back but resist physical contact that she does as they are angry with her. ; Also called AMBIVALENT INSECURE ATTACHMENT (angry with