~PSYB10 FINAL EXAM REVIEW NOTES~
Lecture 5
Group Processes
Groups: a collection of three or more ppl who interact with one another and are
interdependent, in the sense that their needs and goals cause them to rely on one
another
Why people join groups: forming relationships with other ppl fulfills a number of basic
human needs
The needs are so basic that they might be an innate need
Substantial survival advantage in our evolutionary past
o Hunt, grow food, find mates, and care for children – all easier in groups
The need to belong has become innate and is present in all societies and as such ppl in
all cultures are motivated to form relationships
o James Cameron (1999) – Mount Allison university students felt that feeling a part
of the university was associated with positive self-esteem and wellbeing (also
associated with “helping them become the self they aspired to be in the future”)
o “Group Membership” – plays an important role in motivating ppl to become
involved in social change
Groups have a number of benefits: other ppl may be an important source of
information, groups are also an important part of our identity, helping us define who
we are, and serve as a source of social norms, the explicit and implicit rules defining
what is acceptable behavior
Composition and Function of groups
Social Groups: 3-6 ppl, the members of the group tend to be alike in age, sex,
beliefs, and opinions
o Most vary in size from 3-6 ppl b/c interaction btwn ppl involved are required as
part of the definition of a “social group” (bigger groups, less interaction)
o 2 Reasons for the homogeneity: 1 is to attract ppl who are already similar before
they join, another is b/c groups operate in ways that encourage similarity btwn
the members o Social Norms: the implicit and explicit rules a group has for the acceptable
values, and beliefs of its members
Could be considered “a group’s prescriptions for the behavior, values, and
beliefs of its members
Are a powerful determinant of our behavior
Group members are expected to conform to these norms, and those
who deviate are punished or rejected
UC Berkeley’s “Naked Guy”
(May) not be shared by members of other groups that you belong to
(church, mosque, etc.)
Ppl who violate social norms are shunned by other group members and
are in some instances pressured to leave the group
o Social Roles: a group’s expectations for he behavior and responsibilities of
various SUBGROUPS of its members (whereas norms specify how ALL
group member s should behave)
useful because ppl know what to expect from each other
Potential costs of social roles: ppl can get too into their role such that their
personal identity and personality are lost
The Stanford Prison Experiment (Haney, Banks, and Philip Zimbardo
1973) had to be called off after 6 days instead of lasting the full 2
weeks
Ppl forgot they were in an experiment and their sense of
decency was lost
(Zimbardo, 2007) – abuse of Iraqi prisoners by American
soldiers in Abu Ghraib Prison
o Prisoners were easily dehumanized (diff. language and
nakedness b/c of no prison suits)
o Gender roles: societal expectations based on people’s gender (across all
situations)
Women – wife and mother; limited pursuits career-wise with options
remaining limited by gender-role stereotyping
Women are still constrained by expectations that they will pursue
traditional occupations, and that child care and housework remain
their responsibility
Women are still expected to pursue gender stereotypic occupations
Expectations have change over the years but 26/28 women still earn less
than men
o Group cohesiveness: qualities of a group that bind members together and
promote liking among them (Dion 2000; Hogg 1993; Holtz 2004)
An important aspect of group composition is how tightly knit the group is
The more cohesive a group is, the more its members are likely to stay in
the group, take part in group activities, and try to recruit like-minded
members
one drawback: group members’ concern with maintaining good relations
can get in the way of finding good solutions to problems Destructive Groups (Cults)
Defining characteristic of Destructive Cults
1. Charismatic leader
2. Leaders are self-appointed
3. The leader is the focus of veneration
4. Group culture tends towards totalitarianism
5. Group usually has more than 2 or more sets of ethics– lower sets of hierarchy
have different norms and rules from the higher-ups (know about the inner
workings of the cult, know about the money)
6. Group presents as innovative and exclusive
7. Main goals: Recruitment & Fundraising
De-individuation
The loosening of normal constraints on behavior when people are in a group, leading to
an increase in impulsive and deviant acts
“getting lost in a crowd”, hiding behind the anonymity of the internet, can lead to an
unleashing of behaviors that individuals would never dream of doing otherwise
“Disguises tend to make those wearing them capable of far more terrible acts of
violence than would normally occur” (Simmie, 1993)
Why does Deindividuation Lead to Impulsive Acts? 3 Factors
1. The presence of others, or the wearing of uniforms and disguises, makes people
less accountable for their actions because it reduces the likelihood that any
individual will be singled out and blamed (Diener, 1980; Prentice-Dunn &
Rogers, 1989; Zimbardo 1970)
2. The presence of others lowers self-awareness, thereby shifting people’s attention
away from their moral standards (difficult to focus on the inward on ourselves
and outward on the world around us at the same time)
a. Focusing on ourselves is that we are reminded of our moral standards,
making us less likely to behave in a deviant or antisocial manner
b. Focusing on our environment, self-awareness will be low and we will be
more likely to forget our moral standards and act impulsively
3. Finally, deindividuation also increases the extent to which people obey the
group’s norms instead of other norms
a. Ignore laws, common decency, etc. How groups affect us: Social Facilitation and Social Loafing
Social Facilitation: the tendency for people to do better on simple tasks, but
worse on complex tasks, when they are in the presence of others, AND their
individual performance CAN be evaluated
o “when the presence of others energizes us”
o The mere presence of others (no interaction) can mean ONE of TWO things
1. Performing a task with others who are doing the same thing you are
2. Performing a task in front of an audience that is not doing anything
except observing you
o Cockroach study (Zajonc, Heingartner, and Herman, 1992)
o Simple vs. Difficult tasks
The presence of others improves performance on simple well-learned
tasks
But there is a decline on performance, with an audience, on more difficult,
new tasks
o (Arousal – our bodied become energized) and the (dominant response – easier to
do something that is easy)
Why the presence of others causes arousal:
1. Other people cause us to become particularly alert and vigilant
a. We have to be alert in case we need to respond to an action made
by the other person (question)
2. They make us apprehensive about how we’re being evaluated
a. People are concerned with how other people view them
b. Evaluation apprehension: concern about being judged
3. And they distract us from the task at hand
a. How distracting other people can be
b. Any source of distraction, the presence of others or even the
noise upstairs
c. Trying to pay attention to two things at once produces arousal
Social Loafing: the tendency for people to do worse on simple tasks, but better on
complex tasks when they are in the presence of others AND their individual
performance CANNOT be evaluated (part of the group)
o “When the presence of others relaxes us”
o Opposite of social facilitation
o Singing in a choir
o First studied in the 1880’s by the French Agricultural engineer Max Ringelmann
(1913)
o Just as arousal enhances performance on simple tasks and impairs performance
on difficult tasks - becoming relaxed impairs performance on simple tasks but
enhances performance on difficult tasks
o Arousal, social facilitation for simple tasks; relaxed, social loafing for difficult
tasks Process of Social Facilitation or Social Loafing: Evaluation, Arousal, and Task
Complexity – is covered in the above points
o Social Facilitation
has a possibility of evaluation, arousal is present, enhances ability to
complete simple tasks but impairs ability to do more complex tasks
o Social Loafing
No evaluation (part of the group), relaxed, impairs the ability to do
simple tasks but enhances the ability to do more complex tasks
o Evaluation apprehension: concern about being judged/evaluated
o Socio-evaluative Threat
Extreme Evaluation Apprehension
Body responds with the stress hormone cortisol
Cortisol constricts blood vessels in hippocampus, inhibiting memory
and learning
Group-decision making: Are two heads better than one?
Groups will do better than individuals if people are motivated to search for the answer
that is best for the entire group and not just for themselves and if they rely on the
person with the most expertise
The problem with group decision-making is that often times group interactions inhibit
good problem solving
o Groups will do well only if the most talented member can convince the other that
he or she is right, but people are stubborn and won’t always admit they were
wrong
o Process Loss: any aspect of group interaction that inhibits good problem solving
Can occur for any number of reasons:
Groups might not try hard enough to try hard enough to find out
who the most competent member of the group is and instead rely on
somebody who doesn’t know what he or she is talking about
The most competent member might find it difficult to disagree with
everyone else in the group
Communication problems within the group: people don’t listen to
one another, one person is allowed to dominate the discussion while
the others tune out
Failure to share unique information Groupthink: many heads, one mind; a kind of thinking in which maintaining
group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the
facts in a realistic manner
o Antecedents
• The group is highly cohesive: the group is valued and attractive, and
people very much want to be members
• Group isolation: the group is isolated, protected from hearing
alternative viewpoints
• a directive leader: the leader controls the discussion and makes his or
her wishes known
• high stress: the members perceive threats to the group
• non-structured decision-making procedures: no standard methods
to consider alternative viewpoints
o Symptoms
• Illusion of invulnerability: the group feels it is invincible and can do
no wrong
• Belief in the moral correctness of the group: :God is on our side”
• Stereotyped views of out-group: opposing sides are viewed in a
simplistic, stereotyped manner
• Self-censorship: people decide themselves not to voice contrary
opinions so as not to “rock the boat”
• Direct pressure on dissenters to conform: If people do voice contrary
opinions, they are pressured by others to conform to the majority
• Illusion of unanimity: an illusion is created that everyone agrees, for
example, by not calling on people known to disagree
• Mindguards: group members protect the leader from contrary
viewpoints
o Consequences
• Incomplete survey of alternatives
• Failure to examine risks of the favoured alternative
• Poor information search
• Failure to develop contingency plans
Avoiding Groupthink: remain impartial, seek outside opinions, create subgroups,
seek anonymous opinions, someone is explicitly assigned the role of ‘Devil’s
Advocate’
Chapter 8 Lecture 6
Emotions
What is an emotion? – a brief physiological and psychological response to an event
that is felt subjectively and prepares a person for action (4 aspects to discuss later)
o A more complex definition: an emotion is a universal, functional reaction to
an external stimulus event, temporarily integrating physiological, cognitive,
phenomenological, and behavioural channels to facilitate a fitness-enhancing,
environment-shaping response to a current situation” (Keltner & Shiota
(2003), p.89)
o What is not an emotion?
• Due to their time-course, these things are not emotions: moods;
sentiments; affective personality traits; by itself, level of arousal
(sleepiness)
6 basic emotions (Ekman): fear, disgust, anger, sadness, happiness, and
surprise
o More negative (fear, disgust, anger, sadness) emotions than positive
(happiness), surprise is considered valence (could be either pos. or neg.)
• Greater functionality with negative emotions – help to survive
• Positive might help with pair bonding
o Complex emotions – blends of basic emotions
• Affect blends - refers to a facial expression in which one part of the
face is registering one emotion and another part of the face is
registering a different emotion.
Happiness + Surprise = Amusement
• Positive emotions
Most studied Examples are:
Gratitude, Contentment, Desire (moving towards Peditive,
rewarding, stimulus), love (contested as to whether it is an
emotion
• Self-conscious emotions – complex emotions elicited by the self
Most studied examples:
Pride
shame(all about me, more likely to feel anger at the victim,
less likely to apologize, more likely to not fess up, how you
feel)
guilt (all about them, usually try apologize, make-up), both
guilt and shame originate from an action that you regret
taking, (wish I hadn’t done that)
embarrassment – always involves having done something
that involves loss of face or hurts your status
• Why do we feel? How do we recognize emotion? – what social
psychologists want to know Measuring emotions
o Self-report
o Facial action muscles
o Emotional facial displays
• Nonverbal communication: the way in which people communicate,
intentionally or unintentionally, without words; nonverbal cues include
facial expressions, tone of voice, gestures, body position and movement,
the use of touch, and eye gaze
• Encoding: to express or emit nonverbal behavior, such as smiling or
patting someone on the back
• Decoding: to interpret the meaning of the nonverbal behavior other
people express, such as deciding that a pat on the back was an
expression of condescension and not kindness
o Facial Electromyography (EMG)
• Captures subtle facial movements
• Best used for situations where facial movement is not visually
detectable
• Obtrusive measurement technique
o Facial Action Coding System (FACS)
• Codes overt facial expressions
• Numbers all facial muscle actions
• Classifies emotions as patterns of muscle actions that occur together
• E.g., anger is 4,5,7,23
Components of emotion
“An emotion is a universal, functional
reaction to an external stimulus event,
temporarily integrating physiological,
cognitive, phenomenological, and
behavioural channels to facilitate a
fitness-enhancing, environment-shaping
response to a current situation.”
(Keltner and Shiota, 2003 p.89) o Time span of emotion: Emotions are short-lived (Ekman, 1984)
• Real emotions: between 500ms-4s* (Facial decay* - emotion rises and
falls within that 4s)
• Fake emotions: between 1-10s
• Surprise is the shortest – 2.5 s
• Happiness, disgust, and sadness are standard length
• Anger and fear are longer – processed in a different part of the brain
(might be why its longer)
What is NOT an emotion(b/c of their time-course, too long to be
an emotion):
Mood – generalized affective state that they have, valenced state,
no stimulus, lasts for awhile
o Mood vs. emotion
mood is the residue left over from emotion
not an emotion: stimulus response – not always a
response to an evocative stimulus, lasts for days,
action tendencies – moods may not call or an action,
experience – mood are mostly subjective; they are
not observable physiologically
emotions always have physiological responses
Sentiments: greeting card, has some aspects of affect
Affective personality traits – use emotion word to describe
someone at the personality level
By itself, level of arousal – physiological arousal (Sleepiness)
o Physiological component
• Peripheral nervous system – looking more to identify whether an
emotional response has occurred
Most researchers require a peripheral physiological response to
state that an emotion has occurred
o Heart rate, skin conductance (activity on skin), pre-ejection
period, finger temperature
Important caveat about inference: emotions CANNOT be
identified by peripheral response, but they indicate degree of
arousal or intensity
• Central nervous system – there are various areas of the brain are
involved in the processing of emotional stimuli
Limbic System
o Amygdala: fear and anger
o Hypothalamus: laughter
Frontal cortex
o Everything else • Proper inference of psychophysiology
Physiological profiles & locations helps us understand arousal,
intensity, & possible circuits
o Physiological profiles could be: low skin conductance, high
heart rate, avg finger temp (3 measurements)
Emotions cannot be identified by examining physiological states
o Same states for different emotions, running laps = anger?
• James-Lange Theory of Emotion - every emotion has a distinct,
specific pattern of physiological responses that characterizes and
underlies it
Implications:
o Our physiological experience of emotion is the result of our
underlying physiological responses
o Every emotion has a physiological signature – a pattern or
“profile” of physiological responses that uniquely identify it
Dec in heart rate and inc in skin conductance –
sadness, negative arousal
Inc in heart rate – anger
Specific bodily (physio) response tells us what emotion we are
feeling and the bodily response is SPECIFIC
o Event -> specific bodily response -> subjective emotion
Can predict the physio responses from the psycho
stimulus(inference only works this way, with psych
as the independent variable), but not the reverse, do
not see a change in emotional response when they
change the physio response
Directed facial action task – experiment the James-Lange
Theory (Levenson, Ekman, & Friesen 1990)
o Method:
1. Tell participants to pose face in certain ways
2. Ask them what expression they are demonstrating
3. Measure physiological responses
o Results:
1. Participants were able to identify emotions from
instructions
2. Reliable physio profiles o Cognitive component
• Cognitive appraisals: the meaning of an event affects our emotional
response to it
Ex: getting punched
o He meant to do it and he meant to hurt→ anger
o He meant to do it, but was joking around→amusement
Key appraisals for eliciting emotion: self-relevance, goal
congruence, blame & responsibility, certainty, coping ability
• Two-Factor Theory of Emotion
Two-factor theory of emotion:
1. Physiological arousal is generalized, not specific (change
from baseline)
2. We apply a label to the arousal based on cognitive
appraisal (person’s own interpretation of physiological
arousal)
Event → General Arousal + Appraisal → Emotion
1. My heart is pounding! Something’s Happening!
2. Bears are dangerous. I’m Scared!
Schacter and Singer (1964) experimented to prove the Two-
Factor theory
o Method:
1. Give people heart-rate increasing pill or placebo
2. Have them complete a survey with very personal
questions
3. An actor gets angry at the questionnaire
4. What does the participant do?
o Results:
Aroused Participants expressed greater anger than
the actor
Non-aroused participants didn’t get angry (placebo
ppl) o James-Lange vs. Two Factor
• James Lange says specific emotions are distinct and real
• 2-factor says specific emotions are an illusion of appraisal
• Two-factor theory of love/misattribution of arousal
Dutton & Aron Bridge Study
o Behavioural component
• Facial display
Corrugator supercili – brows, related to negative affect in general,
all of them require a furrowing of the brow
Zygomaticus major – involved in all smiles, highly involved in
positive affect, good mood,
Orbicularis oculi – real difference btwn a real (Duchene smile)
and fake smile, always smile with zygomatic but a real smile also
has the orbicularis oculi reaction
Levator labii – expression of you disgust, block your nostrils a bit
to keep you from inhaling noxious odours/gases
• Body posture – pride – shoulders back, standing up straight, ashamed –
shoulders slumped
• Vocal tone
• Touch
o Action! – Action tendencies of emotions – approach or avoid the emotional stimulus
o E.g.,
• Anger →APPROACH
• Fear → AVOID
• Disgust → AVOID
• Happiness → APPROACH
o This is the functional service of emotions
o Universality/Functionality of emotions
Universality of Emotion
• Is emotion universal? – yes and no
There appear to be some universal aspects (6basic)
There are undeniably culturally-bound aspects, as well
• Darwin (1872), The Expression of Emotion in Man and Animals
Adaptive value of emotions
Emotions are adaptations
o Solve problems of survival, reproduction, raising young
Expression of emotion
Expression evolved before language, first way to express
thoughts and feelings to other people
o Continuity btwn species – dogs and anger
o Universality within species
Ekman studies on universality of emotion
• Is expression universal?
• Ekman & Friesen(1972): New Guinean pre-literate villagers
• 3 methods
Standard Method: here’s a photo what is the emotions (6 options)
Dashiel Method: told a story, then “which photo matches” (3
options)
Posed method: Told a story, then “You pose the emotion that the
protagonist would be feeling”; Photos shown to US undergrads,
who rated them with the standard method
• Result: note that chance is 16% for standard and posed, and 33% for
Dashiel
• Is emotion universal?
Protypical expression of emotion appear to be universally
recognizable and producible
However, cultural display rules apply
Influence how, when and to whom emotions are expressed
o Situational context
o Relational context
o Intensity Functionality of Emotion
• Emotions allow us to:
Act quickly
o Just like heuristics
Are typically correct, but sometimes wrong
o Just like heuristics
• Emotions allow us to quickly respond to the most important stimuli in
life
• The Action Tendencies of emotions are their basic functions
• Culturally-specific emotions
Some argue Emotions as culturally constructed and specific
Examples:
o Japanese Amae – pleasant feeling of depending on
someone else
o German Schadenfreude – pleasure derived from the
misfortune of others
o Bedouin Hasham – pleasant feeling of humility
Morality
The study of morality in social psychology
Social psychology cannot tell you what is morally right or wrong
Instead, soc-psy studies why you think something is morally right or wrong
Moralization
The transformation of preferences to values – a value judgment is added to a decision
Cultural level
Cigarette smoking in Canada
Individual level
o Vegetarianism in Canada
Moral reasoning
How do you decide whether you think something is morally right or wrong?
What is moral?
o A man goes to the supermarket once a week and buys a dead chicken. But before
cooking the chicken he has sexual intercourse with it. Then he cooks it and eats it.
o A woman is cleaning out her closet and she finds her old Canadian flag. She doesn’t
want the flag anymore so she cuts it up into pieces and uses the rags to clean her
bathroom
o A family’s dog was killed by a car in front of their house. They had heard that dog meat
was delicious, so they cut up the dog’s body and cooked it and ate it for dinner
o Julie and Mark are brother and sister… - no children, strengthens their relationship, no
repeat or abuse of their relationship Moral reasoning
o Utilitarian reasoning – basing your moral decisions on the outcomes/ends/utility of an
action
o Deontological reasoning – basing your moral decision on reduction of harm (no killing)
Moral emotions
o Almost all modern social psychological views of morality consider it to be a reasoning
process that is influences by emotion
o Feelings as information
• Emotions used as information when making judgments
I feel good → I must like this proposition
I am angry → I must dislike this proposition
• Functionality of emotion-based reasoning:
Reduces complexity
Rapid decision making
o “Moral triad” of emotions
• Moral violations elicit specific emotions
• Moral triad:
Disgust
o Elicited by violations of divinity
Purity
Cleanliness
o Example divinity violation: a 70-year-old male has sex with
a 15-year-old female
Anger
o Elicited y violations of autonomy
Individual rights
Personal harm
o Example violation of autonomy:
A husband gets drunk and beats his wife
Contempt
o Elicited by violations of community
Community
Hierarchy
o Example community violation:
A teenager refuses to yield her seat on the TTC to a
crippled elderly woman
o Social Intuitionist Model – Jonathan Haidt (2001)
• Two steps of moral reasoning
1. Make moral judgment based on emotional reaction
2. Try to come up with acceptable justification for that reaction
o React then justify Dual-process theory of moral reasoning
o Josh Green
o Two types of reasoning processes involved in the moment of the moral decision: emotional
and utilitarian
All people show heightened activity in anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) when making
difficult moral decisions (kill your baby, or get your entire village killed)
o Emotional processes – more emotional decision making processes
o Utilitarian processes – kill the baby, more logical
o There is conflict when there are strong arguments for both
utilitarian decision and an emotional decision, there is
conflict
Neural structures involved in rational and emotional moral reasoning
o People who ultimately choose utilitarian argument: greater activation in (dorsal-lateral
prefrontal cortex) dPFC > ACC while making the moral decision
Chapter 4 Lecture 7
Initial Attraction
Proximity (was known as propinquity effect, Festinger) – strongest factor
o Propinquity effect
• The more we see and interact with other people, the more likely we are to
become our friends
• The degree to which you interact with someone else, how physically
close you are
• The more you see and interact with other people, the more likely you
are to be their friends
• MIT Westgate West Apartments
Results:
next-door Neighbours: 41%
2 doors apart: 22%
Opposite hallways: 10%
nd
Apartments 1 and had more friends from 2 floor
o Why does proximity promote attraction?
• Availability/accessibility
• Because it suggests similarity
• Mere exposure
Familiarity
o Mere-exposure
• The more exposure you get to a neutral object, the more you will like it
• Does not apply if the object has negative qualities
• Moreland & Beach (1992)
Method:
o Confederate sits in front row of class for 0-15 classes
o At end of semester students rate liking of confederate
Results: avg. 3.5 for ppl they’ve never seen, the number of times
they’ve exposed to this person increases the liking
• 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 – “Birds of a feather flock together”
o Research supports the idea that similarity supports liking
o Versus complementarity – “Opposites attract”
Reciprocity & Attraction/Reciprocal Liking
o We like people who like us
o Subtle liking cues
• Eye contact
• Leaning in
• Attentive listening
• Mimicry
o Less true for people with low self-esteem/negative self-concept Attractiveness
o What is attractive?
• Attractiveness in men and women
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
• Why these features might be important
• Symmetry – symmetrical vs. lop-sided faces, symmetrical is better
(Denzel)
Symmetry Matters!
• Averageness
more composite faces, more average, are more attractive than the
individuals or with less faces included in the average
Why are they more attractive? – more familiar and more
prototypical
composite faces are also more symmetrical
composites of people rated highly attractive are more attractive
than composites of all attractiveness levels
• Babyfacedness – large eyes, rounder face and nose
Babyfaced people are:
o Are more persuasive
o Perceived to be more trustworthy
o Evoke liking and caregiving behaviours
• Cultural influence: different cultures attribute Beautiful People with
certain personality traits
These traits are also different across all cultures, though some
share certain attributes, show that these people are “Perfect” to
the values important to each culture
o Attractiveness and liking/attraction
• Walter 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 • Beautifulness-is-good Stereotype
Babies stare at ‘attractive’ faces longer
There is a fair amount of cross-cultural consistency in
attractiveness judgments
Beautiful-is-good Schema
Beauty creates a “halo effect”
o Occurs most for social competence
o More sociable, extraverted, popular
o More sexual, happy, friendly
o There is a kernel of truth
o Cultural shifts in attractiveness
o Attractiveness and relationships
• Matching hypothesis – we seek partners that are of similar
attractiveness to us, and are more satisfied with these partners
Couples of similar attractiveness were more likely to continue
dating after a blind date
UCLA Dating Study
o Results:
Satisfaction in relationship
Relationship longevity
Lower break-up rate at 6month follow-up
Misattribution of Arousal
o Dutton & Aron Bridge study
o Scarcity & Attraction
• 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 patrons)
Time until closing time used as independent variable
Attractiveness ratings of opposite-sex targets increased as the
evening progresses )9:00pm <10:30pm <12am)
Holds even when statistically controlling for alcohol intake Chapter 9
Close Relationships
Evolutionary perspectives on relationships
Evolutionary fitness – potential to pass on your genes/successfully procreate
o Ability to survive to mating years
o Ability to maximize the number of offspring that survive to their mating years
Polygamy and monogamy
o 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
o Reproductive investment – the “investment” of time, resources, and risk
involved in having each child
• Typically varies btwn the sexes
• Sexual “Choosiness” – the sex which bears the most reproductive costs
is “choosier”
Choosy sex
o Bears the most reproductive costs/investment
o Usually the female, but not always
Sex with least reproductive costs:
o Should want more partners
o Will be in competition for mates more often
o Displays greater physical variation
o Sexual dimorphism – pronounced difference in the size or bodily structures of
the two sexes (seen in polygamous animals)
o Biological basis of monogamy: Oxytocin & Dopamine
• Monogamy – reproductive partnership based on a more or less
permanent tie btwn partners
Sexes are close to indistinguishable based on physical
characteristics
• 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 animal
No oxytocin receptors in nucleus accumbens
Homosexuality
o Reproductive partnerships btwn members of the same sex
o Widely displayed across the animal kingdom
o Usually associated with disproportionate number of male and female mating
adults
Human mating – are we polygamous or monogamous? Evidence to both sides
o Polygamous and monogamous features of humans
• Polygamy evidence
Sexual dimorphism
Great physical variation
85% of traditional cultures allow some kind of polygamy
• Monogamous Humans
Co-occurrence 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
hoping to settle with 1 like partner in the end
o Human Mate Selection
Need to belong
Motivation of belonging – belonging is a basic human motivation
Evolutionary explanations:
o Sociometer theory – self-esteem is a gage of whether we’ll be accepted or
rejected by a group
o Human “Survival tactics” – require several ppl (building shelters, hunting
game, agriculture, survive a predator)
o Development of human children – human children are helpless for several
years, need to belong to a group for survival
o 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
o Effects of social isolation: after 3 months
• Huddling alone, rocking, self-mutilation
• Incompetent (often abusive) parenting to their offspring
o Harlow’s Monkeys – never interacted with other monkeys, “cloth” mother,
had food and water and warmth
• Was introduced to therapist monkey – plays with “Therapist monkey”
after 2 weeks
• After 6 months isolated monkey seems mostly recovered
Remains more easily stressed out than “normal” monkeys
Attachment Theory
Attachment Theory describes how infants become:
o Emotionally attached to caregivers
o Emotionally distressed at loss of caregiver
Functional purpose of attachment:
o Comforts fearful child
o Builds expectations for future relationships
o Provides “secure base” for exploration
Preset in non-humans as well
o Imprinting – a more basic form of attachment bond which occurs shortly after
birth/hatching among many species
• Must occur within the “sensitive period”
• Animals show distress when imprinted object has been removed
Attachment among humans – infants enter world predisposed to seek direct contact
with a primary Caregiver
o Motivated by:
• Infants find social interaction intrinsically rewarding
• Instinctive fear of the unknown/unfamiliar
Adult Attachment
Adult Attachment – adult romantic relationships function like caregiver-child
attachment relationships (Hazan & Shaver, 1987)
o Prefer proximity, with distress upon separation
o Turn to partner for support when stressed, in danger
o Derive security from partner, enabling exploration of and engagement with
the rest of the world Attachment styles
o Secure (56%) -
• I find it relatively easy to get close to others and am comfortable
depending on them and having them depending on me. I don’t often
worry about being abandoned or about someone getting too close to me
• Experience of love – trust friendship, positive emotions
• View of self/relationship – believe in enduring love, others are
trustworthy, self in likable
• Memories of caregivers – dependably responsive and caring
o Anxious-Ambivalent (19%)
• I find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I often
worry that my partner doesn’t really love me or won’t want to stay with
me. I want to merge completely with another person, and this desire
sometimes scares people away
• Experience of love – preoccupying, almost painfully exciting struggle to
merge with someone else
• View of Self/relationships – fall in love frequently, easily; have difficulty
finding true love; have self-doubts
• Memory of care givers – mixture of positive and negative experiences
o Avoidant (21%)
• I am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others; I find it difficult to
trust them completely, difficult to allow myself to depend on them. I am
nervous when anyone gets too close, and often, love partners want me
to be more intimate than I feel comfortable being.
• Experience of love – fear of closeness, lack of trust
• View of self/relationships – doubtful of existence or durability of
romantic love, don’t need love partner in order to be happy, self as
independent, self-reliant
• Memories of caregivers – cold and rejecting
• Fearful avoidant
• Dismissive avoidant
Attachment dimensions
o Now we think of attachment in terms of two continuous dimensions
• Attachment avoidance – avoiding/not avoiding different ppl
• Attachment anxiety – low or high, anxious (or not) about how things
will go
o Secure – low anxiety and low avoidance
o Anxious ambivalent - low anxiety and high avoidance
o Avoidance – high anxiety and high avoidance
Global versus specific attachment orientations Closeness
Close Relationships: ABCs of Relationships
Cognition: Self-Expansion Theory, Interdependence Theory
Affect: Theories of Love, Positive Illusions
Behaviour: Co-operative Dilemmas in Close Relationships
Cognitive Component
Self-expansion theory – the experience of closeness is an associative overlap of our
self-concept with our concept of a close other
o AKA “Inclusion-of-Other-in-Self”
o Information about close others are closely associated with self-related
information
o Self/other Cognitive Overlap:
• Longer reaction times when making “me”/”not-me” judgments of
spouse’s characteristics
• Make more situational attributions for self and close others
Make more dispositional attributions for non-close others
(Fundamental Attribution Error only applies to non-close others)
Interdependence Theory/Investment Model
o Social Exchange Theory
Commitment – a mental state characterized by a pluralistic; collective
representation of the self-in relationship
3 components of Commitment
Satisfaction – product of perceived rewards, costs, and
comparison
o Reward/cost ratio
o Comparison level
Quality of alternatives – alternative partners
Investment
Commitment = (↑Satisfaction) + (↓Quality of Alternatives) + (↑Resource Investment)
When commitment is high: Spontaneous use of plural pronouns
Rusbult (1983)
o Method:
o Measure Satisfaction, quality of alternatives, and resources
in dating couples at Time 1
o Contact them 7 months later to ask about their
commitment to their relationship Affective Component
Theories of Love
o Companionate Love – feelings of intimacy and affection we feel when we care
deeply for a person, but without sexual arousal or passion
• Can exist btwn lovers or friends
• Valued in all cultures
o Passionate Love – feelings of intense longing for a person, usually
accompanied by physiological arousal
• Valued in 144 of 167 cultures
Positive illusions – “Idealization” of close others; seeing them as more positive than
they see themselves
o Over the course of 1-year, couple who maintain positive illusions of their
partner (Murray, Holmes, & Griffin, 1996):
• Decreasing instances of conflict
• Increasing satisfaction
• Decreasing doubts about the relationship
• Were more likely to be together at the end of the year
Behavioural Component
Co-operative dilemmas
o What to do when one partner behaves destructively
• Accommodate
Focus on long-term relationship goals instead of short-term, self-
serving goals
o Transformation of motivation in long-term relationships
Relationship Dissolution
What couples do well?
• Most studies of marital stability correlate relationship longevity with:
Married after age 20, similar age
Grew up in 2-parent homes
Dated for a long time, but did not live together
Same level of education, especially if high
Good income
Religious, and of same religious affiliation
Sense of equity
Sex often, arguments rarely
o Novel experiences (Aron & Aron, 1986)
• Sharing new experiences together
• Exploration of environment with partner as “Secure Base”
Why relationships fail
o Low equity in relationship
o Lack of positive illusions (particularly negative illusions)
o Low interdependence
o Boredom – lack of exploration/novel activities • Top causes of Conflict:
Sex
Money
Kids:
o Marital satisfaction dives with first child
o Slowly returns to pre-child levels by empty nest
o Boost in marital satisfaction when both kids leave the
house
o Gottman(1994): “4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse”
1. Criticism (e.g., listing personal flaws, attacking)
2. Defensiveness (e.g., denying, excusing, or counter-criticizing)
3. Contempt (e.g., rolling eyes, sarcasm, insulting)
4. Stonewalling (e.g., non-response to communicative attempts)
How relationships fail
o Friendships
• People typically use “passive strategies” to end the relationship
Avoidance or withdrawal
o Romantic Relationships
• People typically use “direct strategies” to end the relationship
Direct confrontation
Rejection
o Neurochemical basis of rejection
• Neurological Experience of Physical Pain:
Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC)
o Associated with “distress signal” during physical pain
Right ventral prefrontal cortex (rvPFC)
o Associated with regulation and inhibition of felt pain
fMRI scans show cortical activity in ACC and rvPFC during social
rejection
o Relationship between social pain and physical pain
• If social pain is physically painful…
Interrupting the experience of pain should dull the hurt of
rejection
DeWall, MacDonald, et al. (2008)
o Method:
1. Randomly assign participants to take Tylenol or Placebo
twice daily for 21 days
2. Report on social experiences each day, particularly
related to social rejection or social exclusion
o Results:
1. Tylenol participants reported less physical pain
2. Tylenol participants reported less hurt feelings on days
when they experienced social rejection or exclusion
than placebo Chapter 9
Lecture 8
Culture
Culture – an everchanging, constructive stimulus which shapes the way individuals
perceive and contribute to the world
1. Dynamic
2. Influenced by members of the culture
3. Influences members of the culture
Nationality – the country you were born in
Ethnicity – your cultural heritage
Identification – the degree to which you include group membership in your self-
concept or sense of who you are
Meaning System
o Symbols, language, experiences
o Metaphysics
• Beliefs about the world, universe, & existence
Describing Culture
o Individualism/Collectivism
• Individualist cultures – emphasize personal achievement, even at the
expense of others
• Greater emphasis on competition
• E.g., Canada Western Europe
• Collectivist cultures – emphasize social roles and collective
responsibilities even at the expense of the individual
• Greater emphasis on co-operation
• E.g., China, Korea, Latin America
o Political Climate
• Political structure greatly constrains behavior and cultural expression
• Sometimes government change can extinguish a culture
o Religious Beliefs
• Dominant religious beliefs characterize a culture’s moral reasoning and
motivations
• Religion also affects social roles and norms
o Ecological Differences
• Environmental context shapes the development and focus of a culture
Language Issues
o Is the meaning of our words “lost in translation” when we translate from one
language to another? Translation Efficacy (i.e., “Lost in Translation?”)
o Maybe-So evidence
• Method:
1. Participants (Ps) who spoke Argentinean-Spanish, Chinese, or
English
2. Showed Ps an array of objects
3. What would P use for each object?
o Results: # of words used for pictured objects by culture
o Argentinean-Spanish: 15
o English: 5
o Chinese: 7
o Maybe-Not Evidence
• Method:
1. Participants (Ps) who spoke Argentinean-Spanish, Chinese, or
English
2. Showed Ps the same array of objects
3. Asked Ps to group objects according to similarity
• Results:
o Speakers of all three language arranged the objects into
the same groups
• Conclusion: while we may call object by different names, we
group them similarly
Back translation – translating a word, phrase, or sentence multiple times btwn two
languages until both translations yield the same phrase
o Process:
• Translate from language 1 ->2, translate from 2->1, repeat until all
More
Less
