attract_lec.html

Chapter 9 Interpersonal Attraction

Adages pertinent to this area of study:

Birds of a feather flock together vs. Opposites attract

It takes one to know one

Beauty's only skin deep (or is it?)

Familiarity breeds .... ?

Can you think of others?

Two main questions considered (in terms of initial attraction):

(1) Why do we like certain individuals and dislike others?

(2) After we've met a stranger, what determines whether we "(dis)like" them?

Three main factors investigated

(1) Proximity

(2) Positive and negative affect

(3) Physical attractiveness

Proximity

Mere exposure effect (Zajonc, 1968): To know, know, know you, is to .... you

Effect occurs in social and nonsocial realm (e.g., novel Chinese characters)

Being repeatedly exposed to a stimulus can lead to liking or disliking. Why?

Novel stimulus causes mild arousal. Arousal can be positive or negative

Repeated exposure to stimulus reduces arousal; previously novel object now familiar and liked/disliked by virtue of valence of initial arousal

Proximity in Residential Settings (e.g., dorms)

Refers to spatial closeness or nearness

Random assignment to dorms

Seat assignments in classrooms (even though only alphabetical)

In both cases: Those spatially closer to one another, were likelier to become friends later

People living closer to one another, likelier to marry

Why?

One obvious reason: Gives you chance to get to know the other

Think of in terms of misattribution of arousal

Describe Shachter and Singer research

Role of Positive and Negative Affect

Person does something. This arouses positive or negative affect (e.g., opening lines study)

Those using liked openers were reacted to more positively than those using disliked lines

Even being ASSOCIATED with something that arouses PA or NA leads to effect

Being associated with nice/aversive music, good/bad news on radio, good/bad movie, etc.

Being seen with an appealing vs. unappealing stimulus (e.g., seen talking to a gay person; some other stigmatized person)

Explained in terms of classical conditioning

See Byrne's affect-centered model of attraction

The mood you're in has a strong effect on positive/negative evaluation of the other

Role of Physical Attractiveness

Most powerful influence on interpersonal attraction, next to proximity

What is physically attractive, anyway?

http://evolution.humb.univie.ac.at/electronic/baby.jpg (BABYNESS AND SEXUAL ATTRACTIVENESS)
http://evolution.humb.univie.ac.at/electronic/b1.html (ATTRACTIVENESS AND SYMMETRY/AVERAGENESS)

Attributes suggesting youthfulness: childlike features (small nose, small chin, large widely spaced eyes) - cosmetics industry; vocal features

Think about this in terms of evolution theory and reproductive success

"Average" similarity to "face" schema (Langlois & Roggman's research on "average" faces)

What's in a name?

Body type (revisit the Special K commercial)

Gender differences

Women impacted by projected ratings of other women

Men not so impacted

Matching hypothesis: People comparable in physical attractiveness "get together" and stay together

"What is beautiful is good" hypothesis:

We attribute positive traits to attractive people (more sociable, popular, successful, well adjusted, socially skilled).

Seen even in children and in adults' responses to children

Are these attributions "true?" Only in terms of popularity and social skill

Reflect a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy. What is beautiful, to some extent, becomes good (because treated that way)

Regardless of their truth value, we want to affiliate with attractive people because we assume they have other likable attributes

What is beautiful isn't always "good," however

Beautiful people do receive negative attributions (e.g., materialistic, vain, maybe not so intelligent)

Politician study: Attractive males voted for more often; attractive females not

Beautiful people aren't always given "trait" credit for their positive actions

"Beautiful is good" stereotype operates less in adulthood; little predictive value in relationship satisfaction

Also remember that physical attractiveness not the only key; status another important variable

Again, think about this in terms of evolution theory; reproductive success; survival value

Interpersonal attraction established; so, what determines whether we "become" friends?

Introduces a third factor: Similarity

You're attracted to someone. Does your relationship progress? Depends.

Similarity to other on various dimensions determines continuation of relationship (e.g., race, age, culture, class, background, attitudes)

.40-.60 attitudes

.46 education

.45 physical attractiveness

.37 IQ

.15 personality

Does complementarity hold? Rarely (only for dominance-submissiveness)

Seen in Newcomb's research (and others'): liking predicted best by similar attitudes

Why? Newcomb explains in terms of "balance theory"

Own attitude toward object

Other's attitude toward object

Liking for other

Examples:

+ (own) * + (other) = + (you like other)

+ (own) * - (other) = - (you dislike other)

Any imbalance creates negative arousal

Balance creates positive state

Why? Can also be explained in terms of Festinger's social comparison theory

We seek validation from others for own opinions/abilities. Validation makes us feel good

Why? Can also be explained in terms of evolutionary theory (e.g., Rushton)

Attitudinal similarity --> cue to genetic similarity --> cue own genes will "survive"

A fourth factor: Reciprocity

You're attracted to someone. Does your relationship progress? Depends.

We like others who like us.

Why?

Feels good to be liked/be reacted to positively by others

We fear less being rejected by those who like us.

Both lead us to reciprocate liking toward the other.

Examples:

When we think others like us, we behave in more likable ways

When we think others like us, we express more liking for them afterwards