DOC PREVIEW
UMass Amherst PSYCH 360 - Interpersonal Attraction

This preview shows page 1-2-3 out of 10 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 10 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 10 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 10 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 10 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

1Interpersonal Attraction• Soundtrack“Love Shack” B-52’sWhy do people form relationships with others?• People are social animals who have a basic “need to belong” • Newborns are responsive to human faces• Infants engage in social smiling• Having close social ties is associated with being happier & more satisfied, and not having them with loneliness, depression, worse physical health, and earlier death.Why are people initially attracted to each other?• Exercise: Proximity/Propinquity• PROXIMITY/propinquity (or geographical closeness) is one of the most powerful predictors of whether two people will become friends. Proximity• Segal (1974)• Police trainees: Proximity was a better predictor of friendship formation than was similarity (e.g., in religion, hobbies, age, marital status, or organizational memberships).• Trainees sitting next to each other in class more likely to become friendsProximity• Festinger, Schachter, & Back, 1950• Proximity and friendship in married student housing. Person most often named as a friend lived next door.2Why would physical proximity increase the chances that we will like someone?• More interaction: Paths cross, learn about similarities, feel liked by other person, etc.• Familiarity: General principle (humans, other animals)Mere exposure effect (Zajonc)• Mere exposure: The tendency for novel stimuli to be liked more or rated more positively after one has been repeatedly exposed to them.• Novel stimuli (e.g., Turkish words, Chinese characters, men’s faces)• Iv=number of exposures•DV=liking• Results: Preferred stimuli had seen____________.Mere exposure studies (Zajonc & colleagues)• Women wore headphones and, in one ear, heard a prose passage and repeated the words outloud, checking for errors. In the second ear, they “heard” novel melodies played so softly they were not aware that they had heard them.• IV: Melodies “heard” below awareness (i.e., subliminally) versus melodies never heard.•DVs: – Recognition of melodies (Have you ever heard this melody before? Yes or No?)– Liking for melodies (Do you like this melody? Yes or No?)• Results: Recognition ___________chance. But, _________ liking for the melodies that they had previously “heard.”Mere exposure and awareness• Mere exposure effect occurs even when people are NOT aware that they have been exposed to the stimulus.Mere exposure and attraction• How might “mere exposure” work in a context relevant to attraction?Proximity leads to liking• Moreland & Beach, 1992• IV: Four female confederates attended large class 0, 5, 10, or 15 times• DV: How much liked slides of confederate at end of semester• Results: The _________times confederate attended the class, the _____ she was liked.3Proximity leads to likingFamiliarity leads to liking• Familiarity breeds liking.– But, most studies used neutral or positive stimuli.– (Does familiarity ever breed contempt?)Physical attractiveness• We are biased to prefer physically attractive people.Physical attractiveness• Bias to like children who are attractive• Dion (1972)• IV: mild vs. severe misbehavior• IV: attractive or unattractive photo of child• DV: Rate typicality of behavior• Results: Severe misbehavior rated more typical when performed by an ___________child than an __________child.Physical attractiveness is associated with liking. • Hatfield et al. (1966)• Couples randomly paired at “computer dance”• Assessed personality, aptitude, physical attractiveness• Results: Only physical attractiveness predicted liking and wanting to see the person again. (True for men and women.)What is attractive or beautiful?• Is it an objective measureable quality, or is it more in the “eye of the beholder”?• Brief video clip4Is attractiveness objective?• Arguments for Objective Standard• High consensus across countries, race/ethnicities– Agree on attractiveness of faces and body types (F: hourglass; M: v-shaped)Objective standards?• Particular features are associated with attractiveness – F: large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small nose, wide smile– M: broad jaw, large eyes, prominent cheekbones, wide smileObjective standards?• Babies look longer at faces rated as attractive by adults. (less likely to be affected by cultural standards)Is attractiveness subjective?• Arguments for Subjective Standard• Cross-cultural differences in ways to look beautiful– Face painting, plastic surgery, scarring, piercings, etc.– Variations in preference for female body sizeSubjective?• Standards of beauty within a culture change over time– Marilyn Monroe versus Gwenyth PaltrowSubjective?• When we like people, we see them as more attractive.5Attractiveness Standards• Probably both universal and variable components of attractiveness• Overall, physical attractiveness predicts more positive evaluations (true in childhood and later in life)Why are physically attractive people liked more?• Aesthetic appeal. People and objects may be more rewarding when their appearance is pleasing. Why are physically attractive people liked more?• What is Beautiful is Good stereotype:The belief that physically attractive individuals possess other desirable characteristics (e.g., more sociable, outgoing, happier, assertive)– Fairy tales (Cinderella=beautiful; step-sisters = ugly, fat; Snow White)– Media (counterexample: Shrek)Physical attractiveness and self- fulfilling prophecy•Self- fulfilling prophecy: If we expect that a person has positive qualities, then we may act more favorably toward that person and, as a consequence, bring out positive qualities.Self- fulfilling prophecy• (Snyder, Tanke & Berscheid, 1977) • Men received “background” information about a woman they were about to talk with on a phone, info included a photo. Women received same info, but no photo.• IV: Photo of woman either attractive or unattractive• DVs: 1) Men’s expectations about the woman 2) Observers’ ratings of the woman’s behavior • Results: When men expected that the woman was______________, she was judged as _______, more ________, and more _______ than when men believed they were talking with an _________ woman. (self-fulfilling prophecy)It’s true for women too• Andersen and Bem (1981) replication– Women who saw photo of an attractive or unattractive man created a self- fulfilling prophecy.6Why are physically attractive people liked


View Full Document

UMass Amherst PSYCH 360 - Interpersonal Attraction

Download Interpersonal Attraction
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Interpersonal Attraction and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Interpersonal Attraction 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?