HDF 337 1st EditionExam # 1 Study Guide Lectures: 1 - 8Note: The information included in this study guide is chosen based on the study guide the class was provided by the professor. Please use this asa supplement to your class notes and readings. The topics written in red italics are included in the professor’s study guide. Additionally, the exam will cover both material covered in class as well as from the assigned readings. I answer the study guide questions using information from both lecture and the readings and will include the page numbers where you can find the information next to each question in blue.INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY (CHAPTERS 1 & 2)Lecture 1 (January 20)1. Define Interdependence. (p. 3; 8)A state in which the actions of person P affect the outcomes of person O at the same time that the actions of person O affect the outcomes of person P; the defining feature of any relationship. In other words, the mutual influence that two people have over one another (the partners’ behaviors affect each other).2a. How do close/intimate relationships impact our physical health? (e.g., cold study, blister study, etc.)? (p. 24)Cold Virus Study: People who are socially isolated are 4.2 times more likely to develop a cold than those who are not; People experiencing unresolved conflicts in their intimate relationships are more vulnerable to catching a common cold after being exposed to an experimentally administered virus.Blister Study (Hostile Marital Interactions and Wound Healing Study): Researchers recruited married couples to spend the night in a hospital and gave them small, experimentally created blisters on the skin.Couples who exhibited fewer hostile behaviors, their blisters healed 40% faster. The blisters head more slowly among people who are in hostile intimate relationships because conflict reduces the amount of cytokines (chemical messengers that respond to various threat to our health; low cytokine levels are thought to reflect the body’s weakened ability to mount an immune response to the wound) present at the wound site. Meta-Analysis Study: Which is the most strongly linked to survival/mortality? What factors had the biggest effect with figuring out who was alive or dead after 7 years? Individuals with adequate social relationships have a 50% greater likelihood of survival compared to those with poor or insufficient social relationships. The magnitude of this effect is comparable with quitting smoking and exceeds many well-known risk factors of mortality (i.e., obesity, physical inactivity).Additionally: People who were in better relationships lived longer following a heart attack than did those in relatively poor relationships; recovery from breast cancer is markedly slower among women in distressed relationships; cardiovascular, endocrine, and immune functioning are all affected by observed levels of conflict and hostility in intimate relationships.Perhaps because of the links between intimacy and health, married people live longer lives than unmarried people do, particularly when their relationships are rewarding.2b. How do close/intimate relationships impact our mental health (e.g., MRI threat study, happiness studies)? (p. 9; 22)MRI Threat Study: Every time the participant sees an X there is a 20% chance of them being shocked (and they know this); every time the participant sees an O there is 0% chance of them being shocked (they know this as well). Researchers tested three conditions: 1) the participant not holding anyone’s hand, 2) the participant holding his/her partner’s hand, and 3) the participant holding the hand of a stranger. When women held their husband’s hand, the regions of the brain known to respond to threats that people perceive in their environments became less active (threat response was reduced) as compared to when they were holding the hand of a stranger or not holding anyone’s hand at all. This benefit appeared to be the greatest for women in happy marriages/strong relationships.Study of married people and very similar people who remained single showed that depression and alcohol use among married and single people decreased over a period of 7 years, but for married people, these factors decline more quickly. Additionally, people who cohabit experience higher levels of depression and lower levels of relationship quality, compared to similar people who marry instead.Study of couples therapy: unhappy couples can be randomly assigned to experiences designed to improve relationships. When couples therapy is effective in improving relationship quality, it also reduce depression.*People name marriage and family as the major sources of their overall life satisfaction; bad relationships are a leading cause of depression and the number one reason why people in America seek therapy.2c. Know both the positive and negative effects of relationships on our well-being. (p. 19; 23)Our subjective well being (how happy we are generally in life) is linked with various aspects of our intimate relationships, including relationship status, relationship quality and relationship transitions. People who are in good relationships have more money, more sex, and better health and they are thus happier with their lives.3a. What is the need to belong?The need to belong is a powerful fundamental human motivation. We strive to form relationships that 1)provide frequent and pleasant interactions and 2) take place in context of a stable and enduring concern for one another.3b. What does research on ostracism tell us about the need to belong?If the need to belong is a fundamental human drive, then we should be extremely sensitive to rejection. How little does it take to get upset when someone rejects you: Ostracism – Cyberball studies.Original study: following being excluding during the cyberball game, the ostracized people reported higher emotional distress and lower levels of self-esteem and meaningful existence.KKK cyberball study: participants were in one of three conditions, being ostracized or not by 1) in-group, 2) rival out-group, or 3) despised out-group. The ostracized person reported significantly lower levels of belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence than those who were included, regardless of what group membership the other Cyberball players had  source of ostracism doesn’t matter!Computer Malfunction Study: The person being ostracized was then told that the computer malfunctioned and was not supposed to exclude