INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTION

1
CHAPTER 11

• INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTION

2
CHAPTER 11

• INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTIONDESIRE TO APPROACH
  ANOTHER PERSON.
• KNOWLEDGE ABOUT OTHERS THROUGH SOCIAL COMPARISON
  IS WHY PEOPLE AFFILIATE WITH OTHERS.
• SECOND REASON FOR AFFILIATION
• PSYCHOLOGICAL AND MATERIAL REWARDS THROUGH SOCIAL
  EXCHANGE.
• FIRST IS INFORMATION DEPENDENCE.
• SECOND IS OUTCOME DEPENDENCE.
• SOCIAL COMPARISONTHEORYPROPORSES THAT WE
  EVALUATE OUR THOUGHTS AND ACTIONS BY COMPARING
  THEM TO THOSE OF OTHERS (DEVELOPED BY FESTINGER)

3
CHAPTER 11

• SOCIAL COMPARISON INFORMATION IS USED TO EVALUATE
  THE SELF.
• CAUSED BY A STATE OF UNCERTAINTY REGARDING SOME
  PART OF THE SELF.
• FESTINGER SAYS THAT WE COMPARE OURSELVES WITH
  SIMILAR OTHERS.
• ONE REASON FOR AFFILIATION IS SOCIAL COMPARISON
• SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORYPROPOSES THAT PEOPLE WILL
  SEEK OUT AND MAINTAIN THOSE RELATIONSHIPS WHERE
  THE REWARDS EXCEED THE COSTS, AND WILL AVOID OR
  TERMINATE RELATIONSHIPS WHERE THE COSTS ARE
  GREATER THAN THE REWARDS.

4
CHAPTER 11

• THEORY ASSUMES THAT HUMANS SEEK TO MAXIMIZE
  PLEASURE AND MINIMIZE PAIN. THEY ARE
  HEDONISTIC.
• PEOPLE ARE ATTRACTED TO THOSE WHO CAN BEST REWARD
  THEM.
• (LO-2)
• SEEKING OUT OTHERS, MAKING FRIENDS, AND FORMING
  RELATIONSHIPS MAY HAVE A GENETIC BASIS.
• NEED FOR AFFILIATIONPERSONS DESIRE TO SEEK AND
  MAINTAIN MANY POSITIVE INTERPERSONAL
  RELATIONSHIPS
• NEED FOR INTIMACYPERSONS DESIRE FOR WARM,
  CLOSE COMMUNICATIVE RELATIONSHIPS.

5
CHAPTER 11

• THOSE WITH A HIGH NEED FOR AFFILIATION DO NOT
  WANT TO BE ALONE.
• THEY INTERACT BY SEEKING APPROVAL AND AVOIDING
  CONFLICT.
• AT WORKPREFER PARTNERS WHO ARE FRIENDS RATHER
  THAN EXPERTS PREFER FEEDBACK ON HOW THE GROUP IS
  GETTING ALONG.
• HIGH AFFILIATORS
• 1. LESS NEGATIVE ABOUT OTHERS
• 2. LESS COMPETITIVE
• HIGH NEED FOR INTIMACY
• 1. EMPHASIZE INTERPERSONAL OPENNESS
• 2. RECIPROCAL DIALOGUE
• 3. CONCERN FOR OTHERS
• COMPARED WITH LOW INTIMACY SEEKERS, HIGH NEED
  ARE WARM, TRUSTING, AND LIKELY TO CONFIDE IN
  OTHERS

6
CHAPTER 11

• NEED FOR AFFILIATION FOCUSES ON THE QUANTITY OF
  SOCIAL REWARDS.
• NEED FOR INTIMACY FOCUSES ON THE QUALITY OF CLOSE
  RELATIONSHIPS.
• HIGH AFFILIATES ARE NOT AS SENSITIVE TO FEELINGS
  OF OTHERS AS HIGH INTIMATES.
• HIGH INTIMATES ARE
• 1. WARM
• 2. SINCERE
• 3. APPRECIATIVE
• 4. LOVING
• NONE OF THESE TRAITS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH HIGH
  AFFILIATION NEEDS.

7
CHAPTER 11

• HIGH NEED FOR INTIMACY IS A BETTER PREDICTOR OF
  PSYCHOLSOCIAL ADJUSTMENT.
• COLLECTIVIST CULTURES HIGHER NEED FOR INTIMACY.
• INDIVIDUALIST CULTURESHIGHER NEED FOR
  AFFILIATION.
• (LO-3)
• PROXIMITYLOCATION RELATIVE TO ONE ANOTHER.
  EXPLAINS WHY WE CHOOSE CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS
  SOCIAL COMPANIONS. (FESTINGER).
• PROXIMITY ALSO DETERMINES FRIENDS AND ENEMIES.

8
CHAPTER 11

• FAMILIARITYFREQUENSY OF ACTUAL CONTACT WITH
  INDIVIDUALS.
• ZAJONCREPEATED EXPOSURE TO SOMETHING OR SOMEONE
  IS SUFFICIENT TOINCREASE ATTRACTION. CALLED
  MERE EXPOSURE HYPOTHESIS.
• FAMILIARITY LEADS TO LIKING.
• COULD BE CAUSED BY EVOLUTION. ANOTHER FACTOR
  COULD BE ANXIETY.
• ANXIOUS INDIVIDUALS MAY SEEK AFFILIATION WITH
  OTHERS AS A SOCIAL DISTRACTION.
• SCHACTER SHOWED THAT ANXIOUS INDIVIDUALS
  PREFERRED TO WAIT WITH OTHERS WHO WERE ANXIOUS.

9
CHAPTER 11

• PEOPLE WHO WILL FACE A FEARFUL EVENT MAY SEEK
  AFFILIATION WITH THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY
  EXPERIENCED THE FEARFUL EVENT. THEY ARE LOOKING
  FOR COGNITIVE CLARITY.
• EXAMPLES
• (LO-4)
• PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS STEREOTYPEBELIEF THAT
  PHYSICALLY ATTRACTIVE INDIVIDUALS POSSESS
  SOCIALLY DESIREABLE PERSONALITY TRAITS AND LEAD
  HAPPIER,MORE FULFILLING LIVES THAN LESS
  ATTRACTIVE OHTERS. (EXAMPLES). FOUND IN INFANTS
  AND CHILDREN.
• FACIAL ATTRACTIVNESS HAS BEEN FOUND TO HAVE AN
  EFFECT ON MENS STARTING SALARIES, AND ON WOMENS
  LATER SALARIES. (HOW?)
• SUCCESS ON THE JOB IS INFLUENCED BY PHYSICAL
  ATTRACTIVENESS STEREOTYPE.

10
CHAPTER 11

• ATTRACTIVE PEOPLE ARE FOUND TO BE MORE
  COMFORTABLE AND COMPETENT IN SOCIAL SETTINGS.
  (WHY?) THEY ARE LESS SOCIALLY ANXIOUS, MORE
  SOCIALLY SKILLED, AND LESS LONESOME.
• SOME RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THE PHYSICAL
  ATTRACTIVENESS STEREOTYPE FALSE??????
• ANTHROPOLOGISTS HAVE NOT FOUND ANY UNIVERSAL
  STANDARDS OF BEAUTY. THEY DID FIND THAT MEN
  PLACE GREATER VALUE ON PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS,
  REGARDLESS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION.(HOW AND WHY?)
• SOCIOBIOLOGISTS BELIEVE THERE MAY BE UNIVERSAL
  STANDARDS OF FACIAL ATTRACTIVENESS.
• THEY INDICATE GOOD HEALTH AND YOUTH.
• IN AMERICA FEMALE ATTRACTIVENESS WAS ENHANCED BY
  IMMATURE FACIAL FEATURES.

11
CHAPTER 11

• MALE ATTRACTIVENESS INCREASED WITH FACIAL
  FEATURES THAT WERE MATURE AND RELATED TO SOCIAL
  DOMINANCE. (EXAMPLES)
• IMMATURE FEATURES ARE PERCEIVED AS WEAKER, LESS
  COMINANT, AND LESS INTELLIGENT THAN THE AVERAGE
  ADULT.
• THIS PUTS WOMEN IN A DOUBLE BIND.
• BODY ESTEEMPERSONS ATTITUDES TOWARD HIS OR HER
  BODY.
• PHYSICAL SELF-SATISFACTION BY WOMEN IS MADE
  DIFFICULT BY OUR CULTURES FOCUS ON THE FEMALE
  BODY AS AN AESTHETIC OBJECT. (HOW?)

12
CHAPTER 11

• THIS PHYSICAL DISSATISFACTION INCREASES OVER
  TIME.
• SOCIAL PHYSIQUE ANXIETYOTHERS OBSERVING OR
  EVALUATING THEIR BODIES.
• THE MOST VULNERABLE WOMEN ARE THOSE WITH A
  TRADITIONAL GENDER ROLE.
• ANDROGYNOUS WOMEN ARE LESS VULNERABLE.
• THE MASCULINE IDEAL IS THE BODY AS PROCESS. THE
  BODY IS A DYNAMIC INSTRUMENT USED TO ACCOMPLISH
  TASKS IN THE WORLD.
• SOMETIMES WE ARE JUDGED BY THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF
  THE PERSON WE ARE WITH.
• SAME SEX PAIRS WITH ONE OF AVERAGE ATTRACITVENESS
  SEEMS MORE ATTRACTIVE BY BEING WITH SOMEONE WHO
  IS VERY ATTRACTIVE.
• DIFFEENT SEX PAIRS IF MEN ARE WITH ATTRACTIVE
  WOMEN, MEN ARE SEEN AS MORE ATTRATIVE.

13
CHAPTER 11

• THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF WOMEN IS NOT AFFECTED BY
  THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF THEIR MALE PARTNERS.
• A PERSON WILL BE JUDGED AS MORE ATTRACTIVE AFTER
  A VIEWER HAS SEEN SOMEONE WHO IS LESS ATTRACTIVE,
  AND LESS ATTRACTIVE AFTER A VIEWER HAS SEEN
  SOMEONE MORE ATTRACTIVE.
• STRONG IN MALE VIEWERS.
• (LO-5)
• SIMILARITY IS IMPORTANT IN ATTRACTION, EVEN IN
  DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES SUCH AS
• GENDER
• ETHNIC BACKGROUND
• RELIGION
• SOCIAL CLASS
• AGE
• ATTRACTION AMONG WOMEN IS PREDICTED BY SHARING
  COMMON VALUES. MEN, BY SHARED ACTIVITIES.

14
CHAPTER 11

• MATCHING HYPOTHESISPEOPLE ARE ATTRACTED TO
  OTHERS WHOARE SIMILAR TO THEM IN PARTICULAR
  CHARACTERISTICS SUCH AS ATTITUDES AND PHYSICAL
  ATTRACTIVENESS.
• WHY WE ARE ATTRACTED TO SIMILAR OTHERS
• 1. NEED FOR SELF-VALIDATION THROUGH SOCIAL
  COMPARISON.
• 2. EVOLUTION-BASED FACTORSMAY LIKE WHAT IS
  FAMILIAR.
• BALANCE THEORYPEOPLE DESIRE COGNITIVE
  CONSISTENCY IN THEIR THOUGHTS, FEELINGS AND
  SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS. (FRITZ HEIDER)
• IF BOTH INDIVIDUALS LIKE OR DISLIKE THE SAME
  THING, THERE IS BALANCE

15
CHAPTER 11

• CAN REDUCE IMBALANCE BY REDUCING THE IMPORTANCE
  OF WHAT THEY DISAGREE ABOUT.
• BALANCE CAN BE ACEIVED BY REDUCING THE COMMON
  RELEVANCE.
• (L0-)
• COMPLEMENTIARITYPEOPLE WITH OPPOSITE TRAITS ARE
  ATTRACTED TO EACH OTHER. ALSO, COMPATIBLE FIT
  BETWEEN DIFFERENCES.
• MATING RELATIONSHIPS
• 1. LOOKS-FOR-STATUS EXCHANGE (SOCIOBIOLGICAL)
• 2. RECIPROCITYWE WILL LIKE SOMEONE WHO LIKES US
  (SOCIOCULTURAL)

16
CHAPTER 11

• SOCIAL ANXIETYUNPLEASANT EMOTION FELT BY THE
  CONCERN WITH INTERPERSONAL EVALUATION.
• CAN BE AROUSED BY THE ATICIPATION OF SOCIAL
  INTERACITON.
• ALSO KNOWN AS SOCIAL ANXIOUSNESS
• (LO-7)