Lecture7-Attraction-2023-Student.pptx

INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Types of relationships Physical attractiveness  Communal vs. exchange  Relational models theory  Consequences Propinquity  As affected by functional distance  Availability  Anticipating interaction  Mere exposure Similarity  Interests, demographic, physical,...

INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Types of relationships Physical attractiveness  Communal vs. exchange  Relational models theory  Consequences Propinquity  As affected by functional distance  Availability  Anticipating interaction  Mere exposure Similarity  Interests, demographic, physical, personality characteristics     Belief validation Smooth interactions Expectancy of liking Qualities that we like  Halo effect  Beauty is more than skin deep  Self-fulfilling prophecy  People judge a book by its cover  Antecedents  Immediacy  Prestige (market-value hypothesis)  Biology  Excitation transfer EXCHANGE AND COMMUNAL RELATIONSHIPS market pricing equality matching authority ranking communal sharing RELATIONAL MODELS THEORY INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Types of relationships Physical attractiveness  Communal vs. exchange  Relational models theory  Consequences Propinquity  As affected by functional distance  Availability  Anticipating interaction  Mere exposure Similarity  Interests, demographic, physical, personality characteristics     Belief validation Smooth interactions Expectancy of liking Qualities that we like  Halo effect  Beauty is more than skin deep  Self-fulfilling prophecy  People judge a book by its cover  Antecedents  Immediacy  Prestige (market-value hypothesis)  Biology  Excitation transfer PROPINQUITY (PHYSICAL PROXIMITY) Westwood West Study (Festinger, Schachter, & Back, 1950)  used a Sociometric Survey  a survey that attempts to measure the interpersonal relationships in a group of people  measured Functional Distance  an architectural layout’s propensity to encourage or inhibit certain activities, like contact between people Residents in which rooms are more likely to be friends? 1 & 6 2 & 7 4 & 9 5 & 10 Residents in which room are likely to have more friends? 1 2 3 4 5 EXPLANATIONS OF PROPINQUITY EFFECTS Availability and Propinquity  Proximity encourages “passive” contacts Anticipating Interaction  Knowing that we are going to interact with someone makes us like that person more  Cognitive dissonance pressures to like those with whom we must associate The Mere Exposure Effect  Repeated exposure leads to greater liking FAMILIARITY Liking Participants were shown photos of different faces. The number of times each face was seen was varied. The more people saw a face, the more they liked it (Zajonc, 1968). 0 1 2 5 10 25 Frequency TAYLOR, 2006, PRENTICE HALL 8 LIMITS TO MERE EXPOSURE Pre-existing conflicts get intensified Initial stimulus +ve optimal level of exposure INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Types of relationships Physical attractiveness  Communal vs. exchange  Relational models theory  Consequences Propinquity  As affected by functional distance  Availability  Anticipating interaction  Mere exposure Similarity  Interests, demographic, physical, personality characteristics     Belief validation Smooth interactions Expectancy of liking Qualities that we like  Halo effect  Beauty is more than skin deep  Self-fulfilling prophecy  People judge a book by its cover  Antecedents  Immediacy  Prestige (market-value hypothesis)  Biology  Excitation transfer SIMILARITY Belief validation Smooth interactions Expectancy of liking Qualities that we like Ornithologist 鳥類學者 INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Types of relationships Physical attractiveness  Communal vs. exchange  Relational models theory  Consequences Propinquity  As affected by functional distance  Availability  Anticipating interaction  Mere exposure Similarity  Interests, demographic, physical, personality characteristics     Belief validation Smooth interactions Expectancy of liking Qualities that we like  Halo effect  Beauty is more than skin deep  Self-fulfilling prophecy  People judge a book by its cover  Antecedents  Immediacy  Prestige (market-value hypothesis)  Biology  Excitation transfer CONSEQUENCES OF PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS Halo effect  Beauty is more than skin deep Self-fulfilling prophecy  People judge a book by its cover “BEAUTY IS ONLY SKIN DEEP”? Beauty is more than just skin-deep  For both adults and children, attractiveness is strongly related to popularity, and to success for adults.  Attractiveness is moderately related to both intelligence/performance and adjustment in children and to both dating and sexual experience in adults. Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review (Langlois et al. 2000) Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review (Langlois et al. 2000) Attractiv e people do better in life “NEVER JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER”? People do judge and treat others with whom they interact based on attractiveness  For children, attractiveness had the largest effect on evaluations of competence, followed by negative interaction, and positive interaction.  Attractive adults were also treated significantly more favorably than unattractive adults were. Attractiveness had the largest effect on attention, followed by reward, positive interaction, positive impression management, negative interaction, and help-giving/cooperation.  Contrary to popular belief, attractiveness effects extend beyond mere “opinions” of others and permeate actual Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review (Langlois et al. 2000) actions towards others, even though people may not be Table 7 Meta-Analyses of Treatment From: Langlois: Psychol Bull, Volume 126(3).May 2000.390–423 Attractiv e people receive better treatme nt by others “BEAUTY IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER”? Beauty is more than just in the eye of the beholder  The meta-analysis of effective reliability coefficients revealed that judges showed high and significant levels of agreement when evaluating the attractiveness of others. Overall, for adult raters, r = .90 for ratings of adults and r = .85 for ratings of children, both ps < .05 (see Table 3). Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review (Langlois et al. 2000) Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review (Langlois et al. 2000) Attractivene ss are similarly perceived across different groups ANTECEDENTS OF ATTRACTIVENESS Immediacy Biology  Cross-cultural agreement on what is attractive  Beauty is more than just in the eye of the beholder  Reproductive fitness Prestige (market-value hypothesis) FEATURES OF FACIAL ATTRACTIVENESS (RHODES, SUMICH, & BYATT, 1999) Stimuli  B&W photographs of 24 young men and women  For each photograph identified 120 landmark points  A computer program interpolated 3 additional points between each pair of points on a contour  The average configuration of these 656 points from 24 men (women) formed the “average” male (female) composite  An average face was created by warping individual face onto the corresponding sex average composite  High (low) -average face created by moving each point of individual face towards (away) the average composite. Procedure  Presented 3 (low-, normal-, high-average-ness) * 24 + 3 (average composite) pictures in randomized and counter-balanced orders  Rated on “average-ness”, “symmetry”, and “expression” Male and female average face. Each is a composite of 24 faces. RESULTS https://realdoctorstu.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/facial-averages.png The average male face was more attractive than any one individual male face The average female face was more attractive than all but one individual female face Although symmetry and average-ness was correlated, the effect of average-ness remained significant when the effects of symmetry and expression were partialled out. The attractiveness of average facial configuration cannot be attributed solely to their symmetry http://www.scientificamerican.com/slideshow/illusions-whats-in-a-face/ 28 CONTRAST AND ILLUSION OF SEX The two side-by-side faces are perceived as male (right) and female (left). However, both of them are versions of the same androgynous face. The two images are exactly identical, except that the contrast between the eyes and mouth and the rest of the face is higher for the face on the left than for the face on the right. This illusion shows that contrast is an important cue for determining the sex of a face, with lowcontrast faces appearing male and high-contrast faces appearing female. And it may also explain why females in http://www.scientificamerican.com/slideshow/illusions-whats-in-a-face/ many cultures darken their eyes and mouths with make-up. A made-up face 29 INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Types of relationships Physical attractiveness  Communal vs. exchange  Relational models theory  Consequences Propinquity  As affected by functional distance  Availability  Anticipating interaction  Mere exposure Similarity  Interests, demographic, physical, personality characteristics     Belief validation Smooth interactions Expectancy of liking Qualities that we like  Halo effect  Beauty is more than skin deep  Self-fulfilling prophecy  People judge a book by its cover  Antecedents  Immediacy  Prestige (market-value hypothesis)  Biology  Excitation transfer http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10878892/Hungry-men-crave-bigger-women- Hungry ratings Satiated ratings kg/m2 A BMI below 18.5 underweight. A BMI of 18.5 to 24.9 healthy. A BMI of 25 to 29.9 Hungry Satiated EXCITATION TRANSFER THEORY Physiological arousal can often be labeled (attributed) in different ways and can be transferred to and intensify unrelated emotional reactions EXCITATION TRANSFER THEORY 2 min vs. 15 sec Experiment on ETT  People mislabeled their physiological arousal (due to exercise) to the arousal induced by physical (un)attractiveness towards the others resulting in intensified reactions White, G. L., Fishbein, S., & Rutstein, J. (1981). Passionate love: The misattribution of arousal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 56-62 White, G. L., Fishbein, S., & Rutstein, J. (1981). Passionate love: The misattribution of arousal. Journal of Personality and EXCITATION TRANSFER THEORY Trait: likable, sympathetic, sincere, … Romantic attractiion: physically attractive, sexy, like to date her, like to kiss her General attraction: similar they were to her, like to work with er, could get along with her, … Dressed up, made attractive, or not? INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP Types of relationships Physical attractiveness  Communal vs. exchange  Relational models theory  Consequences Propinquity  As affected by functional distance  Availability  Anticipating interaction  Mere exposure Similarity  Interests, demographic, physical, personality characteristics     Belief validation Smooth interactions Expectancy of liking Qualities that we like  Halo effect  Beauty is more than skin deep  Self-fulfilling prophecy  People judge a book by its cover  Antecedents  Immediacy  Prestige (market-value hypothesis)  Biology  Excitation transfer