PYC1502 Study Unit 4-1 PDF

PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 Unit 4: Interpersonal Psychology Learning objectives understand interpersonal communication and process models thereof. develop knowledge on interpersonal dynamics of...

PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 Unit 4: Interpersonal Psychology Learning objectives understand interpersonal communication and process models thereof. develop knowledge on interpersonal dynamics of overt and covert behaviour. understand the nature of prosocial and aggressive behaviour. understand human relationships and causes of interpersonal attraction. 4.1 Introduction Human relationships form the essence of our being. We define ourselves in terms of the context we find ourselves in, the social groups we belong to and the relationships we have with others (Brewer & Gardner, 1996). Naturally, human beings do not exist in isolation but rather live in a space occupied by others with whom they have some relations. In this learning unit we will focus on important aspects of human relations which include; interpersonal communication as a medium through which relationships are formed and negotiated, and interpersonal dynamics of overt and covert human behaviour. We will also focus on human relationships and specific types of interpersonal relationships we have with other individuals in our social contexts. 4.2 Interpersonal communication In order to understand interpersonal communication, we must understand how interpersonal communication functions to meet our needs and goals and how our interpersonal communication connects to larger social and cultural systems. Interpersonal communication is the process of exchanging messages between people whose lives mutually influence one another in unique ways in relation to social and cultural norms. This definition highlights the fact that interpersonal communication involves two or more people who are interdependent to some degree and who build a unique bond based on the larger social and cultural contexts to which they belong. To understand interpersonal communication, scholars proposed models through which we can understand the components of communication. We discuss the models in the following section. 4.2.1 Basic process models of communication Imagine you are learning how to build your own mobile cell phone. You are familiar with how to use a mobile cell phone and on a functional level you understand how cell phones work. Have you ever taken the time to examine and learn the process of computing to understand the series of actions necessary to make cell phones work? One can imagine that it is a Open Rubric PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 complex process requiring advanced skills but once completed, it becomes easy to use the device. In the same way, understanding the fundamentals of communication is complex and takes some time but once learned, it becomes easy to use communication techniques to interact and communicate with others. Learning about the communication process is like learning about any other process. We are familiar with different ways we communicate through channels like the spoken word or text messaging. What are some of the processes that shape communication? How can we understand these processes to become more competent communicators? Understanding interpersonal communication is enhanced by internalising processes of interaction. To continue this process, we turn to interaction models that shed light on the unique phenomena involved in human communication. The basic process models covered in this learning unit do not include every model but focus on important models pertinent to grasping communication. These are discussed in detail below. 4.2.1.1 Transmission model The transmission model of communication focuses on the transportation of messages from one communicator to another to disseminate knowledge over space (Sapienza, et. al., 2016). Transmission model is focused on communication as a linear process where the sender is projecting a message to a target without much consideration to ongoing process or feedback loops as described in other models. Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver developed a basic transmission model of communication that serves as a foundational tool to understanding the communication process (Shannon & Weaver, 1949). The Shannon and Weaver model breaks communication down into five parts - Sender, Encoder, Channel, Decoder, Receiver (see figure 3.1 below). Figure 3.1: Shannon-Weaver’s Model of Communication. Image retrieved from https://socialsci.libretexts.org/ The sender is the original information source of the message. Encoder refers to the transmitter that converts the message into signals. Channel is the means by which the message is conveyed. Decoder is the location of the signal that converts the message. Receiver is the intended target of the message. As a message passes from sender to receiver, it can be impeded by noise, which can alter or distort the message meant for the receiver. PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 For example, let’s say that Blake is a chemistry professor who is explaining the periodic table in class. Blake would represent the sender or information source. Blake’s means of encoding or transmitting would be his brain converting the ideas into a message. The channel professor Blake is using is their voice accompanied by writing a diagram on the board. The decoders would be the ears and eyes of the students in the class. The receivers or destinations are the brains of the students. In this chemistry class there is an abundance of noise that is inhibiting the transmission of the message that Professor Blake is sending. Jamie and Dakota are mischievous class clown types who are intent on derailing the learning experience by making various animal noises at their lab station. Alex is more interested in watching YouTube videos on his phone with one headphone earbud in and one out, pretending to be listening to Professor Blake’s message. Meanwhile, Jordan who is desperately attempting to learn chemistry is internally enraged at the inattentive classmates and periodically sneers and makes gestures imploring others to be silent. Another example, in mass mediated communication, messages are encoded into various channels. In a State of the Nation address, the President of South Africa has a target audience- the South African public. The President and his team craft the speech over a period to be delivered in parliament and broadcast live to a television audience. This speech will be simultaneously broadcast through radio and internet channels. The second example as described above differs from the first example with immediate interpersonal context of transaction because it is not as dependent on immediate feedback. Yes, people will respond in real time through discussions and social media posts. However, this has no impact on the original message created as it was designed as a one-way communication event. How the President’s message is interpreted will differ significantly due to subjective interpretations based on identity. In addition, the message prepared by the president will not be influenced in anyway because it is a one-way communication and therefore all the structures of communication may not be applicable. Understanding the differences in structures of communication helps us in our interactions with others and prepares us to decode and comprehend messages accordingly. Now that we have briefly discussed the Shannon and Weaver model, we will turn to Berlo’s adaptation of the Shannon and Weaver model. 4.2.1.2 Berlo’s SMCR Model David Berlo expanded the Shannon and Weaver model to more accurately reflect the communication process (Turaga, 2016). Berlo’s model is divided into four basic components: source, message, and channel and receiver. In each pillar of Berlo’s model are sub-categories that describe the interaction process in greater detail (see figure 3.2 below). PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 Figure 3.2: Berlo’s SMCR Model of Communication. Image retrieved from https://socialsci.libretexts.org/ Source According to Berlo’s model, the source is the origin of the message. Source can also be analogous to sender as the messenger provides the initial context of the interaction. The source must have basic communication skills such as reading, speaking and listening to be an effective communicator. In addition, the attitude of the sender is important in developing a relationship with the audience. The sender must also be knowledgeable regarding the subject matter she/he is discussing. Inherent in every message are the social systems (i.e., values, beliefs, religion) the sender is immersed in, which impacts the rhetorical choices the sender makes. Culture also influences the sender’s message as messages can be interpreted differently depending on an individual’s cultural background. For example, in some cultures, eye contact is prohibited when talking to elders. This means in order for the source to convey a message clearly, the sender also needs to be mindful of the cultural aspects so that the message can be received successfully. Message The first element to consider in a message is content. What is included in the message from beginning to end? A message consists of elements, treatment, structure and a code. Elements are additional aspects such as gestures and signs, that accompany the transmission of the message, whereas treatment is the way the message is sent, similar to gift wrapping of a present where the message itself is wrapped inside the treatment. The structure refers to the framework of the message or how the message is constructed, and the code refers to form, i.e. text or language that the message is conveyed in. Channel PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 Similar to the Shannon and Weaver model, channel refers to the medium in which the message is delivered. In order for the message to be received it must be perceived by one or more of the five senses: sight, hearing, smell, touch or taste. Most often, messages are conveyed through sight and sound but non-verbal elements such as touch, taste or smell can also convey meaning, as any chef or dancer will tell you. Receiver A Receiver is the person, destination or decoder of the message. In other words, whom the message is intended for. As we discussed with the sender, attitude, knowledge, social systems and culture must be considered in understanding how this process works. The receiver needs to understand the context and cultural dynamics in order to comprehend the message being conveyed to them. 4.2.1.3 Transactional model The transactional model of communication is a more simplified model for understanding the communication process. Developed by Dean Barnlund (2008), the transactional model can be understood as a circular model of communication, more focused on the simultaneous interaction of participants than a linear process (See figure 3.3 below). Both sender and receiver are continually affected by the messages being sent and received back and forth. The transactional model reflects an exchange of ideas, meaning and feelings. Similar to a relationship between a business owner and a client, communication depends on the giving and receiving of information or content. Figure 3.3: Transactional Model of Communication. Image retrieved from https://socialsci.libretexts.org/ Tebogo is a counselling psychologist. Her client, Mikhali has relationship problems and decided to consult the psychologist to help him understand the challenges he is going though PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 in his relationship. Although the counselling session started well, there seems to be a problem because Mikhali is not willing to disclose or answer some of the questions asked by Tebogo because he does not want to appear as the cause of the problems in his relationship. The unwillingness to answer some questions makes it difficult for Tebogo to help Mikhali. In this situation, both Tebogo and Mikhali are dependent on each other to reach the desired outcome. They both have different goals. While Tebogo wants to do the job properly and ensure that Mikhali has a better understanding of how his relationship challenges came about, Mikhali is however reluctant to disclose information. For the session to be successful, the communication between Tebogo and Mikhali has to be bidirectional and both have to be in a position to respond to each other’s questions. However, in this case, the transaction of communication is impeded because there is no feedback from the receiver (Mikhali). The transactional model of communication emphasises the role of feedback and the ongoing negotiation between participants in an interpersonal context. Therefore, according to the model, communication can only be successful if both participants (sender and receiver) contribute equally in the communication. GROUP ACTIVITY Activity 1: In a discussion on myUnisa with your e-tutor and peers, reflect on the process models of communication and provide an in-depth discussion on the difference between the transmission model and transactional model of communication. NB: Please note that it is compulsory for you to have this discussion on myUnisa. We have covered three types of models of communication to understand how communication interactions work. Our everyday interactions are shaped by a variety of factors that can alter the meaning or understanding of content. Often, the same message can be understood more effectively by changing the code or channel in which it is presented. By learning process models, we can more effectively encode and decode messaging to become more competent communicators. In the link below watch this animated video about Barnlund’s Transactional Model. How does it compare and contrast with the other models of communication? (Note: video not for assessment purposes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrFXNRzfJKU 4.3 Interpersonal dynamics The interpersonal dynamics of human behaviour entail aspects of observable and hidden behaviour. There are behaviours that can be observed from ourselves or others, and there are behaviours that remain hidden and only appear in a form of defence mechanisms. The role of psychology is to operationalise and manifest human behaviour so that we have a better understanding of ourselves and those around us. In this section we discuss aspects of human behaviour, in particular, overt and covert behaviour. We will discuss prosocial and aggressive behaviour as well as the underlying causes of these behaviours. PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 4.3.1 Overt and covert behaviour In our interactions with others, we tend to come across behaviours that are observable and sometimes hidden. Some people are ‘open’ and some ‘not so open’. That is, some people are explicit in terms of their behaviour whereas others are implicit in their behaviour or actions. Not all explicit and implicit behaviour is expressed consciously, sometimes we are unaware of our behaviours or the behaviours we express to others. Behaviours that are observable are referred to as overt, whereas underlying or hidden behaviours are referred to as covert behaviours. Our behaviours can reveal some aspects of our personality. Our personality, in turn, can give us some idea on how we are likely to conduct ourselves in our interactions with others. Karen Horney (cited in Van Deventer & Mojapelo-Batka, 2013) revealed three pattens underlying individual interactions. These are: moving towards people, moving against people and moving from people. Moving towards people Moving toward people, also known as the compliant personality, incorporates needs for affection and approval, and a special need for a partner who will fulfil all of one’s expectations of life. These needs are characteristic of neurotic trends: they are compulsive, indiscriminate, and they generate anxiety when they are frustrated. In addition, they operate independently of one’s feelings toward or value of the person who is the object of those needs (Horney, 1945). In order to ensure the continued support of others, the compliant individual will do almost anything to maintain relationships, but they give themselves over so completely that they may enjoy nothing for themselves. They begin to feel weak and helpless, and they subordinate themselves to others, thinking that everyone is smarter, more attractive, and more worthwhile than they are. They rate themselves by the opinions of others, so much so that any rejection can be catastrophic. Love becomes the most compulsive desire, but their lack of self- esteem makes true love difficult. Accordingly, sexual relations become a substitute for love, as well as the “evidence” that they are loved and desired. Moving against people Those who move against people, the aggressive personality, are driven by a need to control others. They view the world in a Darwinian sense, a world dominated by survival of the fittest, where the strong annihilate the weak. The aggressive person may seem polite and fair- minded, but it is mostly a front, put up in order to facilitate their own goals. They may be openly aggressive, or they may choose to manipulate others indirectly, sometimes preferring to be the power behind the throne. Love, which is such a desperate need for the compliant person, is of little consequence for the aggressive person. They may very well be “in love,” and they may marry, but they are more concerned in what they can get out of the relationship. They tend to choose mates for their attractiveness, prestige, or wealth. What is most important is how their mate can enhance their own social position. They are keen competitors, looking for any evidence of weakness or ambition in others. Unfortunately, they also tend to suppress emotion in their lives, making it difficult, if not impossible, to enjoy life. Moving away from people Those who move away from people, the detached personality, are not merely seeking meaningful solitude. Instead, they are driven to avoid other people because of the unbearable strain of associating with others. In addition, they are estranged from themselves, they do not know who they are, or what they love, desire, value, or believe. Horney described them as ‘zombies’, able to work and function like living people, but there is no life in them. A crucial PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 element appears to be their desire to put emotional distance between themselves and others. They become very self-sufficient and private. Since these individuals seek negative goals, not to be involved, not to need help, not to be bothered, as opposed to having clear goals (needing a loving partner or needing to control others) their behaviour is more subject to variability, but the focus remains on being detached from others in order to avoid facing the conflicts within their psyche (Horney, 1945). In the following section we will focus on prosocial, aggressive behaviour and interpersonal attraction as observable or overt behaviours in interpersonal relations. 4.3.2 Prosocial, aggressive behaviour and interpersonal attraction Overt behaviour in interpersonal interactions can take place in a form of prosocial and aggressive behaviour. According to Van Deventer and Mojapelo-Batka (2013), prosocial behaviour is one in which another individual benefits from other people’s action, whereas aggressive behaviour refers to the one which has the intentions to cause harm to the other person. 4.3.2.1 Prosocial behaviour People often act to benefit other people, and these acts are examples of prosocial behaviour. Such behaviours may come in many guises: helping an individual in need; sharing personal resources; volunteering time, effort, and expertise; cooperating with others to achieve some common goals. Although people are often in need, help is not always given. Why not? The decision of whether or not to help is not as simple and straightforward as it might seem, and many factors need to be considered by those who might help. Social psychologists began trying to answer this question following the unfortunate murder of Kitty Genovese in 1964 (Dovidio, Piliavin, Schroeder, & Penner, 2006; Penner, Dovidio, Piliavin, & Schroeder, 2005). A knife-wielding assailant attacked Kitty repeatedly as she was returning to her apartment early one morning. At least 38 people may have been aware of the attack, but no one came to save her. Similarly, we have recently noted a recent surge of random mugging incidents across different cities in South Africa, particularly in the city of Johannesburg where people are violently dispossessed of their personal belongings. More shockingly is that some of these incidents happen during the day with a number of people witnessing the events but making no attempt to help the victims, maybe due to fears of becoming victims as well. Sometimes bystanders take the pleasure in recording cell phone footages of the incidents. Unfortunately, failures to come to the aid of someone in need are not unique, help is not always forthcoming for those who may need it the most. To answer the question regarding when people help, researchers have focused on 1. how bystanders come to define emergencies, 2. when they decide to take responsibility for helping, and 3. how the costs and benefits of intervening affect their decisions of whether to help. Defining the situation: The role of pluralistic ignorance The decision to help is not a simple yes/no proposition. In fact, a series of questions must be addressed before help is given—even in emergencies in which time may be of the essence. Sometimes help comes quickly sometimes not. Some situations are ambiguous, and potential PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 helpers may have to decide whether a situation is one in which help, in fact, needs to be given or not. To define ambiguous situations (including many emergencies), potential helpers may look to the action of others to decide what should be done. But those others are looking around too, also trying to figure out what to do. Everyone is looking, but no one is acting! Relying on others to define the situation and to then erroneously conclude that no intervention is necessary when help is actually needed is called pluralistic ignorance (Latané & Darley, 1970). When people use the inactions of others to define their own course of action, the resulting pluralistic ignorance leads to less help being given. Do I have to be the one to help?: Diffusion of responsibility Figure 3.4: How does being in a crowd decrease someone’s chance of being helped? How does being in a crowd increase someone’s chance of being helped? [Image: flowcomm, https://goo.gl/tiRPch, CC BY 2.0, goo.gl/BRvSA7] Simply being with others may facilitate or inhibit whether we get involved in other ways as well. In situations in which help is needed, the presence or absence of others may affect whether a bystander will assume personal responsibility to give the assistance. If the bystander is alone, personal responsibility to help falls solely on the shoulders of that person. But what if others are present? Although it might seem that having more potential helpers around would increase the chances of the victim getting help, the opposite is often the case. Knowing that someone else could help seems to relieve bystanders of personal responsibility, so bystanders do not intervene. This phenomenon is known as diffusion of responsibility (Darley & Latané, 1968, see Hopper, 2020). PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 The costs and rewards of helping The nature of the help needed plays a crucial role in determining what happens next. Specifically, potential helpers engage in a cost–benefit analysis before getting involved (Dovidio et al., 2006). If the needed help is of relatively low cost in terms of time, money, resources, or risk, then help is more likely to be given. It's simple to lend a pencil to a classmate; confronting a group of armed men to rescue someone being mugged is a different story; intervening may cost the life of the helper. The potential rewards of assisting someone will also be considered, potentially offsetting the cost of assisting. A thanks or expression of gratitude from the recipient of help may be a sufficient reward. If helpful acts are recognised by others, helpers may receive social rewards of praise or monetary rewards. Even avoiding feelings of guilt if one does not help may be considered a benefit. Potential helpers consider how much helping will cost and compare those costs to the rewards that might be realised; it is the economics of helping. If costs outweigh the rewards, helping is less likely. If rewards are greater than cost, helping is more likely. Engaging in prosocial behaviour may be costly. There are a variety of explanations for the occurrence of prosocial behaviour, and table 1 below summarises some of the factors that are known to increase helping. Table 1: Some of the factors known to increase helping Positive moods We help more when we are in a good mood (Guéguen & De Gail, 2003). Similarity We help people who we see as similar to us, for instance, those who mimic our behaviours (van Baaren, Holland, Kawakami, & van Knippenberg, 2004). Guilt If we are experiencing guilt, we may help relieve those negative feelings Empathy We help more when we feel empathy for the other person (Batson, O’Quin, Fultz, Varnderplas, & Isen, 1983). Benefits We are more likely to help if we can feel good about ourselves by doing so (Snyder, Omoto, & Lindsay, 2004). Personal responsibility We are more likely to help if it is clear that others are not helping. Self-presentation We may help in order to show others that we are good people (Hardy & Van Vugt, 2006). Diffusion of responsibility not only occurs in emergency situations; it can also occur in everyday situations. For example, diffusion of responsibility could explain why some students PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 do not put in as much effort on a group project because they believe that the other classmates are also responsible for doing the work. This is known as social loafing (Tosuntaş 2020). Social loafing is defined as an individual’s tendency to reduce his/her effort compared to other individuals performing the same task in the group. Similarly, social loafing is expressed as an individual’s less-than-expected effort in group work. Studies have concluded that when individuals work collectively, they make less effort than when they work consciously or unconsciously as individuals (Karau & Williams, 1997). Two categories to explain social loafing include, individual level and group level. Commitment, task visibility, distinctiveness and evaluation potential, task attachment, importance and significance of the task, distributive justice, personality traits, culture and gender differences, and organizational citizenship are individual level explanations. On a group level, group size, cohesion, and perceived social loafing of group members all play a role (Liden et al., 2004). Cyberloafing is a newer type of loafing behaviour that has emerged as a result of the pervasiveness of technology in our daily lives. Cyberloafing occurs when a person spends unproductive time on the internet during working hours (Ugrin et al., 2008). 4.3.2.2 Aggressive behaviour Aggression is behaviour that is intended to harm another individual. Aggression may occur in the heat of the moment, for instance, when a driver of another vehicle cuts before you or when your soccer team loses an important game. Or it may occur in a more cognitive, deliberate, and planned way, such as the aggression of a bully who steals another child’s toys, a terrorist who kills civilians to gain political exposure, or a hired assassin who kills for money. Not all aggression is physical. Aggression also occurs in non-physical ways, as when children exclude others from activities, call them names, or spread rumours about them. Paquette and Underwood (1999) found that both boys and girls rated non-physical aggression such as name-calling as making them feel more “sad and bad” than did physical aggression. The nature of aggression We may aggress against others in part because it allows us to gain access to valuable resources such as food, territory, and desirable mates, or to protect ourselves from direct attack by others. Although aggression is an overt behaviour, it has biological basis. Aggression is controlled in large part by the amygdala. One of the primary functions of the amygdala is to help us learn to associate stimuli with the rewards and the punishment that they may provide. The amygdala is particularly activated in our responses to stimuli that we see as threatening and fear-arousing. When the amygdala is stimulated, in either humans or in animals, the organism becomes more aggressive. Hormones are also important in regulating aggression. Most important in this regard is the hormone testosterone, which is associated with increased aggression in both males and females. Research conducted on a variety of animals has found a positive correlation between levels of testosterone and aggression. This relationship seems to be weaker among humans than among animals, yet it is still significant (Dabbs, Hargrove, & Heusel, 1996). Hormones regulate aggression; however, other substances and medically induced drugs can regulate aggressive behaviour. Consuming alcohol, for example, increases the likelihood that people will respond aggressively to provocations, and even people who are not normally aggressive may react with aggression when they are intoxicated (Graham, Osgood, Wells, & Stockwell, 2006). Alcohol reduces the ability of people who have consumed it to inhibit their aggression because when people are intoxicated, they become more self-focused and less aware of the social constraints that normally prevent them from engaging aggressively (Bushman & Cooper, 1990; Steele & Southwick, 1985). PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 Negative emotions increase aggression We are much more likely to aggress when we are experiencing negative emotions. One important determinant of aggression is frustration. When we are frustrated, we may lash out at others, even at people who did not cause the frustration. In some cases, the aggression is displaced aggression, which is aggression that is directed at an object or person other than the person who caused the frustration. This why we sometimes hear people say, “do not take out your frustrations on me”. Negative emotions increase aggression. If we are aware that we are feeling negative emotions, we might think that we could release those emotions in a relatively harmless way, such as punching a pillow or kicking something, with the hopes that doing so will release our aggressive tendencies. Catharsis—the idea that observing or engaging in less harmful aggressive actions will reduce the tendency to aggress later in a more harmful way—has been considered by many as a way of decreasing violence, and it was an important part of the theories of Sigmund Freud. However, as far as social psychologists have been able to determine, catharsis simply does not work. Rather than decreasing aggression, engaging in aggressive behaviours of any type increases the likelihood of later aggression. Bushman, Baumeister, and Stack (1999) first angered their research participants by having another student insult them. Then half of the participants were allowed to engage in a cathartic behaviour: They were given boxing gloves and then got a chance to hit a punching bag for 2 minutes. Then all the participants played a game with the person who had insulted them earlier in which they had a chance to blast the other person with a painful blast of white noise. Contrary to the catharsis hypothesis, the students who had punched the punching bag set a higher noise level and delivered longer bursts of noise than the participants who did not get a chance to hit the punching bag. It seems that if we hit a punching bag, punch a pillow, or scream as loud as we can to release our frustration, the opposite may occur—rather than decreasing aggression, these behaviours in fact increase it. Viewing violent media increases aggression Our levels of aggression may be increased subconsciously by our exposure to violence. Viewing violent material may increase aggression. Research evidence makes it very clear that, on average, people who watch violent behaviour become more aggressive. The evidence supporting this relationship comes from studies conducted over many years using both correlational designs as well as laboratory studies in which people have been randomly assigned to view either violent or non-violent material (Anderson et al., 2003). Viewing violent behaviour also increases aggression in part through observational learning. Children who witness violence are more likely to be aggressive. One example is in the studies of Albert Bandura on the observational learning of aggression in children. According to Bandura, children learn by modelling adult behaviour and aggressive behaviour observed in adults is likely to be modelled by children (Artino Jr, 2007). You may watch the following clip by Professor Albert Bandura for more understanding on how children model aggressive behaviour. (Note: video not for assessment purposes): https://youtu.be/jWsxfoJEwQQ 4.3.2.3 Interpersonal attraction Because most of us enter into a close relationship at some point, it is useful to know what psychologists have learned about the principles of liking and loving. A major interest of psychologists is the study of interpersonal attraction, or what makes people like, and even PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 love, each other. A number of factors contribute to interpersonal attraction. The following factors have been found to contribute to interpersonal attractions. These are similarity, self- disclosure, proximity and personal attraction. Similarity One important factor in attraction is a perceived similarity in values and beliefs between the partners (Davis & Rusbult, 2001). Similarity is important for relationships because it is more convenient if both partners like the same activities and because similarity supports one’s values. We can feel better about ourselves and our choice of activities if we see that our partner also enjoys doing the same things that we do. Having others like and believe in the same things we do makes us feel validated in our beliefs. This is referred to as consensual validation and is an important aspect of why we are attracted to others. Self-disclosure Liking is also enhanced by self-disclosure, the tendency to communicate frequently, without fear of punishment, and in an accepting and empathetic manner. Friends are friends because we can talk to them openly about our needs and goals and because they listen and respond to our needs (Reis & Aron, 2008). However, self-disclosure must be balanced. If we open up about our concerns that are important to us, we expect our partner to do the same in return. If the self-disclosure is not reciprocal, the relationship may not last. Proximity Another important determinant of liking is proximity, or the extent to which people are physically near us. Research has found that we are more likely to develop friendships with people who are nearby, for instance, those who live in the same residence that we do, and even with people who just happen to sit nearer to us in our classes (Back, Schmukle, & Egloff, 2008). Personal attraction According to Van Deventer and Mojapelo-Batka (2013), people are attracted to each other for physical and psychological reasons. Positive characteristics tend to be admired, whereas negative characteristics tend to be disliked. Apart from personal characteristics, people may also be attracted to each other based on physical characteristics (Van Deventer & Mojapelo- Batka, 2013). This is also true when you think of a model who has a friendship with another model on the basis of similar physical attributes and sharing similar ideas in terms of ideal physical attributes. Interpersonal attractions have an important element in the formation of human relationships. In addition, the dynamics of interpersonal attractions change over time. That is, people grow and relate differently over time and the determinants of personal attraction can change as people mature in relationships. Some relationships can become strong whereas others could be weakened due to personal dynamics or things that happen during the relationship. Interpersonal attractions determine how people relate to each other and the types of relationships people are likely to have. We discuss types of interpersonal relationships in the following section. PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 Activity 2: While walking home from school, Phindi noted a group of girls attacking one of her classmates, Zandi. Not knowing how to react to the incident, Phindi looked around and noticed that other bystanders were not taking any action to assist Zandi. In the end, Phindi concluded that maybe the situation does not require any intervention. Phindi’s failure to assist Zandi after deeming the situation not needing intervention as a result of the inaction from other bystanders refers to a phenomenon called…. A. observational learning B. catharsis C. cost-benefit analysis D. pluralistic ignorance Answer: Option A is incorrect because observational learning refers to modelling a behaviour observed elsewhere. Option B is also incorrect because catharsis refers to the idea that observing or engaging in less harmful aggressive actions will reduce the tendency to aggress later in a more harmful way. Cost-benefit analysis, option C is incorrect because it refers to weighing the odds on gains and losses (rewards vs harm) that may result from assisting someone in need. The correct answer to the question is option D, relying on others to define the situation and to then erroneously conclude that no intervention is necessary when help is actually needed is called pluralistic ignorance. 4.4 Interpersonal relationships Close relationships are sometimes called interpersonal relationships. The closest relationships are most often found with family and a small circle of best friends. Interpersonal relationships require the most effort to nurture and maintain. These are also the relationships that give you the most joy and satisfaction. An interpersonal relationship is an association between two or more people that may range from fleeting to enduring. This association may be based on inference, love, solidarity, regular business interactions, or some other type of social commitment. Interpersonal relationships are formed in the context of social, cultural and other influences. The context can vary from family or kinship relations, friendship, marriage, relations with associates, work, clubs, neighbourhoods, and places of worship. They may be regulated by law, custom, or mutual agreement, and are the basis of social groups and society as a whole. A relationship is normally viewed as a connection between individuals, such as a romantic or intimate relationship, or a parent–child relationship. Individuals can also have relationships with groups of people, such as the relation between a pastor and his congregation, an uncle and a family, or a mayor and a town. Finally, groups or even nations may have relations with each other. Interpersonal relationships are dynamic systems that change continuously during their existence. Like living organisms, relationships have a beginning, a lifespan, and an end. They grow and improve gradually, as people get to know each other and become closer emotionally, or they gradually deteriorate as people drift apart, move on with their lives, and PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 form new relationships with others. A number of theories have been formed to understand interpersonal relationships. There is merit to looking at relationships from the perspective of each of these theories. To believe exclusively in one theory and disregard the other theories would limit our understanding of social relationships. Why do human beings establish relationships? From the moment of birth, human beings depend on others to satisfy their basic needs. Through this, children come to associate close personal contact with the satisfaction of basic needs. Later in life, we continue to seek personal contact for the same reason, even though we know we are capable of filling our own needs without relying on others for survival. Also, being around others becomes a habit and the basic physical needs of infancy expand to include emotional and social needs as well. These can include the needs for praise, respect, affection, love, achievement, and so on. It is these needs which are acquired through social learning that motivate us as humans to seek relationships with people who can satisfy our needs throughout our lives. 4.4.1 Types of interpersonal relationships People relate differently to each other. We define types of interpersonal relationships in terms of relational contexts of interaction and the types of expectations that communicators have of one another. In this learning section we briefly discuss casual, friendship, family and love relationships. a) Casual relationship A casual relationship is characterised by contracted interactions (Van Deventer & Mojapelo- Batka, 2013). According to Van Deventer and Mojapelo-Batka (2013), casual relationships are based on equity. This implies that in casual relationships, all parties or members involved stand to benefit equally in the encounter. For an instance, the relationship you have with the street vendors outside at the entrance of your workplace from whom you normally buy food during lunch may be considered a causal relationship. This is because although you interact from time to time, you have no other relationship beyond that of a customer and a supplier. In this case, your relationship is based on equity since the both of you benefit from the encounter (i.e., exchange of money for food). Casual relationships do not require a constant contact between two parties. For example, you had a casual relationship with a store assistant from whom you only bought an item once and never went back to the store again. This highlights that casual relationships do not have to be enduring and that throughout our personal interactions with others, we tend to have several casual relationships without actually being aware of it. b) Friendship relationship Theories of friendship emphasise the concept of friendship as a freely chosen association. Friendship relationships are based are based on communality, responsiveness and sensitivity towards one’s needs (Jordaan, 1998; Van Deventer & Mojapelo-Batka, 2013). The key feature of this type of a relationship is that it is selfless in that one has to give without expecting anything in return. Friendship relationships are principled on helping without keeping records and priority is on helping the other person to succeed or to triumph over a challenge. According to Van Deventer and Mojapelo-Batka (2013), a friendship relationship involves responding to one’s needs even if the person is not likely to respond to your needs in the same manner. PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 c) Family relationship Family communication patterns establish roles, identities and enable the growth of individuals. Family dysfunction may also be exhibited by communication patterns. A family is defined as an arranged group, usually related by blood or some binding factor of commonality, where individual roles and relationships modify over time. A family is a system which may include a nuclear family or even extended family. These relations may consist of a mother father, children and extended family members such as aunts, uncles, grandparents, nephews and nieces. Family relations are typically long term and generally have a period in which common space is shared. Family structures tend to be organised, are a relational transactional group in that each member occupies a role and function which other family members relate to. In addition, A family is characterised by sharing a living space for prolonged periods of time, and have a mixture of interpersonal images that evolve through the exchange of meaning over time (e.g., from our families, we learn important values concerning intimacy, spirituality, communication, and respect). d) Love relationship There are different types of love and theories thereof. However, the most popular and comprehensive description of love is theorised by (Stenberg, 1986). Sternberg (1986) suggests that there are three main components of love: Passion, intimacy, and commitment (see figure 3.5 below). Love relationships vary depending on the presence or absence of each of these components. Passion refers to the intense, physical attraction partners feel toward one another. Intimacy involves the ability to share feelings, personal thoughts and psychological closeness with the other. Commitment is the conscious decision to stay together. Passion can be found in the early stages of a relationship, but intimacy takes time to develop because it is based on knowledge of the partner. Once intimacy has been established, partners may resolve to stay in the relationship. Although many would agree that all three components are important to a relationship, many love relationships do not consist of all three. According to Stenberg (1986), there are different kinds of love, most of which could be explained by the triarchic theory of love. These are discussed below: Figure 3.5: Sternberg’s triarchic theory of love. Image retrieved from https://socialsci.libretexts.org/ PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 - Consummate love- this is often considered the most complete and ideal type of love because it consists of intimacy, passion, and commitment. - Romantic love- Intimacy and passion are components of romantic love, but there is no commitment. The partners spend much time with one another and enjoy their closeness but have not made plans to continue. This may be true because they are not in a position to make such commitments or because they are looking for passion and closeness and are afraid it will die out if they commit to one another and start to focus on other kinds of obligations. - Companionate love-Intimacy and commitment are the hallmarks of companionate love. Partners love and respect one another and they are committed to staying together. However, their physical attraction (passion) may have never been strong or may have just died out over time. Nevertheless, partners are good friends and committed to one another. - Fatuous love-passion and commitment are aspects of fatuous love. There is no intimacy and the commitment is premature. Partners rarely talk seriously or share their ideas. They focus on their intense physical attraction and yet one, or both, is also talking of making a lasting commitment. Sometimes this is out of a sense of insecurity and a desire to make sure the partner is locked into the relationship. - Romantic love-Intimacy and passion are components of romantic love, but there is no commitment. The partners spend much time with one another and enjoy their closeness but have not made plans to continue. This may be true because they are not in a position to make such commitments or because they are looking for passion and closeness and are afraid it will die out if they commit to one another and start to focus on other kinds of obligations. - Empty love-This type of love may be found later in a relationship or in a relationship that was formed to meet needs other than intimacy or passion, including financial needs, childrearing assistance, or attaining/maintaining status. Here the partners are committed to staying in the relationship for the children, because of a religious conviction, or because there are no alternatives. However, they do not share ideas or feelings with each other and have no physical attraction for one another. - Infatuation-Perhaps, this is Sternberg's version of "love at first sight". Infatuation consists of an immediate, intense physical attraction to someone. A person who is infatuated finds it hard to think of anything but the other person. Brief encounters are played over and over in one's head; it may be difficult to eat and there may be a rather constant state of arousal. Infatuation is rather short-lived, however, lasting perhaps only a matter of months or as long as a year or so. It tends to be based on physical attraction and an image of what one “thinks” the other is all about. - Liking-In this relationship, intimacy or knowledge of the other and a sense of closeness is present. Passion and commitment, however, are not. Partners feel free to be themselves and disclose personal information. They may feel that the other person knows them well and can be honest with them and let them know if they think the person is wrong. These partners are friends. However, being told that your partner “thinks of you as a friend” can be a devastating blow if you are attracted to them and seeking a romantic involvement. PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 Love relationships are sometimes institutionalised. The most common institutionalisation of a love relationship is marriage (Jordaan, 1998). According Jordaan (1998), the institution of marriage comprises of three models. These are patriarchal, partnership and egalitarian models. - Patriarchal model- according to this model, partners (usually husband and wife) are not equal. The husband is considered to be the head and possess control and determines what ought to be done in a relationship. Decision making and delegation of responsibilities are the sole prerogatives of the husband and the woman is supposed to be submissive, dependent, emotional and a full-time homemaker (Deventer & Mojapelo-Batka, 2013). - Partnership model- this model is different from the patriarchal model in that it is less stringent and recognises both man and woman as companions. In this model, the husband is considered to be the head, however, is rational and open to suggestions. The wife may engage in external activities outside the house but her primary responsibility is that of a homemaker (Deventer & Mojapelo-Batka, 2013). - Egalitarian model- In this model both partners are equal. Both partners are breadwinners and can pursue their interests outside of the home without being restricted to homemaking activities. The partners share activities equally at home and are both able to express emotions equally (Deventer & Mojapelo-Batka, 2013). Human beings have an innate need to belong. Interpersonal relationships are important for our wellbeing. This because through interpersonal relationships, we are able to understand ourselves better as well as understand how we function within the context of others. In this section we have discussed the types of interpersonal relationships and how they benefit us. We also discussed the theory of love and how love is conceptualised according to Sternberg (1986). In addition, we also discussed the institution of marriage and its different models. GROUP ACTIVITY Activity 3: In a discussion on myUnisa with your e-tutor and peers, reflect on the three models of marriage that we have just discussed above and debate the advantages and disadvantages of each model. Your discussion should take into account cultural and constitutional aspects into consideration. NB: Please note that it is compulsory for you to have this discussion on myUnisa. 4.5 Summary Human relations are complex and dynamic processes. Relationship formations result from a multitude of factors such as context, personality, communication and others. In this learning unit we have learnt that people relate to each other differently and what may work for one relationship may not work well for another. We have learnt how our behaviour can save others or cause harm. We have also discussed key aspects of interpersonal psychology which include communication, behaviour and relationships between people. With this, we have learnt PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 what it takes to be in an interpersonal relationship, what to do in order to avert a harmful relationship and most importantly techniques of building successful relationships with our significant others. PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 Glossary Aggression: behaviour that is intended to harm another individual. Sender: The original information source of the message. Encoding: The translation of an idea into a message that can be understood by the receiver. Decoding: The translation of the message into meaning by the receiver. Channel: The means by which the message is conveyed. Receiver: The intended target audience of the message. Noise: Interference that impedes the transmission of a message. Proximity: the extent to which people are physically near us Source: The origin of the message. Element: An additional aspect that accompanies the transmission of the message (i.e., a gesture or sign). Treatment: The manner in which the message is sent. Structure: The framework of the message and how the message is constructed. Code: The text or language the message is conveyed in. PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 References Anderson, C. A., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E., Huesmann, L. R., Johnson, J. D., Linz, D., …Wartella, E. (2003). The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(3), 81–110. Artino Jr, A. R. (2007). Bandura, Ross, and Ross: Observational Learning and the Bobo Doll. Online submission. Back, M. D., Schmukle, S. C., & Egloff, B. (2008). Becoming friends by chance. Psychological Science, 19(5), 439. Barnlund, D. C. (2008). A transactional model of communication. In. C. D. Mortensen (Ed.), Communication Theory (2nd ed., pp. 47-57). Routledge. Batson, C. D., O’Quin, K., Fultz, J., Varnderplas, M., & Isen, A. M. (1983). Influence of self- reported distress and empathy on egoistic versus altruistic motivation to help. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3), 706–718. Bushman, B. J., Baumeister, R. F., & Stack, A. D. (1999). Catharsis, aggression, and persuasive influence: Self-fulfilling or self-defeating prophecies? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(3), 367–376. Bushman, B. J., & Cooper, H. M. (1990). Effects of alcohol on human aggression: An integrative research review. Psychological Bulletin, 107(3), 341–354. Dabbs, J. M. Jr., Hargrove, M. F., & Heusel, C. (1996). Testosterone differences among college fraternities: Well-behaved vs. rambunctious. Personality and Individual Differences, 20(2), 157–161. Darley, J. M. & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383. Davis, J. L., & Rusbult, C. E. (2001). Attitude alignment in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 65. Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., Schroeder, D. A., & Penner, L. A. (2006). The Social Psychology of Prosocial Behavior. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Graham, K., Osgood, D. W., Wells, S., & Stockwell, T. (2006). To what extent is intoxication associated with aggression in bars? A multilevel analysis. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 67(3), 382–390. Guéguen, N., & De Gail, M.-A. (2003). The effect of smiling on helping behavior: Smiling and Good Samaritan behavior. Communication Reports, 16(2), 133–140. Hardy, C. L., & Van Vugt, M. (2006). Nice guys finish first: The competitive altruism hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,32(10), 1402–1413. Hopper, Elizabeth. (2020) "Diffusion of Responsibility: Definition and Examples in Psychology." ThoughtCo. Retrieved from:www.thoughtco.com/diffusion-of- responsibility-definition-4588462. Karen, H. (1945). Our inner conflicts: A constructive theory of neurosis. W W Norton & Co. Jordaan, W. (1998). Interpersonal relationships. In W. Jordaan and J. Jordaan. People in context 3rd edition. Johannesburg: Heinemann. PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help? New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Paquette, J. A., & Underwood, M. K. (1999). Gender differences in young adolescents’ experiences of peer victimization: Social and physical aggression. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45(2), 242–266. Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., & Schroeder, D. A. (2005). Prosocial behavior: Multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 365–392. Reis, H. T., & Aron, A. (2008). Love: What is it, why does it matter, and how does it operate? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(1), 80-86. Sapienza, Z. S., Veenstra, A. S., Kirtiklis, K., & Giannino, S. S. (2016). The transmission model of communication: Toward a multidisciplinary explication. A Review of General Semantics, 73(4), 321. Shannon, C.E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press. Snyder, M., Omoto, A. M., & Lindsay, J. J. (Eds.). (2004). Sacrificing time and effort for the good of others: The benefits and costs of volunteerism. New York, NY: Guilford Press Sternberg, R.J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93, 119-135. Steele, C. M., & Southwick, L. (1985). Alcohol and social behavior: I. The psychology of drunken excess. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(1), 18–34. Tosuntaş, S. B. (2020). Diffusion of responsibility in group work: Social loafing. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4(3), 344-358. DOI: 10.33902/JPR.2020465073 Turaga, R. (2016). Organizational Models of Communication. IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 10(2), 56-65. van Baaren, R. B., Holland, R. W., Kawakami, K., & van Knippenberg, A. (2004). Mimicry and prosocial behavior. Psychological Science, 15(1), 71–74; Van Deventer, V., & Mojapelo-Batka, M. (2013). A Student’s A-Z of psychology. Cape Town: Juta. Attribution Interpersonal Relationships. Provided by: Wikispaces. Located at: http://psychology20.wikispaces.com/02.+Interpersonal+Relationships. License: CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike. Love by Martha Lally & Suzanne Valentine-French, LibreTexts is licensed under SA.https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Human_Development/Book%3A_Lifespa n_Development_-_A_Psychological_Perspective_(Lally_and_Valentine- French)/07%3A_Emerging_and_Early_Adulthood/7.13%3A_Love Basic Process Models of Communication by Daniel Usera & contributing authors,LibreTexts is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA. https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Communication/Introduction_to_Communi PYC1502/Unit 4: Interpersonal psychology/OER 2022 cation/Communicating_to_Connect_- _Interpersonal_Communication_for_Today_(Usera)/01%3A_Fundamentals_of_Interp ersonal_Communication/1.02%3A_Basic_Process_Models_of_Communication Horney's Shifting Perspective on Psychodynamic Theory by Mark D. Kelland, LibreTexts is licensed under CC BY. https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Psychology/Book%3A_Personality_Theor y_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/06%3A_Karen_Horney_and_Erich_Fromm/6.03 %3A_Horney's_Shifting_Perspective_on_Psychodynamic_Theory Factors Influencing Attraction by Martha Lally & Suzanne Valentine-French, LibreTexts is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA. https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Human_Development/Book%3A_Lifespan _Development_-_A_Psychological_Perspective_(Lally_and_Valentine- French)/07%3A_Emerging_and_Early_Adulthood/7.11%3A_Factors_Influencing_Attr action Principles of Interpersonal Communication by LibreTexts is licensed under CC BY- NC-SA. https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Communication/Introduction_to_Communi cation/Communication_in_the_Real_World_- _An_Introduction_to_Communication_Studies/06%3A_Interpersonal_Communication _Processes/6.01%3A_Principles_of_Interpersonal_Communication Verctor image of two people holding hands: https://pixabay.com/vectors/search/relationships/