Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
71 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is the importance of intimate relationships? |
Need to belong: motivation to bond with others in relationships that provide ongoing, positive interactions. -People remember and relive past social pain more easily than past physical pain (ex: ostracism is a real pain)
|
|
|
What are satisfying relationships linked to? |
1. Positive health outcomes (ppl who have satisfying close relationships with spouse display positive health benefits - work out more, sleep better, report lower stress). Effects greater for men than women. BUT: stressful/dissatisfying close relationships: associated with greater increased mortality; greater immune problems etc.
2. Social support: presence of supportive others/able to draw on others for support
3. Capitalization: positive events in our lives = made more positive when we have other close friends/relations that can share in our happiness.
4. "Michelangelo Effect": ppl in close relationship often idealize relationships with their partners. Over time, we evolve in such a way that we become more like out partners' idealizations of us. (ex: i wanna be more outgoing. Partner sees me as more outgoing as I actually am; brings me into situations that encourage/reinforce this which helps me reach my idea wooot) We can become MORE like the people we want to be
5. Goal pursuit: having a supportive relationship helps us achieve our goals
6. Self-expansion: our eyes are open to different hobbies, interests, world... we become more inclusive upon having close relationships with others |
|
|
What factors influence our choice of close friends and partners? |
1. Proximity: most likely get to know and like ppl who we have repeated contact with; like people we see in our everyday lives (classes and social group): BUT physical proximity less important now with social media (geographic closeness matters less than it used to)
2. Physical Attractiveness: HUGE determinant of attraction, esp. @ beginning of relationship! Immediately knowable. Tends to be large factor of whether we'll actually make the effort to try to get to know the person and like them
3. Similarity: ppl tend to choose to interact with (and then get to know and like) people who are SIMILAR to them. (ex: when you're in a large class - who do you choose to sit with?) we tend to SORT! sit with ppl of same gender, race, hair length... greater change they'll get to know and like those people. |
|
|
Anticipation of interaction (textbook) |
-Merely anticipating interaction also boosts liking -experiment: women were given ambiguous info about two other women, one of whom they expected to talk with intimately. when asked how much they liked each one, the women preferred the person they expected to meet. Expecting to date someone similarly boosts liking. -phenomenon is ADAPTIVE: anticipatory liking increases the chance of a rewarding relationship |
|
|
Mere exposure effect |
The tendency for novel stimuli to be liked more or rated more positively after the rater has been repeatedly exposed to them. -mere exposure breeds PLEASANT feelings -colours our evaluations of others: we like familiar people. (also works the other way around too. people we like (smiling vs. unsmiling strangers) seem more familiar) -negative side: prejudice |
|
|
Implicit egoism |
We like what we associate with ourselves (including letter of our name, people, places, and things we unconsciously connect with ourselves) -we even like ourselves better when we are the way we're used to seeing ourselves! |
|
|
Describe the role of physical attractiveness |
Compared to people who are less attractive, physically attractive people are more likely to... -do better in job interviews and tend to be hired (unless interviewer is same gender and has low-self esteem) -Marry or re-marry (BUT: no strong relationship between physical attractiveness and marital satisfaction) -achieve good grades -attain prestigious occupations (and in that field, tend to be better paid!) -get lighter sentences for crimes (UNLESS it's been viewed the the person USED their attractiveness to commit the crime. then they get heavier sentences) |
|
|
Why might the beauty bias be true? |
-Beauty Bias: When we see someone who is physically attractive: we make all kinds of biases about them "wow they are more socially skilled, kind and talented" -Self-fulfilling prophecy: they might actually have some of those qualities (might have positive history of social relationships - other ppl laugh at their jokes, invite em to parties - that lead them to develop their social skills). they might eventually actually adopt those attributes!
-halo effect: might be real! we have these assumptions but they may not be accurate
|
|
|
What is the matching phenomenon? |
The tendency for men and women to choose as partners those who are a "good match" in attractiveness and other traits -many pair off with people who are about as attractive as they are (level of attractiveness AND level of intelligence) -men typically offer wealth or status and seek youth and attractiveness (reverse for women) -men who advertise their income and education, and women who advertise their youth and looks, receive more responses to their ads -helps explain why beautiful young women often marry older men of higher social status |
|
|
How does social comparison relate to the role of physical attractiveness? |
What's attractive to you depends on your comparison standards (ex: rating a woman's attractiveness after having just watched "charlie's angels" -this effect appears greatest for WOMEN |
|
|
How does self-esteem relate to attraction? |
Experiment where women received either favourable or unfavourable analyses of their personalities, and had been asked out on a date with attractive male confederate who'd struck up warm convo with them before experiment. Women whose self-esteem had been temporarily shattered liked the guy more (explains rebound dating)
-low self-esteem people underestimate how much their romantic partners value them. they also have less generous views of their partner and are less happy with the relationship. |
|
|
What is the relationship between attractiveness and social skills? (experiment, part 1) |
-well designed experiment! able to separate people's EXPECTATIONS -participants did not know the attractiveness of the people who they were talking to on the phone. -attractiveness of the 60 participants rated by judges external to the study
1. Had people rate their OWN attractiveness and correlated with judge's ratings. Females did good job with this (females who said they were attractive were rated as more attractive by judges but males didn't do such a good job lol). - in general, females have better sense of their attractiveness than do males (valued by females more; they get more feedback on their attractiveness, and women engage in greater social comparison on attractiveness than men)
2. Rated attractiveness and rated social skills: the judge-related attractiveness and participant-rated social skills were POSITIVELY correlated. Thus: modest correlation between attractiveness and social skills (evidence that attractive people are more socially skilled): so, not just halo effect! |
|
|
What is the relationship between attractiveness and social skills? (experiment, part 1) |
-question: could it be just because people tend to be friendlier and warmer to attractive ppl?
-Males CALLED women and were led to believe that the women were either attractive or not attractive. -Men who thought the women was more attractive: treated them warmer, listened to them, etc. Those women then became more socially skilled and confident -When men thought woman was less attractive: was less warm when talking to them
We tend to be nicer, warmer, and more engaging to those who are physically attractive than to those who are not. |
|
|
What influences attractiveness? |
1. Baby-facedness: the pout, large eyes (think Disney princesses), pointed chin and smaller features, smooth skin, fuller lips. Basically, same facial proportions as a young girl EXCEPT with prominent cheek bones and prominent jaw line in adults which indicate sexual maturity. In men: prominent masculine features, prominent jawline, cheekbones and larger chin, height
2. Facial symmetry: large predictors of attractiveness, goes on under our awareness.
3. Culture: huge degree of consensus of what is seen as attractive (clear skin, proportions etc). But some things do vary according to culture. Independent cultures: value stand out qualities in terms of what attractiveness signifies
4. Clear complexion, fair skin: also, blonde hair is valuable (can see clear skin better). value of clear skin - might have signified fertility in old days
5. Waist to hip ratio |
|
|
Describe the results of the "body weight preferences across 26 countries" study |
Between 2004-2008, over 7000 respondents filled out questionnaire about themselves and chose which body figure in the row they found most attractive.
Result: almost all votes occurred between 3 and 4. Thinned/healthy body weight seen as most attractive. -not a lot of cross-cultural variation. -women's ideal was 3.0 and men was 3.5
Positive correlation between what they chose and the respondent's age. -older people chose heavier figures. -person's BMI mattered: heavier people chose heavier figures -media exposure for countries outside North America: if they had higher exposure to western media, they tended to choose the 3 and 4 body types. -higher SES: chose lower weight figures than those of low SES -body dissatisfaction: ppl dissatisfied with their bodies tended to choose less weight. |
|
|
Elaborate on the waist to hip ratio phenomenon in females. |
Most highly attractive waist to hip ratio: MODERATE weight, 0.7 waist to hip ratio
-ex: Marilyn Monroe and Audrey Hepburn: absolute body type quite different, but same waist to hip ratio
-Evolutionary psychology (more fertile?) |
|
|
Elaborate on the waist to hip ratio in males. |
-women rating men -0.9 waist to hip ratio
-but effect not as strong in MEN! |
|
|
How does the economy relate to our perceptions of attractiveness? |
-tends to happen OUTSIDE of people's awareness
-variability in the strength of the economy is associated with: -the physical features that men find attractive in women: when economy is good, men prefer women who are babyfaced, curvaceous and tinier (more delicate, childlike looking women) vs. years when economy is hard, they find women who are less curvaceous, taller, heavier, less babyfaced and less feminine). Why? when things are good, value women that seem less dominant/less self-sufficient. Harder: value women who seem more self-sufficient. -women's tendency to enhance their own attractiveness: Lipstick effect: economy down: ppl less likely to buy stuff. women more likely to buy cosmetic stuff when economy is harsh (ex beginning of 2008): most stocks sank for some companies except for l’oreal, which increased stocks by 6%. When economy is tight, women want to enhance attractiveness to facilitate finding a mate who can provide for them. -Men's attitude toward economic redistribution: primed to think economy is down, high-status males become less positive about economic redistribution than low status males (ppl who have lots of resources wanna keep em) - and those who have fewer like the idea of sharing them. In tough times, males want to INCREASE their advantages
|
|
|
Explain the "romantic red" phenomenon |
-colour: can influence cognition, affect, and behaviour -red linked to passion, lust and love (cross-culturally too) -societal and biological examples illustrate this link: colour of woman's lips (when woman ovulating or sexually attracted): pink cheeks, pinker overall. Valentines day: pink and red everywhere with hearts and love etc. "Red light district". In some animals, their genitalia becomes red when they are ovulating. |
|
|
Describe the "romantic red" study 1 |
-27 male university students -viewed black and white photo of a woman for 5 seconds -Varied the background colour -Participants asked to rate the woman on: attractiveness and prettiness (1-9 scales) RESULT: women viewed agains RED background viewed as more attractive/pretty than women on the white background (Even though it was the same photo!)
|
|
|
Discuss the follow up studies of the "romantic red" study... when is the "Red effect" shown? |
The "red effect" is shown when: -red is contrasted with other colours (ex: grey or green) -the dependent variable is sexual attractiveness/desire for sexual activity, ask on date, amount of money they'd spend on date ("I'd spend more money on the girl against the red background than the white") -the woman is wearing a red (vs. blue) shirt |
|
|
When is the "red effect" NOT shown? |
-the dependent measures are likability, intelligence, or kindness (the red effect tends to be specific to attractiveness and not other traits)
-the mechanism underlying the "red effect" when men view women is perceived sexual recpetivity |
|
|
Do women view red as more attractive too? |
-YEP -when asked “how bothered would you be if this woman was talking to your boyfriend? more bothered if the woman was in RED dress than green dress. goes beneath our radar. |
|
|
Does "romantic red" works for men too? Is the mechanism similar? |
Using similar methodologies, an experiment found support for the hypothesis that red boosts women’s ratings of men’s attractiveness
BUT the mechanism: not sexual attraction but STATUS (social dominance). This is a mediator. STATUS (think of like red carpet... red letter day... kings wore red in the past) |
|
|
Discuss the effect of SIMILARITY on attraction |
SIMILARITY increases attraction
-personality -demographics -attractiveness |
|
|
What is the Matching Hypothesis? |
Early evidence DID NOT support the matching hypothesis
Experiment (1996): BIG dance! Randomly matched dates study (376 males randomly assigned to 'dates' and filled out surveys)
results: more attractive people were better liked by their partners, and were more interested in dating them in the future. Also: a person’s own level of attractiveness didn’t matter (like if a 2 match with 9, or 9 matched with 9) - in general, more attractive people were better off
Subsequent research found more evidence for matching: photos rated by judges for attractiveness. Results: ppl more similar in attractiveness more likely to stay together as compared to people who are more discrepant in attractiveness |
|
|
What happens to the appearances of two people in a couple the longer they stay together? |
the longer couples stay together, the more similar looking they become! Not only likely to be similar overall in attractiveness, but become similar to each other overall after time |
|
|
Explain the lipstick effect |
lipstick effect: women try to enhance their attractiveness during hard economic times.
Think of the threshold of attractiveness: archival data set. Looked at the Hard times Index (composite measure of unemployment rates, depression, divorce, suicide etc): correlated with a bunch of things. (looked at winners of miss america, academy awards actress winner, playboy winner)
They found that the hard times index correlated with the facial attractiveness of women. Better times they preferred bigger eyes (baby faces)
In general: women who aren’t at the very top percentile of attractiveness to enhance their attractiveness! |
|
|
What is the Social Commodity Theory? and what are the commodities that men and women offer? |
Men's commodities: 1) Economic 2) Attractiveness 3) Social Skills
Women's commodities: 1) Attractiveness 2) Social Skills 3) Social Status |
|
|
Why might the social commodity theory be true? |
-Both evolutionary and cultural reasons -Evolutionary: goal is to successfully have kids who grow up and pass on genes as adults. Goal for males: make alll the children. Use attractiveness as cue to see who's fertile -Women can't have as many kids as they want (takes time to make baby): can only have one baby at year at most so ant a mate that will stick around and provide so their kids will be able to succeed into adulthood |
|
|
In terms of the social commodity theory, what happens as people age? |
-40s and 50's men's attractiveness goes up as compared to women in 40s and 50s who's attractiveness goes down. -which is why it is easier for MEN to re-marry (older man finding much younger wife): much more rare to see reverse! Unusual to see age discrepancy in WOMEN and new husbands. |
|
|
Explain the "Necessities and Luxuries of Mate Preferences" |
Economic model: people take care of the necessities first, before "buying" the luxuries. (just like a student budget; take care of what’s necessary THEN spend money on luxuries)
Disconnect between ratings and "real world" (ex: sense of humour: ppl often say it’s one of the most important qualities but turns out it doesn’t predict quite well who people actually date/marry)
|
|
|
What happened in the "necessities and luxuries of mate preferences" study? |
Participants asked: a) which characteristics are the most essential when choices are constrained? b) Do priorities change when those constraints are not present?
Participants: 71 ppl waiting at airport were given 20 or 60 "mate dollars" that they could use to construct an ideal mate by spending those dollars on a number of characteristics. (ex: 80th percentile in attractiveness = 8 mate dollars) -looked at proportion of the dollars spent up front to later (first 20 and last 20)
results: -In women: top necessities in mate - Intelligence, annual income, and work ethic. (luxuries: creativity, friendliness, romance, talent) -in males: top necessities were attractiveness and intelligence. (luxuries: creativity and talent)
-things like creativity; although pleasant, are not what people value. |
|
|
What is the importance of attachment style in relationships? |
-Biggest single individual variable -Bowlby: the first important relationship is with our mother/primary caregiver. parents provide much more than just minimal things - they provide support. From this very first important relationship, we develop an EXPECTATION of how our relationships will be in life: 1) Am I someone who is valuable and worthy of care? and 2) Can I rely on other people? (in times of stress/need, will others be there to support me?). Sets a TEMPLATE for further relations and relationship
|
|
|
Explain Ainsworth's Strange Situation experiment. |
LOOKS AT: 1) how engaged is the baby in the toys
1)Mom and infant in playroom 2) Mom,infant,and stranger 3) Infant and stranger 5) Infant only 7) Mom and infant |
|
|
What were the findings in the Strange Situation Experiment? |
3 main attachment types were identified:
a) Secure: happy to explore room when mom is there; play with toys. Gets upset when mom leaves but mom able to calm baby down almost immediately. Distress upon separation but trust and comfort restored upon reunion. More able to be calmed down by mom than stranger
b) Anxious/ambivalent: don’t play with the toys as much; stay closer to mom. Freak out like crazy when mom leaves (show heightened stress)
c) Anxious/avoidant: show detached play with the toys. When mom leaves; show little outward signs of distress. notice that she’s gone, don’t really do anything. Upon mom’s return, might turn away from mom; kind of angry at mom. |
|
|
What causes attachment style? |
1. Responsiveness of parental behaviour 2. Consistency and sensitivity of care (match of knowing what baby needs and what kind of care you want to provide) 3. Serves as a template for future relationships 4. Evident in times of stress or conflict
|
|
|
How did Hazan and Shaver map attachment style processes onto adult romantic relationships? |
1. Secure base: partner might give us sense of intimacy and support that makes us feel safe about experiencing the world
2. Safe haven
3. Proximity maintenance
4. Separation Distress |
|
|
On which two dimensions do researchers currently measure attachment? |
ANXIETY and AVOIDANCE (ex: the survey we filled out in class - 18 items assessed attachment anxiety and 18 items assessed avoidance)
Anxiety: the extent to which a person worries about being abandoned or rejected by others
Avoidance: the extend to which a person feels comfortable with closeness and emotional intimacy in relationships |
|
|
What levels of anxiety and avoidance are evident in SECURE relationships? |
LOW in avoidance and anxiety -optimistic beliefs about relationships (don't feel like they'll be rejected or abandoned by partner) -trust others -feel that they can handle threats |
|
|
What are the impacts of HIGH anxiety? |
1. Overdependence on partner for comfort and support (tend to be really clingy in relationships, tend to overreact and fear rejection)
2. "Hyperactivating strategies": overtime: becomes ANNOYING to partner and may push partner away. Self-fulfilling prophecy bring about what they most fear due to their actions
3. Ironically, the behaviour of individuals high in anxiety may bring about the rejection that they fear.
|
|
|
What are the impacts of HIGH avoidance? |
-Unsure if they really event want to be in the relationship
1. Strive to maintain distance, control, and self-reliance in relationships
2. Avoid negative emotional states (avoid arguments and conflict etc)
3. "Deactivating strategies": in times of stress or conflict: do not seek closeness with their partner (want to maintain distance in an effort to control their emotions). don’t want support from partner when stressed. like a “hands off” kinda thing
4. Low intimacy in relationships
- less likely to be in relationships |
|
|
Attachment and relationship function |
-Attachment theory = has been applied to almost every facet of relationship function (ex: study of relationship distance; categorizing things as words or non words and priming; measured reaction times).: People in high attachment anxiety respond quicker to death words than the low attachment anxiety
-cognitive models of self and relationships -relationship initiation -sexual behaviour in relationships (high avoidance relationships: less motivated to please partner) -conflict -communication -caregiving -separation and responses to dissolution |
|
|
How stable are attachment styles? |
Number of studies shown that approx 70% of ppl report the same attachment style, whereas approx 30% change.
longitudinal assessments; 8 mos - 4 years
|
|
|
What are the differences in attachment styles in women and men? |
meta-analysis: found small but significant effect that on average, women are higher in anxiety on men and men are higher in avoidance than women.
Behavioural effects of ANXIETY: more pronounced in women
behavioural effects in AVOIDANCE : more pronoued in men.
|
|
|
What is the effect of different high and low combinations of attachment and anxiety? |
high on both - yikes. rely on both ppl for sense of self worth, but don’t trust people. conflicted attraction to relationships .
high anxiety, low avoidance: dismissive
|
|
|
What is the relationship between attachment and relationship quality? |
Anxious: most variable, turbulent relationships (when things are going well, we feel GREAT. but not so great, feel crummy. like a roller coaster) Avoidant: lower intimacy, enjoyment, and emotions |
|
|
How does anxiety relate to self-fulfilling prophecies? |
Anxiety is associated with:
1) Rejection sensitivity
2) Excessive reassurance-seeking -constantly ask: are you mad at me, is everything okay; bids for “please tell me if you care about me” - tell me that you love me! buuut: may actually undermine a relationship because their behaviours tend to push people away.
|
|
|
Explain the "attachment and perceptions of support" study. |
103 Dating couples (undergrads) 1. Assessment 2. Daily diary for 14 days 3. Videotaped conflict
Result: highly anxious more affected by conflict/support (reacted positively to support from partner) , more distressed by conflict, and escalated conflict
high and low rejection; same threat of separation (study conducted): exchange scenario: would you still go on exchange -depends on whether the argument will underscore rejection or not “It’s only a year, we can make it work” vs. “i dunno, a year is a long time) low attachment anxiety: would go to castle no matter what |
|
|
What is the importance of expectancies and comparison levels? |
1. Satisfaction is determined by discrepancies (well, what do i have in my relationship compared to what i can get?)
-quality of satisfaction: differential between what we have vs. what we think we can have.
subjective ratings (rating that we make about ourselves) |
|
|
What is the social exchange theory? |
Rewards exceed costs = SATISFACTION Costs exceed rewards? = DISSONANCE
Try to reduce dissonance by: a) Increasing rewards/decreasing costs b) Consider alternative relationships c) Consider leaving relationship
But: too simplistic... we must look @ other predictors |
|
|
Why is commitment important to social exchange theory? |
It is more than just costs and benefits, it is a DECISION
-An "internal pledge" -"tendency to maintain a relationship and feel psychologically attached to it"
-much more cognitive variable that stays more stable over time. “We’re gonna stick with relationship for better or for worse. |
|
|
What is the investment model? |
1. Satisfaction is determined by: a) Rewards b) Costs c) Comparison level (is this relationship meeting my standard? Am i worth more? could I get something out of it?)
2. Commitment is determined by: a) Satisfaction b) Alternatives (if we have few alternatives; more committed to our relationships) c) Investments (some tangeable, some internal. Some things we put into the relationship we wouldn't get back if we were to walk away) -these work TOGETHER to predict commitment |
|
|
What determines the decision to stay vs. leave a relationship? |
COMMITMENT (not satisfaction)
-not always the same thing - commitment and satisfaction are DISTINCT constructs. The decision to stay or leave is a distinct cognitive decision
COMMITMENT: more stable and static (doesn't wane as much as satisfaction): something that is more enduring and less variable. Will predict more accurate outcome
SATISFACTION: one component, but two other important ones: investments and alternatives. (think of ppl who are reasonably happy in relationships but leave; or seemingly unhappy in relationships but stay... must be other variables in the mix) |
|
|
Why would people stay in abusive relationships? |
Think of the investment model
-ppl stay in these relationships even though they're being physically or psychologically abused. why? costs HIGH and benefits LOW -perceived quality of alternatives or actual quality - perhaps they don't think there is a better options -"I put so much into this... all this time I won't get back" |
|
|
What are the findings of the investment model in terms of satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size? |
Rewards and costs could explain 46% the variance in satisfaction.
Satisfaction, alternatives, investments could explain 61% of the variance in commitment.
-replicated in adults, homosexuals (far more similarities than differences) -gender more diagnostic than sexual orientation (female's ideas of satisfaction - more sensitive to cost than do males)
-how much we put into a relationship, how easy it is to stay/get out of a relationships, and how happy we are = key factors (see above slides) -this model also applied to other things: ex: whether people stay or leave their job. so - doesn’t only apply to romantic relationships! |
|
|
Explain the Spring break study |
INVESTMENT MODEL: predicting infidelity in relationships
12 men, 25 women, all exclusive daters (partners who will be separated over the week)
-Time 1-2 days before spring break (called in; given questionnaires that would assess satisfaction, investments, alternatives). Asked whether they were TEMPTED to engage in infidelity with another person and whether they ACTUALLY did it
Completed the survey over 9 days of spring break.
Findings: 70% reported emotional infidelity and 41% reported physical infidelity
|
|
|
What do the results of the spring break study tell us? |
Investment model does in fact do a good job predicting both long and short term!
-ppl who had potentially better options - far more likely to engage in physical infidelity (positive correlation) -ppl who made more investments - less likely to engage -negative correlations for commitment/infidelity (least likely to engage in infidelity), satisfaction/infidelity (2nd least likely to engage), investment/infidelity (3rd least likely to engage).
PRO TIP: prime commitment with partner BEFORE separating! |
|
|
Describe the reward theory of attraction |
The theory that we like those whose behaviour is rewarding to us or whom we associate with rewarding events.
Proximity is rewarding: costs less time and effort to receive friendship's benefits with someone who lives/works close by
We like attractive people b/c we perceive that they offer other desirable traits and because we benefit by associating with them
When others have similar opinions = we feel REWARDED as we presume they like us in return
-those who SHARE our views help VALIDATE those views (esp. if we have successfully converted 'em to our way of thinking)! |
|
|
Describe love (what are the 3 components?) |
1. INTIMACY 2. PASSION 3. COMMITMENT |
|
|
Describe passionate love |
Experienced as a bewildering confusion of ecstasy and anxiety, elation and pain.
Two-factor theory of emotions: suggest that in a romantic context, arousal from any source, even painful experiences, can be steered into PASSION -arousal x it's label = emotion. -it is a biological as well as psychological phenomenon |
|
|
What are variations in love in terms of culture and gender? |
-men: tend to fall in love more readily; all out of love more slowly, and are less likely than women to break up a premarital romance
-once in love: women are typically as emotionally involved as their partners, or more so. More likely to focus on the INTIMACY of the FRIENDSHIP and on their concern for partner
-men more likely than women to think about the playful and physical aspects of the relationships |
|
|
Define companionate love |
The affection we feel for those with whom our lives are deeply intertwined. -basically, when a close relationship endures (settles into steadier but still warm afterglow of companionate love) -lower key than passionate love; activates diff parts of brain
|
|
|
What 3 factors enable close (companionate) relationships? (textbook) |
1. Attachment styles: secure attachments (ex: enduring marriage): mark happy life
2. Equity: companionate love most likely to endure when both partners feel the partnership is equitable, with both perceiving themselves receiving from the relationship in proportion to what they contribute to it
3. Self-disclosure: opportunity for intimate self-disclosure (state achieved gradually as each partner reciprocates the other's increasing openness). |
|
|
Secure vs. Preoccupied (anxious-ambivalent) vs. Dismissie vs. Fearful attachment in adults |
1. SECURE attachment -underlying trust sustains relationships through times of conflict -find it easy to get close to others and don't fret about getting too dependent or being abandoned. As lovers: enjoy sexuality within the context of a continuing relationship. Relationships tend to be satisfying and enduring. Have positive image of both self and others.
2. PREOCCUPIED (AKA anxious-ambivalent): marked by sense of one's own unworthiness and anxiety, ambivalence, and possessiveness. Less trusting, more possessive and jealous. May break up repeatedly with same person. Conflict: emotional and often angry
3. DISMISSIVE: avoidant relationship style marked by distrust of others
4. FEARFUL attachment: avoidant relationship style marked by fear of REJECTION. (share same characteristics of avoidance). Tend to be less invested in relationships and more likely to leave them. More likely to engage in one-night stands of sex without love. |
|
|
Give an example that illustrates the differences between dismissive attachment and fearful attachment |
Dismissive: "I want to keep my options open"
Fearful: "I am uncomfortable getting close to others" |
|
|
Describe equity |
Equity: a condition in which the outcomes people receive from a relationship are proportional to what they contribute to it.
NOTE: equitable outcomes needn't always be EQUAL outcomes -(if both feel their outcomes correspond to the assets and efforts each contributes, then both perceive equality) |
|
|
Explain long-term equity and perceived equity and satisfaction |
Long-term equity: those involved in an equitable, long-term relationship are unconcerned with short-term equity
Perceived equity and satisfaction: those in an equitable relationship are more content! -BUT: those who perceive their relationship as inequitable feel DISCOMFORT: the one who has better deal may feel guilty and one who senses raw deal may feel strong irritation |
|
|
Discuss self-disclosure and disclosure reciprocity |
Self-disclosure: revealing intimate aspects of oneself to others. We like those who disclose and we disclose to those whom we like. (after disclosing to them; we like them more!)
Disclosure reciprocity: the tendency for one person's intimacy of self-disclosure to match that of a conversational partner. (disclosure begets disclosure).
Women are more willing to disclose their fears and weaknesses than are men. |
|
|
Discuss divorce in terms of cultural values |
Individualistic cultures: love is a feeling and people ask "what does my heart say?" have more divorce than do communal cultures (where love entails obligation and people ask, "what will OTHER PEOPLE say?"
-Those whose commitment to a union outlasts the desires that gave birth to it will endure times of conflict and unhappiness |
|
|
Describe the detachment process |
-a process, not an event -among dating couples: the closer and longer the relationship and the fewer alternatives, the more painful the breakup -months of years later: ppl recall more pain over spurning someone's love than over having been spurned -additional costs for married couples: parents/friends responses, guilt over broken vows, anguish over reduced household income... |
