Psychology 301 Social Psychology Lecture 21, Nov 18, 2008 Attraction and Relationships Instructor: Cherisse Seaton

Overview Defining Intimacy & Love Theories of Love Why relationships? Evolutionary perspective Maintaining close relationships: Social Exchange Theory

Announcements Also: Leading global media company, Pearson, is seeking college and university students to be part of the Pearson Student Advisory Board program from June 2009 - June 2010 for their Higher Education business http://www.pearsonstudents.com/ Pearson Seeking Two Canadian Student Advisors

Readings for this section Aronson et al. Chapter 9

Review II. Relationships Similarity Self-disclosure Satisfaction Ending

What Defines a Close Relationship? Different types: Friends Romantic partners Parents Children Siblings

Interpersonal attraction: The positive attitude that we form about another person.

Love versus liking: Quantitative Vs Qualitative difference Unidimensional: Heider LOVE Liking Neutral Dislike HATE Distinct: Freud: love = sublimated sexual desire Maslow: love = stems from self-deficiencies Rubin (1973) Distinct – overlapping

Love The movement from close relationships to romantic relationships involves greater interdependence and intimacy. Love appears to come in several varieties that arise in different ways and have different consequences. How many kinds of love are there?

In fact, there are quite a few kinds of love . . .

Love Hatfield and Walster (1981) Two major kinds of love: 1.Companionate love 2. Passionate love Distinction between these two

Companionate love Definition: Friendship Familial love “The feelings of intimacy and affection we feel for another person about whom we care deeply” Friendship Familial love High level of liking Mutual respect Care

Passionate Love Definition: Characteristics: “The feelings of intense longing, accompanied by physiological arousal, we feel for another person; when our love is reciprocated, we feel great fulfillment and ecstasy, but when it is not, we feel sadness and despair” Characteristics: Intense pain and pleasure Preoccupation Idealize High arousal

Gender & Love Men: Women: Fall in love more quickly than women. Are more likely to endorse romantic beliefs such as ‘true love lasts forever’. Women: Hold a more practical, friendship-based orientation to love (i.e. a companionate view of love).

Close Relationships The movement from casual to close relationships involves the development of interdependence. The first close relationships develop in the family and set the stage for the relationships that we will form throughout our lives.

John Bowlby’s Theory of Attachment Relationships Infants have two competing needs: The need for safety The need to explore There must be an evolutionary mechanism that provides a balance between these two needs This mechanism is attachment “Attachment” is a pre-wired, biological mechanism that is best understood in an evolutionary context Attachment to parents provides the infant with a secure base

Patterns of Infant Attachment Secure Use the attachment figure as an effective secure base from which to explore the world. Avoidant Anxious about the attachment figure's responsiveness and have developed a defensive strategy for managing their anxiety. Bartholomew splits category into: Fearful Dismissive Ambivalent Both anxiety and mixed feelings about the attachment figure are readily observable.

Attachment Relationships Our earliest developmental experiences allow us to form two working models--one about the self and another about other people. The working model about the self reflects our basic feelings of self-worth or self-esteem. Model of self = the self as worthy of love and support The working model about others reflects our basic beliefs involving interpersonal trust. Model of others = other people are seen as trustworthy and available vs. unreliable/rejecting Romantic attachment styles vary along these two dimensions

Romantic Attachment Styles

The Four Romantic Attachment Styles Secure (47%) = a sense of worthiness (lovability) plus an expectation that other people are generally accepting and responsive. Preoccupied (14%; F > M) = a sense of unworthiness (unlovability) combined with a positive evaluation of others. Fearful (21%)= a sense of unworthiness (unlovability) combined with an expectation that others will be negatively predisposed (untrustworthy and rejecting). Dismissing (18%; M > F) = indicates a sense of love-worthiness combined with a negative disposition toward other people.

Types of Love Henrick & Henrick’s “wheel of love” Eros -- emotionally intense Agape -- selfless, sacrificing love Mania – possessive, dependent love Pragma -- practical love Storge -- friendship love Ludus -- selfish love; practiced as a game

Aspects of Romantic Love: Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love Sternberg claims that different types of relationships are based on different combinations of three qualities: Intimacy – warmth, closeness and sharing of self Passion – an intense emotional response to another person Commitment – the decision to maintain the relationship Different combinations of the three results in seven different ‘forms’ of love

Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love

Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love The components of Sternberg’s model change in level over time, accounting for the changing nature of love in most long-term relationships.

What’s Love Got to Do With It? Evolutionary psychologists (e.g., Buss & Schmitt, 1993) argue that “love” is just an adaptation to insure survival of the species. It keeps parents together to provide protection of offspring who require a lengthy period of development before they can fend for themselves. According to this view, men and women have quite different mate selection strategies that can be detected today in their views about sexual relations, desirable features in a mate, and infidelity. Genetic or evolutionary ‘fitness’ = reproductive success (ability to pass on genes) Human behaviour adapted to maximize reproductive success

Evolutionary perspective We behave in ways to further the existence of our offspring For women, reproduction is more demanding For men, reproductions is much less constraining Leads to different types of mate preferences

How many sexual partners do you desire? How do the different evolutionary concerns of men and women affect their attitudes about sex and love? How many sexual partners do you desire?

Buss & Schmidt (1993) From: Buss & Schmidt (1993) But see: Pederson et al. (2002) for a refutation

How important is good financial prospects in a mate? How do the different evolutionary concerns of men and women affect their attitudes about sex and love? How important is good financial prospects in a mate?

How important is physical attractiveness in a mate? How do the different evolutionary concerns of men and women affect their attitudes about sex and love? How important is physical attractiveness in a mate?

Gender and the Personal Columns Males Females Offer Seek Offer Seek Money Job information Personality traits (e.g., sincerity) Money Status Career Young Physically attractive Physical attractiveness

Infidelity National surveys indicate extramarital infidelity in 20-25% of American marriages (Atkins et al., 2001). Men – more likely sexual; women more likely ‘love affair’ (emotional)

Sexual Vs. Emotional Infidelity Buss et al. (1992): Jealousy and Distress

Sexual Vs. Emotional Infidelity Buss et al. (1992) Physiological correlates

Maintaining close relationships Jealousy caused by infidelity One of the most damaging issues for a relationship One of the most difficult problems to treat in therapy; although therapists estimated 50-65% of couples undergo therapy as a result of infidelity (Atkins et al., 2001) Other issues: Existence of low rewards and high costs. Inequity in relationship (E.g., Equity theory) What (other) theories explain why people maintain relationships?

Social Exchange Theory Definition: How people feel about their relationships depends on: Their perception of the rewards and costs of the relationship. The kind of relationship they deserve. Their chances of having a better relationship with someone else. Based on the Max-Min principle People seek to maximize their benefits and minimize their costs A relationship is more satisfying the more rewards and fewer costs it entails

Social Exchange Theory Rewards: All positive things that a close relationship offers people. These are all of the reasons why somebody would want to be in a relationship. Costs: All of the downsides to a relationship. These are all of the reasons why somebody would not want to be in a relationship. Outcome: The difference between the rewards and costs of a relationship. Outcome = Rewards - Costs

Social Exchange Theory Additional factors that influence one’s interpretation of the outcome: Comparison level (CL): The standard against which the outcome is compared Comparison level alternative (CLalt): A person’s expectations about his or her other alternatives.

Social Exchange Theory Loss of freedom, $, time, etc. Costs (Inputs) Benefits (Outputs) Companionship, sexual fulfillment, etc. Comparison Level (e.g., a standard) Other person in a relationship, yourself in the past, an ideal Comparison Level for Alternatives Evaluation of the value of other partners

Social Exchange Theory: The investment model Rusbult (1983) The investment model suggests that people’s commitment to a relationship depends on: Their satisfaction with the relationship in terms of rewards, costs, and comparison level for alternatives. How much they have invested in the relationship that would be lost by leaving it.

Social Exchange Theory: The investment model The investment model argues that commitment (C) to a relationship is determined by satisfaction (S) with the current relationship, investment (I) in the current relationship, and the availability of attractive alternatives (A) to the current relationship.

Social Exchange Theory: The investment model The investment model explains why people will sometimes remain (High Commitment) in unhappy (Low Satisfaction) relationships. Low alternatives may keep a person in an unhappy relationship just because there is nowhere else to go High investments create a situation of psychological entrapment. The trapped person stays to justify the past investments. More may be invested in the relationship to try to make it better, but that escalates the need to remain to justify those investments. What theory explains this?

Social Exchange Theory: The investment model Rusbult (1983)

Commitment Personal dedication Constraint commitment Moral commitment Motivation to maintain or enhance a relationship Constraint commitment Negative factors that keep a relationship going Moral commitment Based on sense of obligation Factors that impact commitment Investments of time, money, energy, and emotions in the relationship The availability of alternatives

Commitment & “mate poaching”: The availability of alternatives Schmidt (2004) N = 16,000 53 countries Mate poaching: Approx 20% of long-term relationships begin when 1 or both partners are involved with others Attempted to poach Succumbed Men 62% 47% Women 40% 32%

In Summary, Although “love”, or at least commitment, may have evolved to insure protection of offspring that required a lengthy period of development, today it is influenced by a large number of situational and cultural factors.