Discuss factors affecting attraction: self-disclosure (16 marks)
A01
Self- disclosure: revealing personal information about yourself.
2 elements and as both increase partners become more committed to each other:
1) Breadth - range of topics discussed
2) Depth - how sensitive/personal the info is
Depenetration - dissatisfied partners self-disclose less (gradual disengagement from relationship.)
For a relationship to develop there needs to be RECIPROCAL exchange in depth and breadth of
self-exclosure.
A01
Social penetration theory:
The gradual process of revealing your inner self to someone-else (reciprocal in romantic relationships). As
they increasingly disclose more, romantic partners 'penetrate’ more deeply into each other's lives and gain an
understanding of each other.
A03
One strength is that it has real world-application. Research can help people who want to improve
communication in their relationships. Romantic partners sometimes use self-disclosure deliberately to
increase intimacy and strengthen bonds. 57% of homosexual men and women said that open and honest
self-disclosure was the main way they maintained and deepened their relationships. If less skilled partners
learn to use self-disclose then this could bring benefits to their relationships in terms of deepening satisfaction
and commitment. This shows that psychological insights can be valuable in helping people with relationship
problems.
A03
One strength is that it has research support. In a study of heterosexual couples strong correlations between
satisfaction and self- disclosure were found. Men and women who used self-disclosure were more satisfied
and committed to their romantic relationship. Another study found that relationships are closer and or
satisfying when partners take turns to self-disclose. This increases the validity of the theory.
However…
Much of the research is correlational and it is usually assumed that greater self-disclosure creates more
satisfaction but a correlation doesn't tell us if this is a valid conclusion. It could be that the more satisfied the
partners are the more likely they are to disclose. This rescues the valusit of the theory.
A03
One limitation is that it ignores cultural differences. It is not true in all cultures that increasing depth and
breadth of self-disclosure leads to a more satisfying and intimate romantic relationship. Research found that
men and women in the US (individualist culture) self-disclose more sexual thoughts and feelings than men
and women in China (collectivist culture). Despite lower levels of disclosure, satisfaction levels were no
different. Therefore it is a limited explanation because it is based on findings from individualist cultures
meaning it's not generalisable.
A03
One limitation is that self-disclosure is not limited to the growth of relationships. Strangers on the train
(Rubin) if you meet someone in transit you may disclose more and be more open to self-disclosure. This
therefore means that self- disclosure is not limited to the development of relationships as the self-diclosure
theory suggests.
, Discuss factors affecting attraction: physical attractiveness (16 marks)
A01
Physical attraction:
- Facial symmetry - honest signal (difficult to fake)
- Neotenous (baby face) - triggers protective instincts
The halo effect -
Personality traits associated with high levels of attractiveness are universally positive (stereotype). The belief
that good looking people have these traits makes them more attractive to us and so we behave positively
towards them (a self fulfilling prophecy).
Halo effect: Attractiveness has a disproportionate influence on our judgements of another person's personality
A01
The matching hypothesis: we look for partners who are similar to ourselves in terms of physical
attractiveness instead of choosing the most appealing people.
Research on the matching hypothesis - The Computer Dance
Procedure:
- Advert invited new male and female students at the University of Minnesota to a dance.
- 177 males & 170 females randomly selected.
- Participants rated for physical attractiveness by observers when collecting tickets.
- Completed questionnaires on personality, intelligence, and self-esteem (falsely told it would match them to
an ideal partner). (Pairing was random, not based on data.)
- Feedback collected via questionnaires during the dance and 6 months later.
Findings and Conclusion:
Results: Most liked partners were the most physically attractive; participants ignored their own attractiveness.
Disputes the matching hypothesis. We seek partners with similar attractiveness to avoid rejection.
A03
One strength of this explanation is that there is research support that the halo effect is associated with
physical attractiveness. Palmer and Peterson found that physically attractive people were rated as more
politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people. This halo effect was so powerful that it
persisted even when pp’s knew that these ‘knowledgeable’ people had no particular expertise. This suggests
that there are dangers for democracy if politicians are judged as suitable for office just because they are
considered physically attractive by enough voters.
A03
One strength is that the role of physical attractiveness is research support for the evolutionary process. A
study found that women who had features of large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small noses and high
eyebrows were rated highly attractive by white, hispanic and asian men. The researchers concluded that what
is considered physically attractive is consistent across societies. Attractive features are a sign of genetic
fitness and therefore similar in all cultures (sexual selection).
A03
One limitation of the matching hypothesis is not supported by real-world research into dating. A study looked
into the activity logs of a popular dating site (real world test of the matching hypothesis). Researchers found
that online daters sought meetings with potential partners who were more physically attractive than them.
Thai undermines the validity because it contradicts the central prediction of the hypothesis.
However…
Choosing individuals for dating could be considered a different situation than selecting a romantic partner for
a relationship. A meta analysis of 17 studies found a significant correlation in the rate of physical
attractiveness between romantic partners. Dating may also be seen as ‘fantasy’ as it is in lab research.
A03
One limitation is individual differences. There is evidence that some people don't attach much importance to
attractiveness. A study measured sexist attitudes of men and women and found that low scorers were
relatively unaffected by physical attractiveness when judging the liability of potential partners.
A01
Self- disclosure: revealing personal information about yourself.
2 elements and as both increase partners become more committed to each other:
1) Breadth - range of topics discussed
2) Depth - how sensitive/personal the info is
Depenetration - dissatisfied partners self-disclose less (gradual disengagement from relationship.)
For a relationship to develop there needs to be RECIPROCAL exchange in depth and breadth of
self-exclosure.
A01
Social penetration theory:
The gradual process of revealing your inner self to someone-else (reciprocal in romantic relationships). As
they increasingly disclose more, romantic partners 'penetrate’ more deeply into each other's lives and gain an
understanding of each other.
A03
One strength is that it has real world-application. Research can help people who want to improve
communication in their relationships. Romantic partners sometimes use self-disclosure deliberately to
increase intimacy and strengthen bonds. 57% of homosexual men and women said that open and honest
self-disclosure was the main way they maintained and deepened their relationships. If less skilled partners
learn to use self-disclose then this could bring benefits to their relationships in terms of deepening satisfaction
and commitment. This shows that psychological insights can be valuable in helping people with relationship
problems.
A03
One strength is that it has research support. In a study of heterosexual couples strong correlations between
satisfaction and self- disclosure were found. Men and women who used self-disclosure were more satisfied
and committed to their romantic relationship. Another study found that relationships are closer and or
satisfying when partners take turns to self-disclose. This increases the validity of the theory.
However…
Much of the research is correlational and it is usually assumed that greater self-disclosure creates more
satisfaction but a correlation doesn't tell us if this is a valid conclusion. It could be that the more satisfied the
partners are the more likely they are to disclose. This rescues the valusit of the theory.
A03
One limitation is that it ignores cultural differences. It is not true in all cultures that increasing depth and
breadth of self-disclosure leads to a more satisfying and intimate romantic relationship. Research found that
men and women in the US (individualist culture) self-disclose more sexual thoughts and feelings than men
and women in China (collectivist culture). Despite lower levels of disclosure, satisfaction levels were no
different. Therefore it is a limited explanation because it is based on findings from individualist cultures
meaning it's not generalisable.
A03
One limitation is that self-disclosure is not limited to the growth of relationships. Strangers on the train
(Rubin) if you meet someone in transit you may disclose more and be more open to self-disclosure. This
therefore means that self- disclosure is not limited to the development of relationships as the self-diclosure
theory suggests.
, Discuss factors affecting attraction: physical attractiveness (16 marks)
A01
Physical attraction:
- Facial symmetry - honest signal (difficult to fake)
- Neotenous (baby face) - triggers protective instincts
The halo effect -
Personality traits associated with high levels of attractiveness are universally positive (stereotype). The belief
that good looking people have these traits makes them more attractive to us and so we behave positively
towards them (a self fulfilling prophecy).
Halo effect: Attractiveness has a disproportionate influence on our judgements of another person's personality
A01
The matching hypothesis: we look for partners who are similar to ourselves in terms of physical
attractiveness instead of choosing the most appealing people.
Research on the matching hypothesis - The Computer Dance
Procedure:
- Advert invited new male and female students at the University of Minnesota to a dance.
- 177 males & 170 females randomly selected.
- Participants rated for physical attractiveness by observers when collecting tickets.
- Completed questionnaires on personality, intelligence, and self-esteem (falsely told it would match them to
an ideal partner). (Pairing was random, not based on data.)
- Feedback collected via questionnaires during the dance and 6 months later.
Findings and Conclusion:
Results: Most liked partners were the most physically attractive; participants ignored their own attractiveness.
Disputes the matching hypothesis. We seek partners with similar attractiveness to avoid rejection.
A03
One strength of this explanation is that there is research support that the halo effect is associated with
physical attractiveness. Palmer and Peterson found that physically attractive people were rated as more
politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people. This halo effect was so powerful that it
persisted even when pp’s knew that these ‘knowledgeable’ people had no particular expertise. This suggests
that there are dangers for democracy if politicians are judged as suitable for office just because they are
considered physically attractive by enough voters.
A03
One strength is that the role of physical attractiveness is research support for the evolutionary process. A
study found that women who had features of large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small noses and high
eyebrows were rated highly attractive by white, hispanic and asian men. The researchers concluded that what
is considered physically attractive is consistent across societies. Attractive features are a sign of genetic
fitness and therefore similar in all cultures (sexual selection).
A03
One limitation of the matching hypothesis is not supported by real-world research into dating. A study looked
into the activity logs of a popular dating site (real world test of the matching hypothesis). Researchers found
that online daters sought meetings with potential partners who were more physically attractive than them.
Thai undermines the validity because it contradicts the central prediction of the hypothesis.
However…
Choosing individuals for dating could be considered a different situation than selecting a romantic partner for
a relationship. A meta analysis of 17 studies found a significant correlation in the rate of physical
attractiveness between romantic partners. Dating may also be seen as ‘fantasy’ as it is in lab research.
A03
One limitation is individual differences. There is evidence that some people don't attach much importance to
attractiveness. A study measured sexist attitudes of men and women and found that low scorers were
relatively unaffected by physical attractiveness when judging the liability of potential partners.
