February 23rd and 25th Notes
February 23rd and 25th Notes Psych 360
Popular in Social Psych
Popular in Psychlogy
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by Lorena Roberts on Thursday February 25, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Psych 360 at University of Tennessee - Knoxville taught by Dr. Lowell Gaertner in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 23 views. For similar materials see Social Psych in Psychlogy at University of Tennessee - Knoxville.
Reviews for February 23rd and 25th Notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 02/25/16
Attraction 1 23 February 2016 Attraction I. Factors Affecting Attraction: a. Familiarity b. Mere exposure: when we’re exposed to something new and we don’t have a negative attitude towards it, repeated exposure leads to increased favorable attitudes towards it; initially neutral the more we like it; this happens for people and novel objects A. Familiarity or Mere Exposure E.g., Zajonc (1968): Participants see different bogus words; variance comes from how many times people are exposed to given words; this means some are repeated more than others; afterwards, you’re told to infer the meaning of the word; found that the words that the participants were exposed to more frequently were said to have a positive meaning E.g. Saegert, Swap, & Zajonc (1973): Participants are told that the researchers are testing taste; lots of rooms, lots of people, tasting different drinks; participants pass some people more times than others; rate how much they like the other people at the end; therefore, the more you’re exposed to some people, the more you like them *Classical conditioning: when we are exposed to something novel, the absence of something bad is the unconditioned stimulus; when nothing bad happens, we feel calm; the more familiar we become with someone, the more we like them B. Proximity: we like people that we’re closer to in space than those we’re more distant from; in order to form a relationship with somebody, you have to have contact with someone; liking and disliking comes from knowing someone even exists to begin with; if you’re to keep seeing and being around some person, you’re more likely to like them E.g., Festinger, Schacter, & Back (1950) MIT Housing: Married student housing; randomly assigned to apartments; asked to write down “friends”; the majority of the friends written down lived in close proximity; people who live in high traffic areas were listed by more people as a friend than people who live in low traffic areas C. Similarity: research suggests that we like similar others; people who share our attitudes; people who are attitudinally similar we like them more C.1. Attitudinal Similarity and Attraction E.g. Newcomb (1961): Free housing if they agreed to be in the studies; could not know anyone else in the house; they fill out attitudes towards different things at the beginning of the semester; those who were more attitudinally similar were more likely to be friends; what we don’t know about this is the causality Attraction 2 E.g., Donald Byrne: You’re told that you’re going to interact with the other participant; first, fill out your attitudes towards a number of issues; experimenter comes back and gives you the other person’s attitudes; this is manipulated; they’re asked to fill out a rating of how they think the other person is; what the find is a positive linear relationship between attraction and similarity; bogusother paradigm C.2. Similarity to Actual vs. Ideal self? E.g., LaPrelle, Hoyle, Insko, & Bernthal, (1990) rate actual self, ideal self, liked peers, and not liked peers on trait scales We are threatened by but also admire those who are what we want to become. Selfesteem doesn’t seem to play a role in this. D. Physical Attractiveness E.g., Walster, Aronson, Abrams, & Rottman (1966) “computer dance” College students were randomly assigned a partner to go to a dance together; when you get there, you fill out lots of measures and rate how physically attractive the other person is; half way through the dance they must rate how attracted they are to the other person; this is driven more by physical attractiveness than anything else D.1. Why? The attractive stereotype: we assume that physically attractive people are good people; \.2. Why? Basking In Reflected Beauty E.g., Kernis & Wheeler (1981): Participants are seated in a waiting room; two people come in and are seated; one of those people (peer) and the other (target); same sex people; rated whether the peer was attractive looking or not; manipulate whether or not the two people appear to be friends; D.3. Why? Cue to Reproductive Fitness
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'