What is social exchange theory?
: relationships are formed and maintained
on a cost-benefit analysis
➢ Want to maximize rewards while minimizing costs
➢ Seek partners with the highest mate value possible
“Shopping for the best partner you can get”
What is Intrasexual selection
driven by competition among
individuals of same sex
What is Intersexual selection
driven by mate choice
What is Naturalistic fallacy?
U know this
Explain the study on physical attraction:
They looked at
- Target
- Perceiver
- Interaction between the two
- Target (person in pic)
- Perceiver (person doing the rating)
- Interaction between the two
➢ Target = 33%
➢ Perceiver = 27%
➢ Relationship = 40%
Shows that: there is some consensus on who is attractive, but idiosyncratic preferences also come into play
do we agree on who’s attractive?
there is broad consensus about the general features that are considered attractive
➢ Evident across different cultural groups
➢ Newborn infants share adults’ preferences
* These two factors suggest a
degree of innateness
Attractive features:
What is facial symmetry?
Infants and Monkeys prefer this
When both sides are even and symmetrical
Why is facial symmetry
attractive?
Perceptual fluency explanation
average (“prototypical”) and more symmetrical faces are easier to process, and ease of processing is associated with feelings of pleasantness
Why is facial symmetry attractive?
Evolutionary explanation
: facial symmetry is indicator of reproductive fitness
➢ Pronounced asymmetry may be indicative of issues during prenatal
development (e.g., injuries in utero, infectious disease experienced by the
mother)
➢ Declining health in macaques associated with declines in facial symmetry
(Little et al., 2012)
➢ Some evidence that facial symmetry is linked to better health in humans as
well (Thornhill & Gangestad, 2005)
What are Caveats of facial symmetry being attractive?
Subtle asymmetries do not detract
from attractiveness
* Perfect symmetry may be less attractive
➢ May exaggerate imbalances or “imperfections” in the face (make ppl look alien)
➢ Balance or “averageness” of features may be more important
What is the “averageness” effect?
Faces that are “average” are seen as more
attractive
➢ Tend to perceive a composite image of
many faces “averaged” together as more attractive than the individual faces of which the composite is comprised
- No features “stick out”
What should be noted about liking for symmetry/averageness may not trump our liking for familiarity
(New Zealand and Netherlands)
Participants from both countries
- Found a preference for morphed faces ONLY if they weren’t familiar with the original complied faces
Ex. N Zealand participant liked morph of Netherlands person
- Did not like Morph of N Zealand local celebrities
What is the Mere exposure effect?
We tend to like people and things more after we have been repeatedly
exposed to them (mere exposure) and they
become more familiar to us
Sex-specific preferences:
Fem Features
Female features: cross-cultural preference for “baby-faced” features (large eyes, small nose, small chin, full lips)
➢ But combined with signs of maturity: e.g.,
high, prominent cheekbones, thick hair
Sex-specific preferences
- Less consensus on male features
Preference for wide smile & broad jaw and
forehead
➢ But “softer” features attractive too (convey warmth & friendliness)
Sex-specific preferences
Women’s bodies
- Waist-to-hip ratio = .70
– Signal of fertility, better physical health - Lumbar curvature (45.5 degrees)
– Thought to have helped with pregnancy, can be mimicked with heels
Sex-specific preferences
Men’s bodies
- Waist-to-hip-ratio= .90
– Also linked to better physical
health - Shoulder-to-hip ratio = 1.2
- Height
- Signals of strength and status
Explain the “What’s good is beautiful bias”
People often assume attractive
individuals have other desirable traits
➢ E.g., kinder, more sensitive, more
trustworthy, more competent
What are some exceptions to the “What’s good is beautiful bias”?
In competitive contexts (esp. women judging other women— intrasexual competition), attractiveness can instead evoke envy or derogation
- We don’t look kindly on those who use their looks to deceive
Where does the “What is beautiful is
good” bias come from?
ubiquitous cultural stereotypes
Ex. Disney Princesses = beautiful and kind
Villians = ugly and evil
How is Beauty is an intrinsic reward?
Feel more positively when interacting (or expecting to interact) with attractive targets
➢ Overlap in brain regions reactive to physically attractive faces & rewards like
food and money
* We generally want to approach rewarding stimuli
➢ E.g., more likely to initiate conversations with attractive individua
What is beautiful is good because what is
beautiful is desired?
(three step cycle)
- Beauty is an intrinsic reward
- We generally want to approach rewarding stimuli
- Through projection, perceive attractive targets as possessing attributes compatible with our approach goal
(ex. if we want someone funny / kind we might see that)
“We see what we want to see”
What is the original view
(of attractiveness and bonding)
- See Target’s physical attractiveness
- Perceived positive interpersonal attributes (assume the have positive traits)
- Desire to bond with target
What is Motivated cognition view?
(of attractiveness and bonding)
- Target’s physical attractiveness
- Desire to bond with target
- Perceived positive interpersonal
attributes
(We want to bond so we project attractiveness and nice traits)
-
Class 114
-
Class 261
-
Class 315
-
Class 433
-
Class 529
-
Class 619
-
Class 724
-
Class 823
-
Class 915
-
Class 1021
-
Class 1133
-
Class 1226
-
Class 1322
-
Class 14: Attachment 138
-
Class 1526
-
Class 1631
-
Class 17: Sexuality 138
-
Class 1842
-
Class 19: Conflict 153
-
Class 2041
-
Class 21: Gaslighting8
-
Class 22: Power, Influence, & Violence 132
-
Class 2316
-
Class 24: Relationship dissolution 17
-
Class 2543
-
Singlehood16
-
Couples Therapy8
