Social Psych Lecture 7 2.16
- Self-handicapping: people create obstacles/excuses for themselves to avoid blaming self for failure
- Two ways:
- Create obstacles (Behavioral S-H)
- Drugs
- Alcohol
- Reduced effort
- Failure to prepare
- Men tend towards this
- Ready-made excuses (Reported S-H)
- Women tend towards this
- Create obstacles (Behavioral S-H)
- Drawbacks:
- Come to believe excuses and exert less effort
- Come to be disliked by others
- Women more critical of self-handicapping than men
- Two ways:
- Identity Negotiation (Swann, 1987)
- Swann & Read (1983)
- Basic Principle: Persons seek verification and confirmation of their self-concepts
- What happens if that doesn't occur?
- Method
- Two strangers meet
- Person A forms impression of B
- B is given false expectation of A's "view" of B
- Would you rather people have a positive view of you or an accurate view of you?
- It depends on your self-concept
- Positive: no conflict
- Negative:
- Affective Crossfire
- Swann, Hixon, & de la Ronde (1992)
- Persons with positive self-concepts were more committed to partners who thought well of them
- Persons with negative self-concepts were more committed to partners who thought less well of them
- It depends on your self-concept
- Generality
- Aggressive boys
- Rejection Sensitivity
- Rejection-sensitive people behave more negatively in conflicts w/partners
Attraction and Relationships:
- Rejection-sensitive people behave more negatively in conflicts w/partners
- Basic Principle: Persons seek verification and confirmation of their self-concepts
- Swann & Read (1983)
- Initial Attraction:
- Propinquity (physical closeness)
- Festinger, Schachter, & Back (1950)
- Friendships in married student housing
- 41% of next door neighbors got together socially
- 22% next door away
- only 10% at opposite end of hall
- Exception: ppl at the hallway ends were more likely to be friends w/someone one lvl up (stairways were at the ends of the halls)
- Friendships in married student housing
- Mere Exposure Effect
- Repeated exposure to a stimulus increases our liking for it
- Zajonc (1968)--Chinese characters
- Moreland & Beach (1992)
- female "student" attends class 0, 5, 10, or 15 times
- Students in class rate attractiveness of picture
- None of the students could remember whether they had seen the women before or not
- The more often the woman had been to class, the more attractive she was rated
- Festinger, Schachter, & Back (1950)
- Similarity
- Attitudes:
- Persons like another when they share a high proportion of similar attitudes
- Personality (not so straightforward)
- These traits are favored:
- Agreeableness
- Conscientiousness
- Emotional Stability (opposite of Neuroticism)
- Perceived Similarity>Actual Similarity
- These traits are favored:
- Attitudes:
- Reciprocal Liking
- Knowing someone likes us fuels attraction to that individual
- May even overcome lack of similarity
- In most typical circumstances, similarity is the single best predictor of interpersonal attraction, except physical attractiveness
- Physical Attractiveness
- Readily obvious
- Attractive ppl are liked better than less attractive ppl
- Walster et al. (1966)
- Randomly pair for get-acquainted date
- No. 1 predictor for liking was physical attractiveness
- Sprecher & Duck (1994)--same result
- What features are attractive
- In women
- large eyes, small nose, small chin (neonatal features)
- prominent cheekbones (maturity features)
- high eyebrows, large pupils, big smile (expressive features)
- In men:
- large eyes (neonatal features)
- prominent cheekbones, large chin (maturity features)
- big smile (expressive features)
- In women
- "What is beautiful...is good" stereotype
- Strongest effects for more sociable, extroverted, popular
- Moderate effects for sexual warmth, happiness, assertiveness
- Snyder, Tanke, & Berscheid (1977)
- Men and women "get acquainted"
- Results:
- Men: more sociable, warmer to "attractive" partner
- Women tended to confirm
- Independent Observers:
- "attractive" women rated as more confident, animated, warm, and attractive
- Men: more sociable, warmer to "attractive" partner
- Andersen & Bem (1981) replicated with roles reversed
- Evolutionary Approach:
- Women face higher reproductive "costs"
- Men face lower reproductive "costs"
- Women value...
- Resources & status, especially if the man will invest those things in her and her offspring
- Men value...
- Youth & attractiveness
- But: access to financial resources for women...
- Women with access to financial resources place more importance on the man's attractiveness
- But: reversing roles: speed-dating study
- women seated, men move: women pickier than men
- men seated, women move: men pickier than women
- Propinquity (physical closeness)