Human Relationships Vocab w/o Group Dynamics

Prosocial behavior

Behavior intended to benefit individuals/society

Altruism

Selfless helping behavior without expecting benefit or that comes at a cost to the helper

Kin Selection Theory

Predicts degree of altruism depending on genetic similarity

Selfish Gene Theory

Theory proposed by Dawkins that altruism is a way to guarantee one’s genes will be passed on; sacrifice is to protect kin

Evaluate the Biological Explanations for Altruism

• Overly reductionist (ignores socialization, culture, individual experiences/dispositional factors)

• Impossible to isolate genetic and cultural variables in controlled conditions

• No actual evidence of a specific gene that is responsible for altruistic behavior

• Low generalizability: Animal research does not necessarily reflect human behavior

• Data not reliable: often relies on self-reported feedback about actions

• Etic approaches are not always appropriate, people are taught different manners

Theory of mind

The ability to understand that others have thoughts, beliefs, and perspectives that are different from our own

Empathy Altruism Model

Suggests people can experience two emotions when seeing someone suffering: personal distress and empathetic concern. Personal distress leads to egoistic helping, while empathetic concern leads to altruistic concern.

(ex. Toi and Batson, girl in accident and female university student volunteers, high escape vs. low escape condition)

Empathy overload

Taking on others emotions so strongly that it affects one’s own mental health

Evaluate cognitive explanations for altruism

• Supported by human and animal studies

• Does explain dispositional differences, but has limited predictive power

• Operationalizing “empathy” is difficult

• Extraneous variables: Social norms, observer effect, personal benefit, guilt

Brief Overview of what concepts the sociocultural theory of pro-social behavior is based on

• In-group favoritism: more likely to help those we identify with since we feel they are more competent and that means when they need help it is deserved

• We have an innate need to belong, helping behavior is one way to seek approval of a group

• Social norms can have both negative and positive effects on helping behavior: either we strongly identify with others and are inclined to help, or we feel so removed that others’ struggles become “not our business”

• Simpatico Hypothesis: societies where social obligations are prioritized over individual achievement have lower economic productivity but increased helping behavior

Evaluate sociocultural explanations for pro-social behavior

• High ecological validity: results are similar for both field and controlled experiments

• Ecological fallacy: generalizes across cultures and assumes the behavior of certain cultures

• Difficult to isolate the specific impact of sociocultural variables

Bystanderism

Not helping others in need because we assume others will

Diffusion of responsibility

People will assume others will help victims in need, as the number of people near the event increases, the chances of others helping will decrease

Pluralistic Ignorance

If others aren’t reacting, we won’t either, a conflict between “help those in need” and “do what everyone else is doing”

Social Exchange Theory

Human relationships are based on subjective cost-benefit analysis

• Arousal is a motivational factor since bystanders are motivated to reduce it

• Empathy, proximity, length of incident can increase arousal

• Seeking help from others, leaving, or decided help isn’t needed will decrease arousal

• A lack of balance short-term is okay, but most be restored in order for relationships to be maintained

Law of Social Impact

Helping is a result of SIN: the Strength of the situation, the Immediacy required, and the Number of people around

Intergroup dynamics

How members of different groups interact with each other, can be explained by Social Identity Theory: first we identify with a group, then we attach value to being a member, and finally we gain emotional investment in our membership

Neurotransmitters and Hormones and how they impact human relationships/attraction

• Dopamine: Feel-good neurotransmitter released when thinking about lover

• Noradrenaline: Neurotransmitter that controls emotion/stress and stimulates adrenaline

• Serotonin: Neurohormone that increases when in love, which causes obsession and mood extremes in relationships

• Testosterone: Hormone that increases sex drive and aggression, increasing desire to pursue partner

• Vasopressin: Hormone that plays a role in long-term commitment

• Oxytocin: increases trust between mother and child and in others

Similarity Attraction Model

We find those who we see as more similar to ourselves more attractive, the exception is that usually one person is more submissive and the other more dominating

Internal Working Model

Motivation to form attachment is biological, but the process of forming attachment is formed by experience and our early schema of relationships

Halo Effect

The tendency for an impression in one area to influence our opinion of another area (ex. attractiveness on likability)

Evaluate cognitive theories of attraction

• Account for dispositional factors

• Higher ecological validity

• Constructs are difficult to operationalize/measure (ex. schema)

• Relationships are often influenced by factors we can’t control or constantly observe

Mere Exposure Effect

The phenomenon where we tend to develop a preference for things because we are more familiar with them

What are the effects of culture on attraction?

• “Passionate” love is largely a western phenomenon

• Individualistic countries are more likely to rate love as essential for marriage and agree that marriages should end if there is a lack

• Preferences in partners seem to be universal because of evolutionary selection pressure on men

Distress-maintaining patterns of behavior

When partners blame each other for issues in the relationships and do not give each other credit for positive events in the relationships

Social Penetration Theory

Close relationships form by way of gradual self-disclosure. Self-disclosure leads to self-validation, which is part of the cost-benefit analysis of being in a relationship. Those who disclose more personal info tend to be more liked and people tend to disclose more info to those who they like.

What are the Different Levels of Disclosure?

1. Orientation stage: small talk, sharing simple info

2. Exploratory stage: revealing more about ones feelings and opinions

3. Affective stage: sharing private and personal information

4. Stable stage: having strong trust in one’s partner, being able to predict their emotions

Evaluation of the role of communication in relationships

• Extraneous variables: hard to separate communication with other factors that impact relationships, difficult to determine cause-and-effect

• Most research is western

• Reductionist: doesn’t discuss how men and women have different patterns of disclosure

Equity Theory

States that the perception of equality is what determines relationship stability. This may explain infidelity: if we think our partner is inadequate, we cheat to restore balance of obligation.

Those who feel deprived of equality and those who feel overbenefited are both least likely to think their relationship will last.

Fatal Attraction Theory

When what once attracted us to someone may end up being the reason for breaking up with them

Common patterns: fun → foolish, strong → domineering, spontaneous → unpredictable