Human relationships Paper 2 ERQs

Biological Approach

Overall:

• Argues that attraction is based on natural selection

• attracted to traits that have the greatest advantage of offspring

• argues attraction is a physiological and evolutionary response 

• mainly preference based on opposite sex attraction 

• Two theories then however, the biological approach only looks at the formation of relationships from one aspect

NAPEP

Theory #1

Role of biochemicals in love - Helen Fisher’s Love cocktail

Attraction is associated with a

systemic production of biochemicals like neurotransmitters that affect behavior

Neurochemical reaction is linked to where?

Dopamine rich areas that that are associated with reward, motivation, and pleasure

We have evolved to attract…

mates and enable individuals to focus energy on one individual partner due to the dopamine forming an addiction like obsession  

The love cocktail is characterized as a neurochemical reaction or cocktail of the  neurotransmitters:

Dopamine, noradrenaline, serotonin, testosterone (a hormone) 

Helen Fisher’s Love Cocktail

Research method

Quasi-experiment

Aim

To test if there will be specific neural mechanisms associated with attraction and romantic love 

Sample

17 participants (10F, 7M), avg 21 years old

Procedure

• determined duration, intensity, nature of relationship through semi-structured interview

• completed a passionate love scale on a likert scale (PLS) 

• Then, shown an image of their partner for 30 seconds with fMRI 

• 40 second distraction test: to count backwards by 7s)

• photo of acquaintance for 30 seconds 

• 20 second distraction test again to count backwards 

• fMRI scan for a total of 12 minutes

Results

• showed partner’s image condition: ventral tegmental area (VTA) + right caudate nucleus (RCN) had activity

  • VTA: rich in dopamine and associated with rewards

  • RCN: detection + expectation of rewards 

Findings

• romantic love is linked to dopamine rich areas in the brain 

• love is a motivation system that drives us to who we “love” and are attracted to

• facilitates monogamy as we feel pleasure being with a person

• Dopamine influences our drive towards being in love 

GRAVE strength

internal validity as a relationship could be established between their partner and dopaminergic areas of the brain 

GRAVE limitations 

not generalizable as they only used younger couples who may be more socially active and have different relationships to older couples 

Evolutionary role on relationship formation

The theory focuses on…

adaptation and survival of the fittest as defined by natural selection

It emphasizes

how people select mates in a way that optimizes reproduction and survival in opposite sex attraction 

traits that have been deemed attractive

are distinct between male and female

Sexual selection

refers to a form of natural selection where the best mate is chosen for the offspring

Intersexual selection

competition between one sex choosing mates of the opposite sex based on certain characteristics 

Johnston

Aim

To investigate how a woman’s menstrual cycle may influence what she finds attractive in a male

Research Method

Quasi Experiment

Sample

42 female participants uni students

Procedure

• participants shown M and F faces 

  • faces could be manipulated to be more fem or masc

• given a goal ex attractive or healthy male and manipulated the image till it met that goal  

Results

• stages of ovulation correlated to the characteristics they found attractive in a male 

• highest chance of contraception = stronger masculine features because it correlated to strength and reliable to raise their offspring

Findings

attraction is reliant on our tendency to choose a partner based on their ability to raise our offspring

GRAVE strength

internal validity as it was in a controlled lab setting

GRAVE limitation 

lacks mundane realism and generalizability of attraction as it was only a westernized female sample it also doesn’t consider social interaction so there is low ecological validity 

CAPER points of bio: 

• alternative theory: other influences not just evolutionary or biochemical, there is also similarity model of cognitive approach where who we are attracted to is simply because they are similar to us in age, social class, language or culture, not because of their ability to raise offspring

• Reductionist: doesn’t consider those with different sexual orientations or who are asexual only studied heterosexual individuals and only considers reproduction in that way 

• predictive power: able to find patterns in what is “attractive” to individuals so they are able to make predictions about best fit partners for offsprings or reproduction 

Cognitive approach to relationship formation 

Overall

• explains formation of relationships as a focus of internal mental factors both conscious and unconscious 

• our relationship choices and people e are attracted to are a result of our mental perceptions of individuals and our environment 

• one perspective + two theories 

Similar Attraction Model

Explains the extent to which people perceive 

themselves as similar to their partner which forms the theory where we are attracted to people who are more similar to ourself

We attracted to those with

shared interests, culture, language, social class, etc 

This preserves our own…

self esteem by feeling part of a group with shared values and cognitive consistency, the tendency to be influenced with ideas or people who have congruent thoughts to our own 

Markay and Markay

Research method

Questionnaire

Sample

169 66 males 103 females self selected of undergrad uni students

Aim

to investigate the extent to which similarity is a factor when people choose a partner

Procedure 

• participants given a questionnaire to describe characteristics, values, attitudes of ideal partner 

  • asked to not think of a specific person or relationship 

• Then asked participants to fill in a questionnaire to describe themselves

Results

• participants description of themselves were congruent to what they were looking for in a partner 

Procedure for follow up

• 106 heterosexual young couples in at least a 1 year relationship 

• self selected uni campus participants

• filled in a questionnaire about their characteristics and their partner’s characteristics 

Results follow up

• found that the results supported the model and was in line with the original study where participants description of themselves and their partner was similar 

• found that the most loving and harmonious relationships were only similar in some characteristics, not all ex) dominant and submissive personalities

• determined that total similarity is desired but not ideal to maintain a healthy relationship

GRAVE strength

• follow up was conducted and had consistent results, indicates that the study itself is reliable

• results are consistent throughout large sample size

GRAVE limitation

• self reported data entirely which is subject to demand characteristics and is also retrospective which questions the internal validity of the data collected 

• low generalizability 

Internal working model 

Suggests that a child…

forms a perception or model of relationships based on relationship of attachment style with caregiver

The motivation of attachment style and to form attachment in relationships is 

based on experience 

parental figures can influence 

attachment figures and expectations of a romantic relationship

Positive and negative relationships with parents or caregivers

It is argued that children experiencing love and are in a secure relationship will grow up to expect this in future relationships 

Negative relationships therefore will form poor relationships and expect negative treatment  

Hazen and Shafer 

Aim

to investigate how romantic love is an attachment process and how attachment histories have an effect on relationship formation 

Research method

questionnaire 

Sample

self selected of 620 people 14-82 years old with a mean age of 36 

42% married and 94% heretosexual 4% homo 2% bi 

Procedure

• questionnaire of a 3 part love quiz 

• Part 1: 56 statements on most important parts of relationships 

  • asked to rank strongly disagree to strongly agree on a likert scale 

• Part 2: specific questions about the nature of their relationship 

• Part 3: childhood relationship between child and parent and between parents 

• throughout: asked to focus on one current or previous relationship that was the most important

Results

• 54% demonstrated secure attachment 

  • characterized by trust, friendship and positive emotions

  • the follow up interview reviewed they had available and responsive parents 

• 25% anxious avoidant 

  • characterized as fear of closeness and lack of trust in relationship 

  • interview revealed rejecting or inattentive parents

• 19% anxious ambivalent 

  • preoccupied with love, often experiences painfully exciting love 

  • anxious, sometimes responsive parents

Findings

Childhood attachment shapes how love is viewed and is similar/shapes our relationships now 

strength

large sample size and age rage so data is relatively generalizable 

limitation

self reported data which is retrospective in nature and asked to focus only on one relationship indicating there is no pattern established 

likert scales can be interpreted differently indicating low construct validity 

CAPER for cog

• alternative theory is the biological evolutionary approach where the main focus is not our mental processes of what we find attractive based on our schema production of what a relationship looks like or who we are similar to but what is best for our offspring like Johnston et al where women who were at high chance of contraception during ovulation were more attracted to men with stronger masculine features for reliability to raise offspring 

• sample bias as the studies are etic in nature where only western participants  are studied so it is not cross cultural

• ability to include personal and cultural differences like schemas which universal or people who are similar which accounts for cultural similarities

Sociocultural approach to relationship formation 

Overall

• argues that the formation of relationships are due to our environment and cultural factors 

• attraction is different around the world and based on culture and shaped by our environmental factors 

• two theories one perspective 

Theory #1: Mere Exposure Effect

Mere Exposure effect is a psychological effect where people

have the tendency to be more attracted to things they are familiar with

It is enough for an individual to

see someone several times and become attracted to them 

more exposure =

likelihood of/and attraction

Moreland & Bach

Aim

To determine if the length of time around a person will change how others perceive them

Sample

130 undergraduate students 63M 67F

Research Method 

field experiment

Procedure

• Took place in the university with 4 confederates posing as students 

  • A = 0 sessions 

  • B = 5 sessions

  • C = 10 sessions

  • D = 15 sessions 

• Each confederate:

  • Arrived at the lecture 

  • walks slowly down hall

  • sat in a seat visible to all students

  • none of them interacted with the students 

• End of semester asked participants to rank the women 1-7 based on several traits 

  • popularity, attractiveness, intelligence, success - PAIS

  • also asked if they knew the confederates 

Results

• both M and F responded same or similar so sex was not confounding variable 

• women were not familiar but more classes = higher scores

• A = 3.62

• B = 3.88

• C = 4.25

• D = 4.38

Strength

field experiment so high ecological validity as there is a lack of demand characteristics, it was also longitudinal so it was done in naturalistic conditions

Limitation

confounding variables like how each woman was different and looked different where person D could just be more conventionally attractive, also almost impossible replicate

Theory #2: Effect of Culture 

Culture affects

who are we are attracted to form romantic relationships 

culture in relationships in modern days are affected by 

globalization and diversify 

many studies only focus on 

individualistic cultures 

values differ

between individualistic cultures as people tend to look after onself and are less integrated into the community vs a collectivist where it is heavy on community integration, there are ideological difference like the concept of love in marriages 

Levine

Aim

to study the cross cultural importance of romantic love in arranged marriages

Sample

497 male and 673 female uni students from 11 different countries

Research Method

Survey

Procedure

asked participants if they would marry someone who met all their needs and had all the qualities they desired but they did not love them

Results

USA - 4% said yes

Australia - 5%

UK - 8%

India 49%

Pakistan 51%

Findings

• India and Pakistan are collectivist cultures and arranged marriages are more normalized.

• more people would want to do an arrange marriage if it is the norm if they had all the desired qualities as it is not the importance of oneself that is important in a collectivist culture vs westernized individualist cultures where your own opinion and love is vital to a marriage or relationship forming.

• arranged marriages are less encouraged in individualist cultures.

Strength

generalizable because it works cross culturally and it works with a population that might be preparing for marriage so it is relevant and generalizable to this age of participants.

Limitation

Self reported so it is subject to demand characteristics and social desirability effect. Low ecological validity because it is in an ideal situation also ignores factors like gender inequality in some countries where women have no choice in participating in an arranged marriage as they are highly reliant on men.

CAPER

• alt theory can include not just exposure to people or values in a relationship but our human tendency to attract mates based on their ability to help us raise offspring - Johnston et al shows that it is also based on our features that help us raise children not just our environment or our sense of love

• credibility - survey and field experiment so sociocultural approach importance of environment can be applicable to real life situations

Communication in relationships 

Overall

• communication is important in relationships it can be make or break, lead to healthy or negative effects on the realtionship

• communication methods are complex

• theories + one aspect

Theory #1: Patterns of Communication

How coupes communicate

could either be distress maintaining or relationship enhancing

Distress maintaining:

• unhealthy relationships that blame partners

• dont give partners credit for positive actions

• attributed to situational factors

Relationship enhancing:

• happy relationships that engage in communication that doesn’t follow blame 

• doesn’t assume they did things on purpose or for selfish reason 

Bradbury & Fincham

Aim

to determine the role of communication styles on the success of relationships