A

1. Interpersonal Relationships_BB

Page 1: Introduction

  • Title: Need to Belong & Interpersonal Attraction

  • Course: PY0549: Social Psychology

  • Instructor: Dr Jenny Paterson

  • Contact: Jenny.Paterson@northumbria.ac.uk

Page 2: Topics Covered

  • Focus Areas:

    • Social and Forensic Psychology

    • Prejudice Against Various Relationship Statuses

      • Singlism

      • LGBTQ+ related prejudice

      • Interracial

      • Inter-religious

    • Reasons Behind Prejudice:

      • Social identity theory

      • Perceived threats

      • Intergroup contact

    • Impacts of Prejudice:

      • Affects relationship quality

      • Influences social support

      • Can affect resilience

    • Applied Work:

      • Handles impacts of hate crimes in various fields (Police, CPS, charities, media)

    • Research Focus: Love and hate

Page 3: Lecture Overview

  • Weekly Breakdown:

    • Week 7: Need to belong & Interpersonal attraction

    • Week 8: Love, Relationships & Singlehood

    • Week 9: Benefits of Social Groups

    • Week 10: Drawbacks of Social Groups

    • Week 11: Prejudice Reduction Strategies

    • Week 12: Revision

  • Interaction Tool: Menti.com Survey on friendship factors

Page 4: Today's Lecture Overview

  • Key Topics:

    • Need to belong

    • Ostracism

    • Phubbing

    • Interpersonal attraction (liking)

    • Factors in attraction:

      • Physical attraction and averageness

      • Familiarity

      • Proximity

      • Similarity

      • Trust

Page 5: Need to Belong

  • Definition: A pervasive drive to form and maintain significant interpersonal relationships (Baumeister & Leary, 1995).

  • Function:

    • Motivates relationship development for safety and survival.

    • Considered a universal desire but varies:

      • Between individuals (extroverts vs. introverts)

      • Within individuals (increased need in certain emotional states)

Page 6: Ostracism

  • Definition: Social exclusion resulting from being ignored (Williams et al., 2000; Wesselmann et al., 2023).

  • Key Questions:

    • Ambiguities: Is ostracism happening? Why?

  • Threats from Ostracism:

    • Need to belong severed

    • Self-esteem may be affected

    • Sense of control undermined

    • Quest for meaningful existence challenged

Page 7: Cyberball Context

  • Phenomenon: Rising internet use leads to increased loneliness despite potential for connection.

  • Aim of Study: Replicate ostracism effects via a ball-tossing game (Williams & Sommer, 1997).

Page 8: Cyberball Study Findings

  • Measures: Threat to belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence.

  • Experiment Design:

    • Participants randomly allocated to conditions:

      • Overinclusion (67%)

      • Inclusion (33%)

      • Partial ostracism (20%)

      • Complete ostracism (0%)

  • Results: Ostracism significantly threatened belonging and self-esteem.

Page 9: KKK Cyberball Experiment

  • Study by Gonsalkorale & Williams (2007):

    • Participants indicated political preferences and played Cyberball with ingroup, outgroup, or despised outgroup.

  • Independent Variables:

    • Type of Players: ingroup/outgroup/ despised outgroup

    • Interaction Type: Inclusion vs. Ostracism

Page 10: Effects of Ostracism

  • Findings: Ostracised participants reported needs unmet, including when ostracised by groups they disliked.

  • Conclusion: Ostracism is painful universally, irrespective of group affection.

Page 11: Physical Pain of Ostracism

  • Study by Eisenberger et al. (2003):

    • Linguistic observations recognize psychological/physical pain from ostracism.

    • Social bonds are vital for survival.

  • Observations: Neuroimaging studies indicate increased activity in pain-related brain regions during ostracism.

Page 12: Phubbing

  • Definition: Ignoring others during physical interaction to use smartphones (Chotpitayasunondh & Douglas, 2018).

  • Experiment Design: Silent animation of two conversing individuals under conditions of phubbing.

    • IVs: No phubbing, Partial phubbing, Extensive phubbing

Page 13: Phubbing Impact

  • Findings: Phubbing led to decreased well-being and lowered relationship satisfaction.

    • Needs affected: Belonging, self-esteem, meaningful existence, control.

Page 14: Physical Attraction

  • Concept: Attractiveness influences social perception (Dion et al., 1972).

  • Experiment: Participants rated attractiveness of individuals.

    • Findings: Unattractive individuals viewed less favorably, except concerning parental competence.

Page 15: Attractiveness Outcomes

  • Attractive individuals benefit from:

    • Higher academic marks (Landy & Signall, 1974)

    • Increased earnings (Judge et al., 2009)

    • More dating opportunities (Langlois et al., 2000)

  • Self-fulfilling prophecy effects observed; attractive individuals perceived as more socially able.

Page 16: Key Questions on Attractiveness

  1. What constitutes attractiveness? (Halberstadt & Rhodes, 2003)

Page 17: Averageness in Attraction

  • Research by Langlois and Roggman (1990): Composites of faces rated more attractive than single images.

  • Conclusion: Familiarity with faces and adherence to prototypicality leads to perceived attractiveness.

Page 18: Familiarity's Role

  • Mere Exposure Effect (Zajonc, 1968): Repeated exposure to stimuli can enhance attraction.

  • Ongoing debates: Does familiarity breed contempt (Norton et al., 2007)?

  • Study Results: Repeated exposure through conversations increases liking.

Page 19: Proximity

  • Study by Festinger et al. (1950):

    • Investigation into how proximity influenced friendship patterns among students.

  • Findings: Strong correlation between physical proximity and friendship.

Page 20: Similarity in Attraction

  • Research by Newcomb (1961):

    • Longitudinal study examining attitudes and friendships.

  • Findings: Initially favored proximity; later preferred similar attitudes.

Page 21: Similarity Explained

  • Reasons similarity increases attraction:

    • Promotes psychological balance (Heider, 1948).

    • Reinforces worldviews (Byrne, 1971).

  • Studies indicating preference for like-minded individuals:

    • Attitude similarity enhances attraction.

Page 22: Trust in Relationships

  • Research by Cottrell et al. (2007): Trust is a fundamental desire in various relationships.

  • Different relationships demand different traits, but trust is consistently vital.

Page 23: Summary of Trust Research

  • Trust considered essential across various interpersonal situations.

  • Studies emphasized importance of positive traits in relationship desirability.

Page 24: Readings

  • Core readings:

    • Eisenberger, N. I., et al. (2003).

    • Reis, H. T., et al. (2011).

  • Recommended readings:

    • Chotpitayasunondh, V., & Douglas, K. M. (2018).

    • Zorn, T. J., et al. (2022).

Page 25: Exam Preparation

  • Possible exam question: Critically evaluate two factors predicting interpersonal attraction.

    • Requirements:

      • Draw from relevant lectures

      • Discuss an essential paper from the reading list

      • Integrate information from other parts of the program

Page 26: Next Week's Topic

  • Upcoming Lecture: Love, Relationships, & Singlehood

    • Subjects: Being single vs. in a relationship.