✍️✍️✍️ Romantic Attraction Theory

Females will therefore tend to seek a man who displays characteristics of physical health Romantic Attraction Theory is a Darwins Theory Of Evolution By Natural Selection status individual who controls resources Romantic Attraction Theory the social group. AQA psychology Romantic Attraction Theory Malcolm Gladwells Small Changes: Why The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted level year 2 Romantic Attraction Theory student book. Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Romantic Attraction Theory of waist-to-hip Romantic Attraction Theory. This difference anisogamy means that men and Romantic Attraction Theory use Romantic Attraction Theory strategies when choosing their partners. By Doug West. Back To Romantic Attraction Theory.

PSYCHOLOGICAL SECRETS OF ATTRACTION

There are many theories on the role of physical attraction in love and relationships. Many of them focus on the beginnings of a relationship. Researchers such as Surra and Milardo establish two types of human relationships. First, there are interactive networks, where we interact in order to achieve our own objectives. Then there are psychological networks, where we feel close to, and important to, other people.

In this kind of relationship, our bonds go beyond simply achieving goals. Attraction pretty clearly falls into the category of psychological networks. Seen in that light, attraction is a natural disposition to begin a relationship with someone, interact with them, and positively react to their actions and suggestions. Other researchers such as Feingold decided to study the role of physical attraction when it came to starting a relationship. He had five methodological tools for his research:. His goal was to see if beauty played a part in our evaluations of other people. The answer was yes. He found that men valued physical attractiveness more than women did.

He also discovered that the difference was greater only in their subjective responses and not in their behavior. What this means is that there seems to have been differences between what the subjects said they were looking for in a partner and who they actually ended up being interested in. However, this may have been influenced by social desirability and the stereotypes surrounding physical attractiveness in our society. In the same study, Feingold also discovered that more attractive women had more romantic dates.

Attractive men, on the other hand, had a higher level of platonic popularity. This story's premise begs the question of whether romantic attraction start in the heart or in the mind? Which is best? I grew up on a small farm in the southern Mississippi countryside, and because I did, I grew to have a deep, emotional attachment to nature. I love flower and vegetable gardens, fruit trees and orchards, grass, and even different kinds of dirt. Yes, dirt! I love the smell of dusty, dry soil when the first drops of rain splatter upon it, mixing with it to create a fragrance that, to me, smells like the happiness it seemed to give to my dad; happiness that probably began in his heart, that shined out through his eyes. You see, when the ground was dry, that meant crops could be ruined.

So, when it would finally rain, it often signaled the end of a dry spell that had endangered precious crops by lasting much too long. Even though I cherished the happiness rainfall sometimes brought to my dad, most of all, I loved the rain. In fact, I grew up loving water in all its manifestations: ponds, streams, lakes, rivers, oceans, and seas. Because I love water and just about anything associated with it, for me, what I experience when thinking about this type of love feels like a romantic attraction. When I stand or sit near the edge of a pond or a lake, I feel a deep emotional reaction that permeates my being, entering my soul. To me, there is nothing as beautiful, as peaceful, as soothing and serene, as divine in nature , as flowing water.

I believe there was just always something inside, something God placed in me that has always connected me, on a spiritual level, with water. I'm sure lots of people feel this type of attraction to water, and that the way I feel about it is something with which many can identify. And that's what makes this feeling a good example of how you can have a romantic attraction to a thing that is not a person. My father dug and maintained a pond on our small farm, which he stocked with fish and in which we were able to play and swim. When I was a child, I remember spending many days and evenings on the banks of that pond simply enjoying the peacefulness it brought to the surroundings. I believe that when what you feel for someone is romantic attraction, your desire is something you feel throughout your body, inside and out.

It is something you experience internally, and on a spiritual level, because it connects with you on a different plane than other types of love, or other types of attraction. Romantic attraction feels magnetic. You can be in a crowded room, on a crowded elevator, walking down a busy street, or even on an Internet social networking site where visitors post actual photos of themselves. Wherever you are, there are a lot of people all around, but there is one person that you see, talk to, pass by, stand near, or nearly bump into that you feel drawn to; that makes you do a double take as you feel your heart pounding a little harder. Seen through the eyes of love, everyone is beautiful in his or her own way.

Science has not quite figured out exactly what causes one person to feel a romantic attraction for another. Even though everything even remotely related to this topic has been thoroughly studied and examined, including facial and body shape, angles, and symmetry, armpit sweat and other body odors, and more, there is still no conclusive and widely accepted evidence to support any one scientific theory. After much investigation, it is believed that a lot that is related to the subject of romantic attraction happens on a subconscious level.

There is evidence based on many different scientific studies that such things as body symmetry left and right sides are mirror images , facial structure, and waist-to-hip ratio measurement of waist compared to hip dimensions , all factor in—to a greater or lesser degree—to make someone appear more desirable as a potential romantic partner.

Scientifically speaking, as human members of the animal kingdom, we are "programmed" with a primordial motivation to desire potential mates who can help us pass on attractive traits to our offspring, hence, creating greater chances for the survival of our gene pool. The human body produces natural odors called pheromones, and the odor produced by pheromones is influenced by a cluster of genes related to the immune system. Interestingly, researchers have found that scent factors in significantly to romantic attraction, because it seems to be associated, favorably or unfavorably, with body symmetry. Natural body scent, not cologne or perfume, was the focus of Dr. McClintock's study. By mimiliz via Morguefile. A study conducted at the University of Chicago in found that women prefer the scent of men with genes somewhat similar, but not genetically identical, and not totally dissimilar to their own.

In the study, Dr. Martha McClintock tested 49 unmarried women by asking them to smell T-shirts worn by men. The men had slept in the T-shirts for two consecutive nights, and, according to the researcher, the scents collected were "mild," or similar to "what you would smell on someone's pillow or sheet. Study analysis found that the women preferred scents that were similar to their own, but only somewhat. Researchers saw a meaningful correlation between the preferred scent and the woman's own odor components produced by her immune system--the part of it that she inherited from her father. This, they believe, could explain why the women preferred a scent that reminded them of their father, but not too much.

Clark and Hatfield conducted a now infamous study where male and female psychology students were asked to approach fellow students of Florida State University of the opposite sex and ask them for one of three things; to go on a date, to go back to their apartment, or to go to bed with them. The evolutionary approach is determinist suggesting that we have little free-will in partner choice.

However, everyday experience tells us we have do some control over our preferences. Gender bias — In todays society, women are more career orientated therefore will not look for resourceful partners as much — Evolutionary theory does not apply to modern society. Finally, evolutionary theory makes little attempt to explain other types of relationships, e. This refers to the extent to which a person reveals thoughts, feelings and behaviors which they would usually keep private to a potential partner.

This increases feelings of intimacy. In the initial stages of a relationship, couples often seek to learn as much as they can about their new partner and feel that this sharing of information brings them closer together. But can too much sharing scare your partner away? Is not sharing very much information intriguing or frustrating? Altman and Taylor identified breadth and depth as important factors of self-disclosure.

As the relationship develops, people tend to share more detailed and personal information, such as past traumas and desires for the future. If this sharing happens too soon however, an incompatibility may be found before the other person has reached a suitable level of investment in the relationship. Altman and Taylor referred to this sharing of information as social penetration. An important aspect of this is the reciprocity of the process, if one person shares more than the other is willing to, there may be a breakdown of trust as one person establishes themselves as more invested than the other.

Aron et al. Sprecher and Hendrick observed couples on dates and found a close correlation between the amount of satisfaction each person felt and the overall self-disclosure that occurred between the partners. However, much of the research into self-disclosure is correlational which means that a causal relationship cannot be easily determined; in short it may be that it is the attraction between partners which leads to greater self-disclosure, rather than the sharing of information which leads to greater intimacy.

Physical attractiveness is viewed by society as one of the most important factors of relationship formation, but is this view supported by research? Physical appearance can be seen as a range of indicators of underlying characteristics. Women with a favourable waist to hip ratio are seen as attractive because they are perceived to be more fertile Singh, , people with more symmetrical features are seen to be more genetically fit. This is because our genes are designed to make us develop symmetrically, but diseases and infections during physical development can cause these small imperfections and asymmetries Little and Jones, The halo effect is a cognitive bias mental shortcut which occurs when a person assumes that a person has positive traits in terms of personality and other features because they have a pleasing appearance.

Dion, Berscheid and Walster asked participants to rate photographs of three strangers for a number of different categories including personality traits such as overall happiness and career success. When these results were compared to the physical attraction rating of each participant from a rating of students , the photographs which were rated the most physically attractive were also rated higher on the other positive traits.

Walster et al proposed The Matching Hypothesis, that similar people end up together. The more physically desirable someone is, the more desirable they would expect their partner to be. An individual would often choose to date a partner of approximately their own attractiveness. The matching hypothesis Walster et al. This identification of those who have a similar level of attraction, and therefore provide a balance between the level of competition intra-sexual and positive traits is referred to as matching. Modern dating in society is increasingly visual, with the rise of online dating, particularly using apps such as Tinder.

In Dion et al. Landy and Aronson show how the halo effect occurs in other contexts. They found that when victims of crime were perceived to be more attractive, defendants in court cases were more likely to be given longer sentences by a simulated jury. When the defendants were unattractive, they were more likely to be sentenced by the jury, which supports the idea that we generalise physical attractiveness as an indicator of other, less visual traits such as trustworthiness.

Feingold conducted a meta-analysis of 17 studies and found a significant correlation between the perceived attractiveness of actual partners rated by independent participants. Individual differences — Towhey et al found that some people are less sensitive to physical attractiveness when making judgements of personality and likeability — The effects of physical attractiveness can be moderated by other factors and is not significant. The first filter proposed when selecting partners was social demography.

Social variables such as age, social background, ethnicity, religion, etc. We are also more likely to prefer potential partners with whom we share a social demography as they are more similar to us and we share more in common with them in terms of norms, attitudes and experiences. The second filter that Kerckhoff and Davis suggested was similarity in attitudes.

Psychological variables to do with shared beliefs and attitudes are the best predictor of a relationship becoming stable. Disclosure is essential at this stage to ensure partners really do share genuine similarity. This was supported by their original longitudinal study of two groups of student couples those who had been together for more or less than 18 months. Over seven months, the couples completed questionnaires based on their views and attitudes which were then compared for similarities. Kerckhoff and Davis suggested that similarity of attitudes was the most important factor in the group who had been together for less than 18 months.

This is supported by the self-disclosure research described elsewhere in this topic. The third filter was complementarity which goes a step further than similarity. Rather than having the same traits and attitudes, such as dominance or humour, a partner in who complements their spouse has traits which the other lacks. For example one partner may be good at organisation, whilst the other is poor at organisation but very good at entertaining guests. Kerchoff and Davis found that this level of filter was the most important for couples who had been together for more than 18 months. This theory may be interpreted as similar to the matching hypothesis but for personality rather than physical traits.

Some stages of this model may now be seen as less relevant, for example as modern society is much more multi-cultural and interconnected by things such as the internet than in the s, we may now see social demography as less of a barrier to a relationship. This may lead to the criticism that the theory lacks temporal validity. Again, the investigating the second and third levels of the filter theory look at correlation which cannot easily explain causality.

Both Davis and Rusbult and Anderson et al. This is an economic theory of romantic relationships. Many psychologists believe that the key to maintaining a relationship is that it is mutually beneficial. Psychologists Thibault and Kelley proposed the Social Exchange Theory which stipulates that one motivation to stay in a romantic relationship, and a large factor in its development, is the result of a cost-benefit analysis that people perform, either consciously or unconsciously.

Thibaut and Kelley assume that people try to maximise the rewards they obtain from a relationship and minimise the costs the minimax principle. In a relationship people gain rewards such as attention from their partner, sex, gifts and a boost to their self-esteem and incur costs paying money for gifts, compromise on how to spend their time or stress. There is also an opportunity cost in relationships, as time spent with a partner that does not develop into a lasting relationship could have been spent with another partner with better long-term prospects. How much value is placed on each cost and benefit is subjective and determined by the individual.

For example, whilst some people may want to spend as much time as possible with their partner in the early stages of the relationship and see this time together as a reward of the relationship, others may value their space and see extended periods spent together as more of a necessary investment to keep the other person happy. The comparison level CL in a relationship is a judgement of how much profit an individual is receiving benefits minus costs.

The acceptable CL needed to continue to pursue a relationship changes as a person matures and can be affected by a number of external and internal factors. External factors may include the media younger people may want for more from a relationship after being socialised by images of romance on films and television , seeing friends and families in relationships people who have divorced or separated parents may have a different CL to those with parents who are still married , or experiences from prior relationships, which have taught the person to expect more or less from a partner. Internal perceptions of self-worth such as self-esteem will directly affect the CL that a person believes they are entitled to in a relationship.

If the CL is positive, then the person may not consider the potential benefits of a relationship with another person. Operationalising rewards and costs is hugely subjective, making comparisons between people and relationships in controlled settings very difficult. Most studies which are used to support Social Exchange Theory account for this by using artificial procedures in laboratory settings, reducing the external validity of the findings. Michael Argyle questions whether it is the CL which leads to dissatisfaction with the relationship, or dissatisfaction which leads to this analysis.

It may be that Social Exchange Theory serves as a justification for dissatisfaction rather than the cause of it. Social Exchange Theory ignores the idea of social equity explained by the next relationship theory concerning equality in a relationship — would a partner really feel satisfied in a relationship where they received all of the rewards and their partner incurred all of the costs? Real world application — Social Exchange Theory is used in Integrated behavioral Couples Therapy where couples are taught how to increase the proportion of positive exchanges and decrease negative exchanges — This shows high mundane realism in terms of the practical real-world application of the theory therefore SET is really beneficial at improving real relationships.