3What Do We Find Attractive? “Average” FacesComposite faces are judged more attractive than any individual face that comprises composite.Symmetrical FacesDeviations from symmetry often occur from exposure to diseases in uteri.What is “your” good side?Female waist-to-hip ratio of 0.7Regardless of weight
4Physical Attractiveness Some important conclusions from research on physical attractiveness and attraction:Though there are some features that are nearly universally-regarded as attractive, there is considerable variability in what individuals find attractiveThough we tend to like those people who are physically attractive, the reverse is also true: We find people we like more attractive than those we don’t like.Happy couples tend to idealize each other’s physical attractivenessPhysical attractiveness is less stable than we think: some less attractive young people get better looking with age, and some great looking young people lose their ‘luster’ with age.
5Impact of Physical Attractiveness Attractive Individuals as compared to less attractive individualsAre more popular with members of opposite sexMay be graded easierMay earn more moneyMay get help easierAre less likely to be convictedReceive lighter sentences if convicted
6Early Effects of Physical Attractiveness Attractive infants receive more affection and attention from mothersAttractive children arethought to be more intelligent and better behaved by teachersHeld less accountable for transgressions.Even infants show same preference for attractiveness
7Why Does Physical Attractiveness Have Such Impact? a. Immediacyb. Prestige• Sigall and Landy (1973)c. Halo EffectBelief that attractive people also possess a number of other desirable characteristics
8Gender and the Impact of Physical Attractiveness Attractiveness plays more important role in women’s lives than men’s lives.Beauty functions as currency for womenAllows greater access to…Social mobilityPopularityDating prospectsMarriage opportunities
9Evolutionary Theory Primary motive is reproductive success. People who make bad mate choices will have little success.Mate preferences should be shaped by natural selection.We are instinctively attracted to features associated with reproductive successParental Investment TheoryThe sex that invests more is more selective.Females look for mate that couldProvide resourcesWas willing to invest resourcesProtect familyMales look for mate thatHad good reproductive potentialYoung and healthyWould be faithfulNuturing
10Evolution and Long-Term Mate Choice David Buss (1986)Had college students rank 13 traits on how desirable they were in a mate.Both attractiveness and earning capacity were ranked lower than kindness and intelligence
11Buss’s Cross Cultural Study Looked at rankings across 36 countriesMen ranked attractiveness higher than womenWomen ranked good financial prospect higher than menWomen want to marry an older mate while men want to marry younger mate
12Social Structure Theory (Eagly & Wood, 1999) Argue that differences found by Buss can be explained by social structureIn most countries, mean control financial resourcesEasiest way for women to access these resources is marry a man with themFound that as women have increased access to resources, gender differences in importance ratings decreased.
13Gender Differences in Jealousy Buss argued that men should be more jealous of sexual infidelity than women since it is difficult to prove paternityFound that males were more physiologically aroused when they imagined partner having sex with another man compared to falling in love with another man.Christine Harris argued mean are more aroused by sex and would show same pattern imagining fidelity as infidelity.
14Gender Differences in Short-Term Mating Males are more interested in short-term mating than females.Men and women are equally interested in long-term mating.Males are more interested in having more sex partners than females.
15Gender Differences in Short-Term Mating Men do not need to know partner very long to have sex.
16Propinquity • Westwood West Study 1. Studies of Propinquity and Attraction• Westwood West Study(Festinger, Schachter, & Back, 1950)--used a Sociometric Survey - a survey that attempts to measure the interpersonal relationships in a group of people--measured Functional Distance - an architectural layout’s propensity to encourage or inhibit certain activities, like contact between people
17Propinquity a. Availability and Propinquity • Manhattan Housing Project (Nahemow & Lawton, 1975)• Zajonc studies2. Explanations of Propinquity Effectsa. Availability and Propinquityb. Anticipating Interactionc. The Mere Exposure Effect
23Similarity and Attraction 2. Don’t Opposites Attract? Complementarity• Most studies claiming to support complementarity have been criticized on methodological grounds• Similarity appears to be the rule, and complementarity, the exception, in attraction3. Why Does Similarity Promote Attraction?a. Similar Others Validate Our Beliefs and Orientationsb. Similarity Facilitates Smooth Interactionsc. We Expect Similar Others to Like Usd. Similar Others Have Qualities We Like
24Attraction D. Theoretical Integration 1. The Reward Perspective on Interpersonal Attraction2. The Social Exchange Perspective onPhysical Attraction