Definition
- Formation of Relationships: The process through which individuals develop emotional, romantic, or social bonds based on biological, cognitive, and social factors; whether romantic, platonic, or familial. This can be explained by the biological, cognitive, and sociocultural approaches.
Biological Explanations of Attraction
The biological approach to personal relationships is rooted in the evolutionary theory, which suggests that mate preferences have developed to maximize reproductive success.
- Natural Selection: Traits that enhance survival (e.g. physical strength, resistance to disease) increase the likelihood of an individual living long enough to reproduce.
- Sexual Selection: A facet of natural selection, in which a best mate is chosen to produce and protect the most healthy offspring.
Sexual selection can be divided into:
- Intrasexual competition: Members of the same sex (typically males) compete for potential mates.
- Intersexual selection: One sex (usually females) selects mates based on desirable traits, such as financial stability or physical attractiveness.
Evolutionary Theory (Buss, 1989):
Aim: To understand mate preferences across cultures and their alignment with evolutionary predictions.
Method: Cross-cultural survey of over 10,000 participants from 33 countries. Participants rated desirable traits in mates (e.g., physical attractiveness, financial stability).
Results: Females prioritized financial stability, while males emphasized physical attractiveness.
Conclusion: The findings supported evolutionary hypotheses of maximizing reproductive success.
Evaluation:
- The study included a large, diverse sample from 33 countries, enhancing the generalizability of the findings.
- There is self report bias as participants may have responded in a socially desirable manner rather than truthfully expressing their mate preferences.
- The study overlooks other factors such as personality, shared interests, and emotional compatibility.
Genetic Compatibility (Wedekind et al., 1995):
Aim: To study how genetic similarity (MHC genes) influences attraction.
Method: Men wore T-shirts for two days; women rated the odor based on pleasantness and sexiness.
Results: Women preferred odors of MHC-dissimilar men.
Conclusion: This preference indicates a biological inclination toward genetic diversity in mate selection.
Evaluation:
- Standardized conditions minimized confounding variables.
- Findings may not be fully generalizable to larger populations as small sample.
- Women’s preferences for MHC-dissimilar men fluctuate with hormonal changes, suggesting other biological factors play a role.
Critical Thinking of Biological Explanations
- Strengths:
- Cross-cultural studies enhance generalizability; biological perspectives provide a universal framework for understanding attraction.
- Modern studies link evolutionary psychology with hormonal and neural mechanisms underlying attraction.
- Limitations:
- Reductionist approach may overlook cognitive and social factors.
- Cultural biases in surveys may influence responses.
- The approach fails to account for non-reproductive relationships, such as same-sex attraction and asexuality.
- Applications:
- Insights can inform relationship counseling and improve understanding of compatibility.
- Aid in medical research on immune system compatibility and hereditary disease prevention.
Cognitive Explanations of Attraction
Cognitive researchers argue that our thoughts, beliefs, and mental processes shape how we approach personal relationships.
- The Similarity-Attraction Model proposes that people are attracted to others who are similar, rather than dissimilar to themselves.
- John Bowlby’s attachment theory suggests that we develop schemas of relationships in early childhood. The attachment styles are: secure, avoidant, anxious, and anxious-avoidant.
- The Internal Working Model refers to when we form attachments based on experience. For example, our attachment to caregivers and what we can expect from them influence our perception of relationships.
Markey & Markey (2007):
Aim: Investigate the extent to which similarity is a factor in choosing a partner.
Method: A sample of 106 heterosexual couples. Researchers asked the participants to fill in a questionnaire about their own characteristics and the characteristics of their partner.
Results: Participant described themselves in similar ways as to what they were seeking in an ideal partner. Participants in the most loving relationships found that their partner had some traits that were similar to them, but not all.
Conclusion: Supporting the similarity attraction model, we seek partner's who possess similar traits to ourselves.
Evaluation:
- A follow-up study was done, which strengthens the results.
- Only heterosexual couples were asked, which limits the generalizability.
- The study was correlational.
- Self-reported data raises issues with introspection and bias.
Hazan & Shaver (1987):
Aim: Investigate whether relationship formation is a reflection of the expectations and beliefs that people have formed during their childhood.
Method: 205 males and 415 females of a self-selected sample responded to a ‘love quiz’. The questionnaire asked about romantic and familial relationships.
Results: Securely attached participants reported their parents had been readily available, attentive and responsive. People who were anxious-avoidant said their parents were unresponsive and inattentive. People who were anxious-ambivalent said their parents were anxious and only sometimes responsive.
Conclusion: There was some correlation between childhood attachment style and the quality of one's adult romantic relationships.
Evaluation:
- Self-selected samples are motivated to participate.
- The sample is biased towards females.
- Self-reported data.
- Variables are not isolated, therefore, only a correlation can be established.
