Mindmap-Book Summary-Relationship Initiation Handbook

Mindmap-Book Summary-Relationship Initiation Handbook

• About Relationship Initiation Handbook
  • Date Read: April 1, 2016
  • Author: Specher, Wenzel, Harvey
  • ISBN: 978-0-8058-6159-4
  • 596 pages
  • MyRating: 5 Stars
• Section I: Introduction
  • Chapter 1. Have We Met Before? A Conceptual Model of First Romantic Encounters
    • The Six Tasks of Success ful Encounters 21 3
      • 1st – the would-be initiator must determine whether the potential partner possesses thequalifiers that make it likely that an encounter will be worthwhile 21 2

        2nd – the would-be initiator must determine whether the other is cleared for an encounter and a relationship 21 2

        3rd – the initiator must find an opener to secure the other person’s attention and provide the person with an opportunity to make a preliminary appraisal of the initiator’s appeal 21 2

        4th the initiator must seek an integrating topic one that engages both partners. Often in such a situation the initiator will ask questions hoping to uncover a common interest 21 2

        5th – the initiator seeks to present a self that will be attractive to the other 21 3

        6th -. the initiator or the other must schedule a second encounter 21 3

    • A Historical Persp ective on Relationship Initiation 9
      • 1. -Field Partnering 1 – 9
        • partnering was regulated andsupervised by parents and mates were often drawn from a pool of family acquaintances 67

          calling system 7

          wherein a man visited the home of a woman and socializedthere under the supervision of her parents 7

          Usually when a woman came of age suitorswere invited by the mother to call on her daughter 7

          Women largely controlled this calling system 7

          Consequently it was initially the mother who determined whether a man possessed the requisite qualitiesfor marriage. 7

      • 2. The Dating System 6
        • The secondperiod the dating system began in the early s and quickly took hold particularly among themiddle class and the nouveau riche—as personified in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel of the flapper era The Great Gatsby (Fitzgerald 25). Young men and women “played the field” until they found asuitable partner. 67

          The calling system gradually eroded during the last of the th century and the beginning of the th century. American society was changing greatly (Bailey ). Many people were migratinginto the cities 5 5

          The automobile was becoming more available to the average person. Women wereenjoying more freedom an increased presence in schools and greater participation in the paid workforce.These changes resulted in both men and women having the opportunity to “play the field ”and the dating system came into being. 5 5

          Social initiations and activities moved from the femaledominatedhome to an external world that was dominated by men 5 5

          Moreover magazines popularnovels and radio shows helped establish rules of dating etiquette 5 5

          rules specified that men rather than women were to initiate dates.

          Men were responsible for the majority of Davis’ ( 73) tasks including determining whether thepotential other was cleared for an encounter selecting an opener and setting up a second encounter.

          Women were shifted largely to a “gatekeeping” role in which they accepted or rejected overtures according to their interest in the potential sui

      • 3. Modern Partnering 3
        • The third period which we call modern partnering can be dated from the early s to the present day. Phrases such as recreational sex hanging out and hooking up enteredpublic discourse during this time 67

          This period also saw the development of commercialized methodsof finding a partner (e.g. personal ads and Internet dating) as well as the emergence of open datingamong gays and lesbians. 67

          group dating 8

          • In recent years there hasalso been a movement toward group dating or “getting together.” This involves mixed-sex groups ofindividuals most commonly adolescents or young adults meeting at common gathering places (e.g. movies dances parties and malls) for the primary purpose of having fun. 8

            group dating may facilitate relationship initiation in at least two ways 8

            • 1. it gives people more time to determine if others in the group have the qualities they desirebefore they signal an interest 8

              2. group activities also provide people with clues useful to identifyingintegrating topics should they decide to move forward with someone in the group 8

          Speed dating

          • an organized event that brings together people who are seeking dates

            bringing together potential relationshippartners who are likely to share at least one major qualifier

            speed-dating participantsbenefit from knowing that at least in principle other participants are cleared for an encounter

            In atypical speed-dating session potential dating partners rotate to meet each other in a series of short“dates ” each lasting from 3 to 8 minutes. During these brief interactions people exchange personalinformation. Following each of these mini-dates participants fill out cards indicating whether theywould be interested in further contact with the other person. Participants then leave the cards withthe organizers or transmit their interest over the Internet

            Therefore instead of one or both individualsverbally requesting a second encounter on the spot

            speed-dating participants do not need to set up a second meeting until after they have been informedthat the potential other is interested.

          online dating 5

          • Internet dating sometimes referred to as online dating also has become very popular both inthe United States and in many parts of the world 5

            Internet dating services have assisted individuals in locating potential partners byproviding a medium for electronic personal advertisements that can be posted and searched

          Internet dating services appear to facilitate the tasks of relationship initiation –

          • they greatly increase the pool of potential partners who can beapproached –

            This increases the number of people encountered who possess the qualifiers desired ina potential relationship and who are cleared for an “encounter. –

            the availability of informationon people’s interests occupations and other preferences should facilitate finding openers andintegrating topics that maximize the likelihood of a positive response from the person who is contacted. –

            because face-to-face interaction is not immediate individuals have time to cultivatea more attractive come-on self –

          downside of intenet dating

          • Internet dating opensthe naïve and emotionally vulnerable to predators who may take advantage of the ease with whichthey can put forth an appealing face and portray their motives as honorable
    • Motives for Forming Relationships 3
      • 1. Finding a spouse was the primary motive behind relationship formation. 25 2
      • 2. Satisfy sexual desire sexual intimacy 25 5
    • Valuing marriage 25 1
      • Rather than devaluing marriage as a legitimate motive for partnering the predominantideology in much of Western society today is that marriage is a special union that one isprepared to enter into only after ample relational and life experiences have been acquired 25

        Consequently although most people will at some point in their lives form a relationship withthe objective of finding a marriageable partner the salience of this motive for a particular personat a particular time cannot be assumed. It is not uncommon for an individual to fall “in love” manytimes to have multiple sexual partners and to live with at least one romantic partner before decidingto pursue a relationship that will lead to marriage 25

    • Assumptions 25 5 5
      • model of relationship initiation presumed that individuals generally sharesimilar motivations for forming personal relationships it is evident that in the forum of modernpartnering such motivational congruency can no longer be taken for granted 25 5 5

        The task of assessinga prospective partner’s motives has become an important element of evaluating a partner’s desirability 25 5 5

        Indeed failing to consider a potential partner’s motives and his or her likely openness to one’sown motives can lead to embarrassing hurtful and at times dangerous situations. 25 5 5

        In contrast beingconscious of cues that suggest an incongruity of motives may prevent an individual who is seekinga long-term relationship partner from getting involved with someone who is interested in only aone-night stand (see Reeder this volume). 25 5 5

        The importance of correctly perceiving others’ relationalmotives and goals likely depends on the nature of one’s own motives for forming a relationship 25 5 5

        Anindividual whose sole aim is to find a marriageable partner has much more to lose by misperceivingthe intentions of a “player” than does an individual who is seeking a casual romantic encounter 25 5 5

        Individuals’most salient motive(s) influence to some degree what attributes they consider to be attractive the cues to which they are most attentive their perception of the likelihood that their overturewill be accepted and the ways in which they choose to strategically present themselves to others 25 5 5

    • A Model of Relationship Beginnings
      • First our model suggests that an analysis of relationship initiationsshould begin with a consideration of the motives that people have for forming relationships andshould recognize that these motives shape how people view potential partners who come “undertheir radar. 1

        Second we propose that in addition to Davis’ tasks of determining if a potential partner has important qualifiers and is cleared for an encounter individuals also weigh a number of other considerations—such as the other’s likely attraction to them—before deciding to make an overture 1

        Third our model acknowledges and elucidates the various factors that influence individuals’ use(or lack thereof) of strategic self-presentation to curry the favor of a potential partner 27 –

        Fourth weexamine the dialectical nature of the process of building rapport after an encounter has begun 27 –

    • Motives and Initial Attraction 28
      • Attraction is rooted in the motives and goals that people have for forming relationships. Whereassome attributes (e.g. physical attractiveness or kindness) are desirable regardless of the specificmotives involved many of the qualities that make a potential partner attractive are tied to a person’smotive(s) for the relationship. 28
    • short-term 28
      • Considerable research supports the notion that the salience ofparticular attributes is different for individuals seeking short-term rather than long-term engagements. 28

        Those with short-term motives generally place greater emphasis on qualities such as physicalattractiveness sex appeal and munificence 28

    • long-term 28
      • those who hold long-term goals are more likelyto emphasize the importance of commitment dependability emotional stability and the capacity tolove 28
    • Women are more likely than men to seek long-term committed relationships 28 3
    • men aremore likely than women to desire short-term recreational involvements 28 3
    • five mostimportant qualities men and women seek in a long-term relationship 28
      • (a) mutual attraction and or love 28
      • (b) emotional stability and ormaturity 28
      • (c) dependable character 28
      • (d) pleasing disposition 28
      • (e) education and or intelligence 28
    • The Decision to Make an Overture: From Attraction to Affiliation 29 491
      • Relationships are initiated and take shape within what Kerckhoff ( ) described as people’s “fieldof availables.” 29 491

        This field consists of people individuals are likely to come across in their day-to-daylives or learn about through a mutual acquaintance 29 491

        Would-be partners may work in the same building as did Amy and Michael; they may be coworkers friends of friends or people who are part of thelandscape of one’s daily rounds 29 491

        Regardless of the context from which a personal or romantic relationshipemerges someone has to make the first move. Someone has to say “Have we met before?”or “I’ve really enjoyed working with you on this project. Would you like to go to dinner sometime?” 29 491

        The decision to make a bid for another’s attention is driven by attraction 29 491

    • V = f (A × P)
      • V
        • is the strength of the valence of making an overture
      • A
        • is the individual’s attraction towardthe other
      • P
        • is the would-be initiator’s estimate of the probability that an overture will beaccepted rather than rejected by the person
    • The Presentation of Self in First Encounters 1 6
      • When people decide to initiate a relationship they often experience a tension between wanting tobe known and wanting to be liked 1 6

        Most individuals have a sense of who theyare—that is a strong core identity—and would prefer at least when they are looking for a long-termrelationship to express themselves openly and to be liked for the virtues they possess and forgivenfor their limitations 1 6

        when people are highly attracted to apotential partner and strongly assured that the individual is interested in them they typically presentthemselves much as they see themselves showing little if any tendency to overstate their positivequalities or downplay their shortcomings. 2 3

        it is common for individuals to lack totalconfidence that they will be able to arouse a prospect’s interest solely by being themselves 2 3

        In suchsituations concerns about acceptance become more salient and may lead people to try to cultivatethe other’s interest by presenting a self that they think the other will find attractive. 2 3

        when people are highly attracted to a prospect but are provided with onlymoderate assurance of the other’s interest they are likely to embellish their positive qualities andminimize their shortcomings. 2 3

        This tendency to enhance one’s image was not found in situationswhere individuals were not attracted to the potential partner or when they were informed that therewas no chance of acceptance by the other 2 3

    • 3 primary ways people can strategically attempt to build a prospect’s interest 2 3
      • (a) They can try to make themselves appear likable 2 3

        (b) they can attempt to appear competent or capable 2 3

        (c) they can seek to come across as morallyvirtuous (i.e. as having integrity) 2 3

        People try to make themselves likable by drawing attentionto positive aspects of their personality by expressing attitudes or interests they believe conform tothose of the other or by flattering the other by commenting favorably on the other’s qualities 2 2

    • ingratiation strategies 3 9
      • Gain favour with somebody by deliberate efforts 3
      • flattery 3 – 3
        • flattery is a particularly effective tactic becausepeople like to be liked and thus perceive the flatterer to be credible 3 – 3
      • excessive drawing attention to one’s good quality 3
        • On the otherhand there are significant risks to drawing attention to one’s good qualities or trying to find pointsof agreement; the ingratiator may seem too eager to please and may be seen as obsequious or needy 3
      • admire and respect 3
        • People admire and respect—and hence are attracted to—others who are capable talented accomplished and resourceful 3
      • excessive promoting their talents or drawing attention 3
        • Would-be ingratiatorsmay seek to attract interest by promoting their talents or drawing attention to their athleticism theirknowledge or their pedigree. If they are not careful however they run the risk of seeming conceited narcissistic or self-important all of which might undermine their appeal 3
      • excessive self-promotion 3
        • Although Gordon’s(1 6) meta-analysis did not distinguish between self-promotion as embellishing one’s likablenessand self-promotion of one’s talents or virtues he found evidence that obvious self-promotion in theservice of whatever positive impression generally boomerangs. It is far better to have someone elsebrag about one than to do the bragging oneself. 3
      • integrity 3
      • honest 3
      • sincere 3
      • moral 3
    • short-term relationships 3 2
      • individuals who are seeking short-term relationshipsare particularly likely to be disingenuous—if need be—in order to attract another’s interest. 3 2

        Both those who pursue others by being emotionally warm with little interest in long-term commitment(“players”) and those who try to get what they want while remaining emotionally distant anduncommitted (“predators”) endorse using charm and manipulation to secure a potential partner’sinterest 3 2

        Players are also likely to report being willing to seduce a prospect by lying and being flashy 3 2

    • long-term relationships 3 2
      • individuals who have a long-term orientation aremore likely to try to attract a partner through supportive ingratiating behaviors such as helping apotential partner accomplish something being honest and providing sincere compliments 3 2

        Suchpartner-oriented individuals typically eschew the use of deceptive manipulative ingratiation tactics seeing them as illegitimate ways to elicit the other’s attraction 3 2

    • Building Rapport in Initial Encounters 4 – 9
      • For an encounter to be successful people must build rapport. This goal is salient regardless ofwhether a person seeks a friend a casual sex partner a romantic partner or a mate. In all such situations the relationship seeker must use an effective opener build an affinity and if in theend the partners wish to meet again set the stage for another encounter. 4 – 9

        We will treat these taskssequentially. Once an individual opens a conversation however the dialogue between the partnersproceeds dialectically with the outcome depending on how both partners act and react to each otheras the encounter unfolds 4 – 9

        To build rapport with a potential partner the initiator must first open the conversation typicallyby putting forth an opening line designed to persuade the other to continue the interaction 4

        Sociallyconfident people may put little thought into how to open a conversation because they find it easy toattract the initial interest of others. 4

        In contrast individuals who lack such social confidence—thosewho are shy insecure or fearful of rejection—may not seriously consider making an overture in thefirst place 4

        However according to our model those who areattracted to someone and moderately confident of acceptance should give considerable thought tothe likely effectiveness of various opening approaches before making an overture 4

        The best openers for men this research shows appear to be those that are not seen as“lines” by women 4

        Confident direct or innocuous overtures are more likely to get a conversationoff to a good start than are indirect cute or clever gambits 4

        In contrast women interested in getting a conversation off the ground atleast in a singles bar can open pretty much any way they please. They can be direct cutesy or coywhen approaching an opposite-sex prospect—all starters work about equally well 4

        the intensity of an opener should mirror the intensity ofthe potential partner’s signal—if in fact there is one 4 8

        when individualsare attracted to others they behave in ways that elicit the other’s attraction which in turn thenbuilds their own affinity for the partner. 4 4

        When men were led to believe that a woman they weretalking to on the phone was physically attractive they acted more sociable sexually warm interesting outgoing and humorous than when they were led to believe their conversation partner wasunattractive. 4 4

    • Theoretical Persp ectives on the Conceptual Model 5
      • Social Exchange Theory 5 467
        • Exchange theory derives from social learning and marketplace economic theories of human behavior 5 467

          people operate under the “pleasure principal ” and as such they seek to identify prospective partners with whom interaction promises to be rewarding ratherthan costly. 5 467

          The main currency of exchange according to Homans is the expression of positive andnegative sentiment: Another person’s esteem is rewarding whereas rejection is costly 5 467

          The exchange logic is reflected succinctly in the idea that “[p]eople join together only insofar asthey believe and subsequently find it in their mutual interest to do so” 5 1

          Exchange theory also draws attention to the idea that even at the outset of a relationship peoplemay think about what might happen down the road. People contemplating the initiation of a relationshipthat they hope will be long-term attend both to the likelihood of immediate acceptance and tothe likelihood of long-term mutual interest should a relationship become established 6 –

          They knowthat it is one matter for a person to say “yes” to an overture and quite another matter for a person tosay “yes” to an ongoing relationship 6 –

          A proposal of marriage in our society tends to be a way in which a man sums up his social attributesand suggests to a woman that hers are not so much better as to preclude a merger in thesematters 6

          Such a proposal can be seen as the culmination of an extended two-way dialogue as the partnersnegotiate and renegotiate their level of involvement based on their interest in each other and themutuality of that interest 6

          Exchange theorists also have suggested that concerns about issues of reciprocity underlie strategicself-presentation in initial encounters 6 2

          People fashion a come-on self based ontheir assessment of whether a hoped-for partner will accept their overture and try to show themselvesas having qualities valued in the marketplace 6 2

          Social exchange principlesalso underlie the success of many ingratiation strategies—such as opinion conformity and flattery—that rely on offering another person rewards (e.g. compliments) to increase the probability that theother will reciprocate in kind 6 2

      • Interdependence Theory 6
        • Interdependence theory (Kelley ; Kelley et al. 3) is built partly on principles of exchange 6

          The theory takesas its starting point the “situation” in which two individuals find themselves 6

          Situations differ in theextent to which the partners’ interests are correspondent in how the partners communicate andshare information and in the serial ordering of their actions 6

          The prototypicalsituation we have used in this chapter is one in which a person is faced with deciding whether ornot to make an overture to another individual. 6

          The interdependence theorist would break down thesituation much like we have first by representing the would-be initiator as choosing between twooptions make an overture or not make an overture and then identifying two possible responsesto the overture on the part of the other accept or reject. 6 6

          The initiator does not know in advancewhether the other will be pleased and accept an overture or if the other will be displeased or indifferentand turn an overture aside. According to the principles of interdependence theory this situationposes a dilemma for would-be initiators if their stake is great—as it would be if an initiator was strongly attracted to the target person. Initiators in such a situation may feel particularly vulnerablebecause their “fate” is under the control of the other individual 7 93

          Attracting an individual’s interest—and then sustaining a relationship—requires finding commonground. The likelihood of finding such common ground from the perspective of interdependencetheory depends on the “correspondence of outcomes ” which generally prevails when people havesimilar points of view interests values and hopes 7 4

      • Evolutionary Social Psychological Theory 7 6
        • Evolutionary social psychological theory posits that preferences for potential partners have evolved according to Darwinian principles over evolutionary time 7 6

          evolutionarytheorists believe that the human mind is a set of information-processing machines that have evolvedthrough natural selection to solve adaptive problems related to survival and reproduction 7 6

          Parental investment–based models presuppose that men and women have differential investments in their offspring and that individuals’ reproductive success is dependent upon pairing with mates who optimize the chances that their investments will pay off 7 7

          Ancestral men who preferred and mated withhealthy as opposed to unhealthy women and ancestral women who preferred and mated with menwho had sufficient as opposed to insufficient resources were more successful in producing offspringand passing on their genes. 8 5

          Early theorizing and research from the evolutionary perspective suggested that men (rather thanwomen) are attracted to physical attractiveness in a mate whereas women (rather than men) areattracted to status and resources in a mate 8

          when the goal is to attract a short-term mate women are believed topresent themselves as sexually available through flirting sexualizing their appearance and actingseductively or by derogating other women’s appearances and hinting that rivals are sexually unavailableor unclean. 8 283

          women seeking to attract a long-term mate are posited to present themselvesas willing to be sexually exclusive or to belittle potential rivals as promiscuous 8 7

          On the otherhand men seeking short-term versus long-term mates are predicted to enact differing strategies thatshow off their present or future resources and status (e.g. wearing expensive clothes versus talkingabout their willingness to commit and ability to acquire long-term resources) and or derogate theirrivals’ resources or ability to provide 8 7

      • Adult Attachment Theory 8 7
        • Adult attachment theory at its core posits that people possess different interpersonal predispositions as a result of their early experiences with caregivers and other personal relationships 9 – 7

          These past experiences result in differences between people in how comfortable theyare with being close to others and how anxious they are about being abandoned ( 9 – 7

          The extent to which people possess these two characteristics can be used to classifythem into attachment orientations: secure (e.g. those comfortable with trusting and depending onothers) avoidant (e.g. those distrustful and uncomfortable with being close to and depending on others) and anxious (e.g. those who worry that others will leave them and feel that others are reluctantto get close to them) 9 – 7

          Other researchers have taken a more dimensional approachto adult attachment discovering for example that three dimensions—comfort with depending onothers anxiety or fear of being abandoned or unloved and comfort with closeness—underlie the traditionaladult attachment orientations 9 4

          classification presumes that two dimensions underlie adult attachment patterns—the self and theother—thus resulting in four attachment patterns: secure (low anxiety and low avoidance) preoccupied(high anxiety and low avoidance) dismissing (low anxiety and high avoidance) and fearful (highanxiety and high avoidance) 9 4

          The expectations that individuals hold for potential partners differ according to their attachmentclassification and are posited to influence how people appraise the potential rewardingness ofa prospect 9

          avoidant individuals—those who expect others to beuntrustworthy—are more likely than secure individuals to project their own perceived interpersonaldeficiencies onto potential partners thus reducing the other’s perceived reward value 9

          extremely avoidant individuals may choose to remove themselvesaltogether from situations that could lead to receiving rewards from others 9

          The relationalexpectations that influence initial attraction also play a role in a would-be initiator’s evaluation thata potential partner is likely to reciprocate the initiator’s attraction 9

          Secureindividuals are likely to be trusting of others and expect that others will act benevolently and accepttheir overtures whereas anxious and avoidant individuals tend to expect that a perceived other willnot be responsive 9

          Once an approach has been made people’s attachment orientations also influence the effectivenessof their tactics in eliciting acceptance 9 3

          Avoidant people tendto present an inflated view of themselves to others in order to appear strong and self-sufficient an approach that often impairs rather than promotes the development of intimacy 9 3

          Anxious people tend to devalue themselves to others—possibly in an attempt to receive thecompassion and love that they fear others will not give them—a strategy that also is not very effective 9 3

          Secure individuals in contrast are less likely than both avoidant and anxious individuals to bebiased or self-destructive in their self-presentations. 9 3

          Attachment-related conceptions of self and others also are important in the rapport-building phaseof first encounters (Shaver & Mikulincer 6). Secure persons who trust others and are comfortablewith closeness openly disclose to would-be partners and are responsive to the reciprocal disclosuresof others (Keelan Dion & Dion 1 8) thus facilitating the development of relationships. 9 3

          avoidant individuals tend to engage in low levels of self-disclosure which reflects their fear of dependenceand lack of trust in others. Anxious people who frequently worry about how others regard them often attempt to rush disclosure thus halting the buildup of rapport because the other is not ready forsuch intimacy 9 3

      • Conclusion
        • Our analysis of the initiation of relationships provides yet another example of the centrality of theprinciple of reciprocity in understanding human affairs

          People care about how others respond tothem: They make overtures with the hope that their interest will be reciprocated; they put out feelersfor sex with the hope that their offer will be taken up; they reveal parts of their identity with the hope that others will like what they see or like them in spite of what they see; they commit theirtime and energy and sacrifice their immediate interests with the hope that their partner will do thesame; and they love with the hope that their love will be returned in kind.

          A -year-old widowedfather may look for very different qualifiers in a mate and perceive his own market value very differentlythan would a single man half or twice his age. An individual with little “human capital”(e.g. education work skills and income) may be forced to think about partnering with a personwho has little to offer or consider not partnering at all. 5

    • self-disclosure 6
      • self-disclosure—an important element in the promotion of rapport—has also long beenviewed as a process of social exchange 6
  • Chapter 2. Friendship Formation
    • how do people “catch” new friends?

      when people are asked what gives their liveshappiness joy and meaning friendships are near the top or at the top of the list

      thegreatest enjoyment and excitement were reported when in the presence of friends—more so thanwhen alone or in the presence of spouse or family. Given how important friendships actually are inpeople’s lives it becomes critical to understand how people form this kind of relationship.

      four major factors

      • environmental factors
      • situationalfactors
      • individual factors
      • dyadic factors

      what friendship is

      • friendship is first and foremost a type of relationship

        “[F]riend” is not just a categorical label like “colleague” or “cousin ” indicating the social positionof each individual relative to the other. Rather it is a relational term which signifies somethingabout the quality and character of the relationship involved

      qualities and characteristics

      • 1. Friendship is a voluntary
      • 2. personal relationship
      • 3. characterized by equality
      • 4. mutual involvement
      • 5. reciprocal liking
      • 6. self-disclosure
      • 7. the provision of various kinds of support

      Environmental Factors

      • It has been assumed that a prerequisite for the development of friendships is that the two peoplemust be brought into contact with one another through physical proximity or propinquity

        Population Density 2

        Residential Proximity 9

        Workplace and School Settings 49 9

        Making Friends Online 5 9

        Social Networks 51 8

      Situational Factors 2

      • The role of serendipity in the formation of relationships is generally not acknowledged. However there are a number of “chance” factors that influence whether or not friendships are formed. Forexample as will be seen a friendship will not develop unless both individuals happen to be availablefor this kind of relationship. A number of other situational factors also play a role in friendship formation.These include the probability of future interaction the frequency of exposure to a potentialfriend and whether the other person has some control over one’s outcomes. 2

        Probability of Future Interaction 2

        • When two people are engaged in an interaction they usually know whether it is likely to be a onetimeoccurrence (e.g. a conversation with a fellow passenger on an airplane) or whether their interactionswill be ongoing (e.g. a conversation with a new colleague). 4

        Frequency of Exposure and Familiarity 6

        Outcome Dependency

        Availability 3

      Individual Factors 1

      • People obviously do not pursue friendships with everyone they meet. In determining which acquaintanceshipswill develop into friendships and which will remain acquaintanceships another classof variables must be considered namely individual-level factors. Interestingly friendship selectionappears to be a two-stage process. 2

        Frienship two-stage process 2

        • 1. The first is an exclusion process in which undesirable candidatesare eliminated from the pool of possibilities 2

          2. The second stage is an inclusion processthat entails deciding which candidates meet one’s friendship criteria 2

        Exclusion Criteria: Deciding Who We Do Not Want as a Friend 2

        • exclusion judgments precede inclusion judgments; we decide who we donot want as a friend before deciding who we do want 2

          2 Kinds of Exclusion 2

          • dislike 2
            • “We never like people who meet our dislike criteriaregardless of what likable qualities they may also possess” 2

              judgments aboutliking and disliking are asymmetrical. People may attribute likable qualities to disliked people 2

              we might admit that a disliked colleague has a good sense of humor) but they do not attribute dislikedqualities to people who are liked (e.g. we would not describe a liked colleague as obnoxious).According to this view if an acquaintance exhibits qualities that we dislike he or she is immediatelystricken from the list of potential friends 2

          • disregard 2
            • people are eliminated from the friendshippool not because they are disliked but because they are judged to be unsuitable friendship candidates. 9

              People may be disregarded because of their race education level age physical attractiveness manner of dress and so on 9

              we use disregard criteria because they“enable us to operate on actuarial or ‘best guess’ strategies so that our energy and attention are notexpended fruitlessly on people we are unlikely to like” 9

        Inclusion Criteria: Deciding Who We Want as a Friend 2

        • Once the candidates who are judged as unsuitable have been culled the focus shifts to inclusioncriteria namely whether the person in question possesses qualities that we desire in a friend. Ofcourse this is a two-way process—not only do we assess whether a potential friend has desirablequalities but the other person also assesses whether he or she perceives those same qualities inus. There are a number of characteristics that are associated with friendship desirability includingphysical attractiveness social skills and responsiveness 2

          Physical Attractiveness 2

          • Why do we want to form friendships with physically attractive people?

            There are a number ofreasons. According to the “what is beautiful is good” stereotype

            people assume that those who are physically attractive also possess desirable traits (for meta-analyticreviews

            Recent research shows that this stereotype operates at an implicit unconscious level

            people automatically tend to attribute positive qualities to good-lookingpeople and negative qualities to those who are not good-looking

            We also assume that physically attractive people are similar to us in terms of personality andattitudes

            attractive people tend to experiencepositive reactions from others which contributes to the development of self-confidence andcompetent social skills.

            interactions with physically attractive people are more pleasantand enjoyable than with those who are physically unattractive

            the conclusion reached in a recentmeta-analysis was that physically attractive adults are in fact more extroverted popular intelligent and self-confident and have more dating experience than their less attractive counterparts

            attractive children are more popular and intelligent and score higher onmeasures of adjustment than less attractive children

            when it comes to forming friendships physically attractive people are at an advantage for a number of reasons

          Advantages-Physical Attractiveness 651

          • Social Skills 651
            • making friends is a skilled performance much likelearning to play a sport or drive a car. Indeed studies conducted with children and adults haveconsistently found that those with good social skills have more friends and interact more positively – 8
          • Responsiveness 1
            • An individual characteristic that is closely related to social skill competence isresponsiveness.

              responsiveness generally takes the form of having participants interactwith a confederate who behaves either responsively or nonresponsively

              The dependent variable istypically liking or ratings of the confederate’s desirability as a friend

      Dyadic Factors

      • Friendships are dyadic relationships

        analyses of friendship formation must take into accountnot only the individual characteristics of each person but also the interplay between them.

        friendships are more likely to form when liking is reciprocal when self-disclosure is mutual and when the two individuals are similar to one another. – 3

        Factors of Friendship – 3

        • liking is reciprocal – 3
        • when self-disclosure is mutual – 3
        • when the two individuals are similar to one another
        • if the two people share a humorous experience

        Reciprocity of Liking

        • “How I like to be liked and what I do to be liked!”
        • reciprocity of liking is most pronounced when one is making initial judgments aboutanother person.

        Self-Disclosure 2

        • Social Penetration THeory-According to social penetration theory when we first meet another person we typically disclose only superficial informationabout ourselves 2

          If an interaction is pleasant and rewarding we will continue to increase thebreadth and depth of our disclosures until we eventually reveal virtually everything about ourselveson virtually every topic. On the other hand if exchanges become unpleasant or uncomfortable wewill return to our earlier more superficial level of disclosure. 2

          One implication of this theory is that we should be attracted to people who engage in intimateself-disclosure because revealing personal information indicates that they like us and desire intimacywith us. 5 5

          people who engage in intimate self-disclosureare liked more than those who disclose nonintimately 5 5

          The greater the self-disclosure from theinteraction partner the greater the attraction (e.g. liking and belief that the other could becomea friend) reported by the participants 5 5

          even “forced” self-disclosure leads to feelings ofcloseness. 5 5

          stranger dyads engaged in a structured self-disclosure process in whicheach person was required to reveal increasingly more intimate information about him or herself 5 5

          findings imply that not only do we like those who self-disclose tous but we also like those to whom we have self-dis

          Self-disclosure onthe part of self was positively correlated with attraction to the other

          in general the greater another person’s self-disclosure the more we likehim or her. We also like those to whom we have self-dis

          At the early stages of relationships it is also important for disclosures to be reciprocal

          If PersonA reveals something intimate about herself Person B needs to reciprocate with an equally intimatedisclosure. Indeed there is evidence that reciprocity of disclosure is associated with greater likingfor an interaction partner

          Reciprocity is considered important in establishing trust in a relationship

          Oncetrust is established it is not necessary for each self-disclosure to be reciprocated in kind

          there is evidence that disclosures that are too intimate—revealing “too much too soon”—arenot likely to be reciprocated and can result in dislike for the discloser

          the results of countless laboratory studies support the idea that self-disclosure that is reciprocaland gradually increases intimacy is associated with closeness and liking

        Shared Fun and Humor 8

        • In a review of the literature on friendship interaction skills across the life span Samter ( 3) notedthat among children two of the communicative competencies that facilitate friendship formationand maintenance are being fun and entertaining and having a good sense of humor. 65

          Having fun andplaying together also comprise a criterion used to identify friendships among toddlers and preschoolers 65

          there is some evidence that once friendships are established shared laughter and funare important in maintaining the relationship – 5

        Similarity

        • One of the most widely researched predictors of friendship formation is similarity

          the “ruleof homogamy” has been described as “one of the most basic principles that has come from the studyof interpersonal attraction”

          There is considerable evidence that people are likelyto become friends with those who are similar to them in terms of demographic characteristics

          Demographic Characteristics

          • age
          • physical health
          • education
          • religion
          • family background
          • residential proximity
          • social status
          • physical attractiveness

        Relation Between Similarity and Friendship

        • Demographic Variables
          • Nonfriends were less similar thanacquaintances and friends in terms ofincome parental status and age

            Acquaintances were less similar in age thanlong-term friends. Acquaintances were lesssimilar than temporary and long-termfriends in terms of ethnicity and gender

            Roommates who chose one another weremore similar in terms of year in collegethan those who were assigned to oneanother

            Among male roommate pairs who chose oneanother similarity in year of college wascorrelated with liking and staying togetheras roommates

            No significant effects for similarity of majorarea of study religious background age race and father’s education 8

            Of participants’ three closest friends greatest similarity was found in terms ofage marital status sex political preference(Altneustadt sample) religious preference education and residential mobility forfirst-named (best) friends followed bysecond- and then third-named friend 8

            Similarity in terms of occupation employmentstatus and occupational prestige relativelyequal across the three friends 8

            Similarity in terms of academic orientation(especially for African Americans). Someevidence of similarity in terms of ethnicidentity. 9

            Students who were similar in terms ofacademic ability were more likely tobecome friends. Students who wereoriginally from the same geographic regionwere more likely to become friends 9

            Friends were more similar than nonfriendsin terms of social status (acceptance andrejection). 9

        • PhysicalAttractiveness Attitude Similarity 3
          • Friends were more similar than nonfriendsin terms of physical attractiveness

            Greater attraction was reported to ahypothetical target whose attitudes wereportrayed as similar rather than dissimilar to those of the participant

            Friends and strangers did not differ in termsof attitude similarity

        • Values
          • Female roommates (chosen and assigned)high in value similarity were more likely toremain roommates (not significant for malepairs).

            Both actual and perceived value similaritywere correlated with attraction over time 9

            Perceived value similarity had the greatesteffect on attraction early on; actualsimilarity assumed a greater importance inlater interactions 5

            Participants were more attracted to ahypothetical person portrayed as similar tothem in terms of interests and hobbies andbasic values (e.g. morals religion) thansomeone similar to them in terms ofpolitical opinions and opinions aboutmatters of fact 5

        • Leisure and ActivityPreferences 5
          • Friends were more similar than strangers interms of activity preferences. 5

            Nonfriends were more similar thanacquaintances and friends in terms ofleisure activities. 5

            Participants were more attracted to ahypothetical person portrayed as similar tothem in terms of interests and hobbies andbasic values (e.g. morals religion) thansomeone similar to them in terms ofpolitical opinions and opinions aboutmatters of fact

        • Personality
          • No relationship between personalitysimilarity and attraction over time
        • Personal Constructs
          • Dyads high in functional similarity (i.e. whoapplied constructs in a similar way whenrating other group members) were moreattracted to one another than dyads low infunctional similarity 3

            Dyads high in structural similarity (i.e. whoshowed similar differentiation andorganization of personal constructs whenrating group members) were moreattracted to one another than medium- orlow-similarity dyads (when tested after weeks of interaction; these effects were notevident after 4 weeks 3

            Friends used more similar systems ofinterpersonal constructs than nonfriends. 3

        • CognitiveComplexity 5
          • Some evidence that participants were moreattracted to a hypothetical target personwho was similar versus dissimilar to them incognitive complexity. 5
        • Social Skills 5
          • Some evidence that children were moreattracted to peers who were similar versusdissimilar to them in terms of social skills(especially skills reflecting emotionalsensitivity and responsiveness). 5

            Toddler-age friends were more similar interms of social skills than preschool friendsor nonfriend dyads 5

        Convergence of Environmental Situational Individual and Dyadic Factors 8

        multiple factors converge in the formation of friendships

        39 variables

        • environmental factors
        • proximity
        • situational factors
        • willingness to spend time together
        • [accessibility
        • individual factors
        • being considerate and understanding
        • dyadic factors
        • attitudinal similarity
        • demographic similarity
        • reciprocal self-disclosure
  • Chapter 4. Attachement Theory and Research: A Special Focus on Relationship Initiation
• Section II: The Process of Relationship Initiation
  • Chapter 3. An Evolutionary Perspective on Mate Choice and Relationship Initiation 2

    Chapter 5. Prelude to a Kiss: Nonverbal Flirting Opening Gambits and Other Communication Dynamics in the Initiation of Romantic Relationships 4

    • relationship initiation begins with the biology 4 7
    • gender 4 7
    • temperament 4 7
    • background (such as culture) 4 7
    • expectations of each person 4 7
    • dance of courtship 4 7
      • 1. prioritize desires 4 7
        • focuses on how salient motives and expectations affectthe courtship sequence as a function of a variety of individual and social variables 4 7

          Prioritize Desires: Courtship Behavior as aFunction of Culture Gender RelationshipAsp irations and Personality 5 3

          Gender 5 5 5

          • The genders generally differ in their motives for courtship behaviors. Understanding the differencesin motives requires a brief recounting of evolutionary theory 5 5 5

          theory of sexual selection 5 5 5

          • theory of sexual selection suggested that whatever traitis associated with reproductive success will increase in the population and evolve over time 5 5 5

            sex differences in mating dynamics stemmed from differential parentalinvestment such that the gender that made the most investment in offspring would be relativelyselective in the choice of a partner and compete with other members of that gender to attract thebest mate. 5 5 5

          physical attractiveness 6 –

          • physical attractiveness is particularly important in evaluations of females while males tend to beevaluated on their social status and competence … since females have more to lose by making apoor mate selection there may also have been selection pressure for females who were discriminatingof males with the best genetic combinations and who were not deceived by false displaysof fitness 6 –

          nature of the intended relationship 6

          Individuals had different priorities and standardswhen they were seeking to meet someone for a single date a sexual encounter a steady datingrelationship or marriage. 6

          Females had higher standards for sexual relations (which involve pregnancyand disease risks) than they had for a single date whereas males had higher standards to go out on adate (in which they generally pay the costs) than they had for a sexual fling 6

          Females expressed higherstandards than males overall particularly for their mate’s status and earning capacity whereas malestended to have higher standards for their mate’s physical attractiveness than females 6

          female physical attractiveness was a necessity for males in long-term relationships whereas male resources and status were necessities for females 6 4

          Giving research participants a limitednumber of “mate dollars” to spend females were found to spend more of their low budget onmale intelligence followed by male yearly income. Men spent the highest proportion of their lowbudget on female physical attractiveness followed by female intelligence 6 4

          potential long-term marriage 6 4

          • physical attractiveness 6 4
          • creativity 6 4
          • liveliness 6 4
          • social level 6 4

          “maleswant physical attractiveness and females want status and money ” neither beauty nor wealth was theconsistently dominant priority for either gender and even those preferences were not universallyapparent ( 6 1

          gendershad different motives even in a permissive society 6 8

          males may be more interested in short-term relationships than females 6 3

          most single college-age males sought just one or two partners in a year rather than multiple sexual partners 6

          strategic pluralism theory 6

          • According to strategic pluralism theory some females see short-termrelationships with highly desirable males as a fallback strategy to insure that their offspring possessadaptive heritable traits 6

            Females also may use short-term relationshipsas a means of evaluating a male’s suitability for a long-term relationship or securing his interestso he will commit to a long-term relationship 6

          hypothetical romantic experiment 7 9

          • males consistently showed the greatest interest in a highly physically attractive partner followedby a moderately physically attractive partner followed by a high socioeconomic status (SES) partner 7 9

            Females by contrast were most interested in a physically attractive partner for a short-term relationshipand for dating kissing making out and having sexual intercourse but were equally interestedin the high SES partner and high physical attractiveness partner for a longer term relationship 7 9

            both males and females treated physical attractiveness asa necessity in a short-term relationship but both genders treated warmth and trustworthiness asnecessities in long-term mates. 7 9

            The majority of their research participants reported never having hada short-term sexual relationship. 7 9

          Sociosexuality 7

          • People vary in their willingness to ask a stranger to visit their apartment or accept an invitation to goto bed 7

            Not only are shyness and a fear of rejection factors but also some people are simply not interestedin short-term romantic relationships 7

          SociosexualityOrientation Inventory (SOI) 7 2

          • SociosexualityOrientation Inventory (SOI) to assess willingness to engage in uncommitted sexual relations 7 2

          unrestricted 7 2

          • People who desired casual short-term relationships were termed unrestricted and their incidence varied cross-culturally 7 2

            In cultureswith relatively benign ecologies those in which males are in relatively short supply or those inwhich women possess more political economic and relational power there is a tendency toward moreunrestricted sociosexuality compared to cultures in which the ecology is more stressful females are inshort supply or females are relatively powerless 7 2

            Unrestricted individuals sometimes appeared selfish 7

            they displayed less investment commitment dependency and love than more traditional “restricted” individuals 7

            Unrestricted females reported more negative interactions with their romantic partners 7

            unrestricted males described themselves as irresponsible cold and narcissistic 7

            unrestricted individuals sometimes seemed more sociable than restrictedindividuals 7

            Unrestricted females were adventurous and pleasure seeking whereas restricted femaleswere compliant and dysphoric 7

            Unrestricted individuals also were less instrumental or ends oriented in their current relationships than restricted individuals 7

            Of relevanceto initial encounters unrestricted males smiled more laughed more and displayed more flirtatiousglances than restricted males in a lab study of nonverbal behavior and interaction. 7

            Unrestrictedfemales were more likely to lean forward and cant their heads than were restricted females 7

          Mating and Attachment Styles 7 5

          • We proposed that the specific manifestation of SOI was dependent on other aspectsof the individual’s personality such as agreeableness and that the combination of two personalitydimensions can have a substantial impact on mating strategies 7 5

            Individuals who possess the personality trait of agreeableness tended to be warm cooperative sympathetic and helpful 7 5

            whereas people who possess the opposite tendency of disagreeablenesstended to be hostile and uncooperative. 7 5

            In addition agreeable people expend some effort to controltheir negative prejudicial or antisocial impulses whereas disagreeable people do not 7 5

          4 different approaches to mate attraction 8

          • The partner 8
            • responsive 8
            • intrinsically interested in a romantic relationship 8
            • positively correlated with agreeableness 8
            • positively correlated with secure attachment style 8
            • negatively correlated with sociosexuality 8
            • negatively correlated with the three insecure attachment styles [avoidant ambivalent] 8
          • The player 8
            • pursues a mixed reproductive strategy of being moderatelywarm while eschewing commitment. 8

              High scores on the player dimension were strongly correlatedwith sociosexuality and somewhat negatively correlated with agreeableness 8

              correlatedwith all three of the insecure attachment prototypes most strongly with dismissive. 8

          • The parasite 8
            • The parasitepursues a long-term relationship strategy apparently to address personal needs or deficiencies 8

              Theparasite is passionate and intense and may engage in stalking if the partner decides to leave 8

              Highscores on the parasite dimension were negatively correlated with agreeableness 8

              positively correlatedwith the preoccupied attachment style 8

              uncorrelated with sociosexuality 8

          • The predator 8
            • a disagreeableunrestricted individual may be an unscrupulous predator 8
            • exploits and then abandons the date 8
            • High scores on the predator dimension were negatively correlated with agreeableness 8
            • positivelycorrelated with sociosexuality and a fearful attachment style. 8
      • 2. attract attention 8 4
        • Before a romantic relationship can form people have to become aware of each other. One of theprimary nonverbal stimuli that capture the attention of others is physical appearance. The presentationof physical attractiveness is a nonverbal behavior that is forbidden to females in some Islamiccultures which require head-to-toe clothing. Elsewhere both males and females pay attention toand remember physically attractive people more so than unattractive people 8 4

          Attention to physical attractiveness may have evolved because it provided a clue to healthy mates(Symons ) but evidence for the relation of physical attractiveness to health and fertility is mixed 8 491

          physical attractiveness isnot a single dimension such as being curvaceous possessing symmetry or matching the populationaverage but a combination of several desirable qualities. 8 491

          In the multiple fitness model (Cunningham et al. 2) physical attractiveness involves thedisplay of attributes from four categories of features: neonate mature expressive and grooming 8 491

          4 Categories 8

          • Neonate and Sexually Mature Features 8

            humans are drawn to mammals withcute babyish features. 8

            Neonate features include large eyes a small nose smooth skin glossy hair and light coloration. Each of these stimuli suggests youthfulness and fitness as a beneficiary ofresources. 8

            Although neonate cuteness is desirable physically attractive adults possess striking postpubescentsexually mature features which convey the fitness of a mating partner. 9 – 9

            Female sexual maturityfeatures include high cheekbones narrow cheeks prominent breasts a .7 waist-to-hip ratio longlegs and symmetrical features. 9 – 9

            Male sexual maturity by contrast is conveyed by a broad chin thickeyebrows visible facial hair broad shoulders tall height and a 1. waist-to-hip ratio 9 – 9

      • 3. notice and approach 4 7
      • 4. talk and reevaluate 4 7
      • 5. touch and synchronize 4 7

    Chapter 6. Uncertainty and Relationship Initiation 8

    • Uncertainty is an intrinsic part of forming relationships 8 2

      “Howshould I respond?”) their partner’s behavior ( 8 2

      “Why did he say that?”) and the natureof the relationship itself 8 2

      “What is the status of this relationship?”). 8 2

      Acquaintances grapple with questions about their own behavior 8 2

      Uncertainty during theearly stages of relationship development merits study for two reasons 8 2

      • First uncertainty is a powerfulpredictor of people’s verbal and nonverbal communication behavior 8 2

        Second uncertainty shares a close connection withdyadic well-being 8 2

      The Nature of Uncertainty 8 3

      • Uncertainty exists when people lack confidence in their ability to understand their surroundings 8 3

        uncertainty stems from thenumber and likelihood of alternatives that may occur in social situations 8 3

        Uncertainty is low when only a single outcome is plausible 8 493

        uncertainty is high when multiple outcomesare equally probable 8 493

        Uncertainty is a function of people’s ability both to predict future eventsand to explain past events 8 493

        Individuals lack predictive power when they areunable to proactively identify the most likely outcome 8 493

        lack explanatory power whenthey are unable to retroactively determine the cause of an occurrence 8 493

        Uncertainty increases aspeople’s ability to predict and explain decreases 8 493

        Uncertainty arises from both cognitive questions and behavioral questions 8 493

        Cognitive uncertainty 9 – 1

        • Cognitive uncertainty refers to the ambiguity individuals experience about their own attitudesand the attitudes of others 8 493

          Cognitive uncertainty encompasses questions such as “Is he sincere?” 8 1

          “Do I like spending time with her?” 8 1

          “Why is he annoyed?” 8 1

        Behavioral uncertainty 9 – 1

        • Behavioral uncertainty indexes thequestions people have about their own actions and the actions of others 9 – 1

          Behavioral uncertaintyentails questions such as “What is she going to do next?” 9 – 1

          “How should I respond?” 9 – 1

          “Is he aboutto laugh or cry?” 9 – 1

          individuals experience uncertainty when they lack information about themselvesand others. 9 – 1

        Uncertainty according to this broad definition is relevant to a range of dyadic relationships 9 9

        Uncertainty Reduction Theory 9 651

        Assumptions 9 9

        • URT seeks to explain how individuals communicate under conditions of uncertainty 9 9

          individuals communicate to reduce uncertainty about their environment 9 9

          uncertaintyis high when people meet for the first time but decreases as relationships develop. 1 – 6

        Conditions increase people’s drive to reduce uncertainty during acquaintance 1 –

        • 1. deviance 1 –
          • Individuals are especially motivated to reduce uncertainty when a partnerbehaves in nonnormative ways. 1
        • 2. anticipation of future interaction 1
          • People are particularlyinterested in gaining information if they are likely to interact with a partner again in the future 1
        • 3. incentive value 1
          • Individuals are especially eager to alleviate doubts when a partner controlsthe rewards and costs they receive 1

        communication 1

        • According to URT communication is a tool for gaining knowledge and creating understanding 1

        Communication can play two roles within interaction 1

        • 1. communicationcan produce uncertainty 1
          • For example people may question what to disclose why a behavioroccurred or how to seek information. 1
        • 2. uncertainty can be reduced through communication 1
          • For instance individuals may obtain insight through observation glean information from nonverbalcues or gain knowledge from conversation. URT posits that communication can both escalate anddiminish uncertainty. 1

        7 Axioms Uncertainty Reduction Theory 1 5

        • Axiom 1: 1 5
          • Given the high level of uncertainty present at the onset of the entry phase as the amount ofverbal communication between strangers increases the level of uncertainty will decrease.As uncertainty is further reduced the amount of verbal communication will increase. 1 5
        • Axiom 2: 1 5
          • As nonverbal affiliative expressiveness increases uncertainty levels will decrease. Inaddition decreases in uncertainty levels will cause increases in nonverbal affiliativeexpressiveness 1 273
        • Axiom 3: 1 273
          • High levels of uncertainty cause increases in information-seeking behavior. As uncertaintylevels decline information-seeking behavior decreases. 1 273
        • Axiom 4: 1 273
          • High levels of uncertainty cause decreases in the intimacy level of communication content.Low levels of uncertainty produce high levels of intimacy of communication content. 1 273
        • Axiom 5: 1 3
          • High levels of uncertainty produce high rates of reciprocity. Low levels of uncertaintyproduce low reciprocity rates 1 3
        • Axiom 6: 1 3
          • Similarities between persons reduce uncertainty while dissimilarities produce increasesin uncertainty 1 3
        • Axiom 7: 1 3
          • Increases in uncertainty level produce decreases in liking. Decreases in uncertainty levelproduce increases in liking 1 3
        • Axiom 8: 1 3
          • Shared communication networks reduce uncertainty while lack of shared networksincreases uncertainty 1 3

        Strategies for Managing Uncertainty 1 25

        • 1. Seeking Information 1 25
          • According to URT people employ passive active and interactive strategiesfor seeking information 1

            Passive strategies 1

            • Passive strategiesentail unobtrusively observing the target person. 1

              This “fly-on-the-wall” behavior allows an individualto gather information while the target person remains unaware of the scrutiny 1

            Active strategies 1

            • Active strategiesare behaviors that require direct action but do not involve communicating with the target person 1

              Examples include asking questions of a third party and manipulating the target person’s environmentto see how he or she will respond 1

            Interactive strategies 1

            • Interactive strategies require communicating with the targetperson 1

              This category encompasses behaviors such as asking questions disclosing information in thehopes that the target person will reciprocate and relaxing the target person in the hopes that he orshe will open up 1

            The categories of information-seeking behavior vary in their degree of face threat efficiency and social appropriateness 1 1

            For example passive strategies incur only minimal face threat because an individual observes from a distance 1 1

            On the other hand passive strategies may not generate the specific information the observer ishoping to discover. 1 1

            Active strategies give an individual more latitude over the kind of informationobtained but they may backfire if the third party lacks information and or alerts the targetperson. 1 1

            Interactive strategies offer the most direct way of acquiring information but they alsofurnish the most face threat. A person could violate social norms appear pushy and or offend thetarget person within conversation. URT does not advance hypotheses about how people select aninformation-seeking strategy but they probably weigh the risks against the likelihood of success 1 1

        • 2. Planning 1 1
          • A second method of managing uncertainty is planning 1 1

            Individualsdevelop a plan or a cognitive representation of goal-directed action to help them communicate inambiguous surroundings. 1 1

            People formulate a plan by relying on the knowledge they possess aboutsimilar situations 1 1

            A plan is most valuable when it contains an optimallevel of complexity: It should be comprehensive enough to help individuals anticipate contingencies 1 1

            it should be simple enough to allow them the freedom to improvise 1 1

            When a plan fails to achieve its objective people typically conservetheir cognitive resources by altering low-level tactics rather than expending mental energy to alterhigher order tactics 1 1

            Individuals communicate most effectively whenthey are able to plan for uncertain circumstances 1 1

        • 3. Hedging 1 5
          • A third strategy for managing uncertainty is to hedge against the negative outcomesthat could occur within conversation 1 5

            several ways of crafting messages tohedge against face threat embarrassment and anxiety under conditions of uncertainty 1 5

            One optionis to frame messages by using humor (e.g. “I’ll bet you’re dying to go out with me on Saturday night.”) 1 5

            or inserting other plausible interpretations so backtracking is possible (e.g. “I’m just kidding.” or“You’re confused—that’s not what I meant.”). 1 5

            Individuals can also rely on ambiguous language tohide the actual purpose of the message (e.g. “What are you up to this weekend?”). 1 5

            People can employdisclaimers to guard against an unfavorable response (e.g. “I don’t want to move too fast but wouldyou like to go out with me on Saturday night?”) 1 5

            Individuals can engage in retroactive discounting totone down a message (e.g. “We could go out for dinner on Saturday night; I don’t know if you’d wantto do that though.”) 1 651

            people can control the floor by assigning the other person to lead theconversation (e.g. “Tell me about your plans for the weekend.”). All of these hedging devices can beeffective for avoiding negative outcomes in ambiguous situations 1 651

        Predictors of Uncertainty 2 4

        • individual differences play a rolein people’s experience of uncertainty 2 4
        • global uncertainty 2 4
        • global uncertainty as people’s tendency to be uncertain about acquaintance in general 2 4
        • (e.g. “Howconfident are you of your general ability to predict how strangers will behave?” 2 4

        Effects of Uncertainty on Communication 3

        Predicted Outcome Value Theory 3 8

        • POV proposes that theirmore primary goal is maximizing rewards and minimizing costs. 3 3

          POV claims that individuals engage in uncertainty reduction only in the serviceof forecasting relational outcomes 3 8

          According to POV individuals gather information to predict whether future interaction with apartner is likely to be rewarding or costly and then they decide whether to pursue or avoid furthercontact 3 8

        three claims about relationshipformation 3 8

        • First individuals should be attracted to a partner when they expect future interaction withhim or her to be advantageous. 3 8

          Second people should be motivated to develop relationships that correspondwith favorable predicted outcome values and they should seek to terminate relationships thatcorrespond with unfavorable predicted outcome values. 3 8

          Third individuals should steer conversationtoward topics that they expect will produce rewards and they should avoid topics that they expectwill incur costs. 3 8

        4 Concepts Of Uncertainty 5 6

        • Relational uncertainty 5 6
          • We define relational uncertaintyas the degree of confidence people have in their perceptions of involvement within interpersonalrelationships 5 6

            Relational uncertainty stems from self partner and relationship sources. 5 6

        • Self uncertainty 5 6
          • Self uncertainty refers to the questions people have about their own participationin a relationship 5 6

            “How certain am I about how much I want to pursue this relationship?” 5 6

        • Partner uncertainty 5 6
          • Partner uncertainty refers to the ambiguity individuals experience about their partner’sparticipation in a relationship 5 6

            “How certain am I about how much my partner wants to pursuethis relationship?” 5 6

        • Relationship uncertainty 5 6
          • Relationship uncertainty encompasses the questions people have about the relationshipas a whole 5 6

            “How certain am I about the definition of this relationship?”). 5 6

        Uncertainty Is Rewarding as Well as Costly 6

        • Both URT and POV suggest that uncertainty is problematic for participants in initial interaction 6

          According to URT uncertainty makes it harder for people to formulate plans anticipate contingencies and make sense of their surroundings 6

          According to POV uncertainty makes it difficult for individuals to anticipate whether future interactions will be advantageousor disadvantageous 6

      Uncertainty Is Strategically Increased and Maintained (as Well as Reduced) 6 1

      A third assumption of both theories is that individuals are motivated to reduce their uncertainty.URT contains this premise as a central tenet 6 6

      POV argues that people seek to reduce uncertainty in order to forecast the rewards and costs ofrelationship formation 6 6

    Chapter 7. Information Seeking in the Initial Stages of Relational Development 2

    • Ad Example: SWF ISO career-minded but not a workaholic male … should also be similar to me but different attractive but not gorgeous clean cut and fashion-conscious but not obsessed with looks goodconversationalist but not phony family man but not mama’s boy independent but interdependent committed but not smothering loving but not possessive sexually experienced but not overly willing kind to others but stands up for himself polite but not sappy expressive but not emotional stable and able to be fragile fragile but able to be strong listener but not silent. 2 9

      Information Seeking in Initial Interactions 3 5

      • Seeking General Information 3 5
        • 1. passive 3 1
        • 2. active 3 1
        • 3. interactive 3 1

        3 specific interactive strategies 3

        • 1. interrogation 3
          • question 3
          • asking 3
        • 2. disclosure 3
          • talking about one’s self in hopes of eliciting reciprocity by the other 3
        • 3. relaxing the target 3
          • creating a conversational atmosphere that encourages disclosure on theother’s part 3

        Question asking is the most efficient but also the most intrusive way of gathering informationand is often considered the least appropriate 4

        individuals often turn to other forms ofinteractive information seeking during initial interactions. As noted above two less efficient butalso less intrusive forms are disclosure and target relaxation efforts 4

        The disclosure strategy—thesecond most common form of information seeking in initial interactions 4

      Seeking Attraction-Related Information 4 3

      • affinity-testing strategies 4 1
      • confronting 4 1
        • “actions that required a partner to provide immediate and generallypublic evidence of his or her liking”) 4 1
      • withdrawing 4
        • “actions that required a partner to sustainthe interaction” 4
      • sustaining 4
        • “actions designed to maintain the interaction without affecting itsapparent intimacy” 4
      • hazing 4
        • “actions that required a partner to provide a commodity or serviceto the actor at some cost to him or herself”) 4
      • diminishing self 4
        • “actions that lowered the value ofself either directly by self-deprecation or indirectly by identifying alternative reward sources for apartner” 4
      • approaching 4
        • “actions that implied increased intimacy to which the only disconfirmingpartner response is compensatory activity 4
      • offering 4
        • “actions that generated conditionsfavorable for approach by a partner” 4
      • networking 4
        • “actions that included third parties either to acquire or [to] transmit information” 4

      Sending Attraction-Related Information 1

      • nonverbal communicationshows that intimacy and liking are conveyed through 1
        • forward body lean 1
        • smiling 1
        • eye contact 1
        • close proximity 1
        • direct body orientation 1
        • frequent gesturing 1
        • Tie signs like hugging 1
        • hand-holding 1
        • “head canting” 1 4
        • “flirtatious glances” 1 4

        Not surprisingly studies have shown that individuals who are sexually interested in a target displaymore nonverbal signals of affection than less interested others 1 4

      The Role of Perceived Romantic Interest 1

      • men are more likely than women to interpret flirtation as being motivated by sexual interest. 1 9

        Indeed a review in this area leaves little doubt that men more than women perceive sexualinterest in its absence 1 9

      Information Seeking In Developing Relationships 1 8

      • Typologies of Information-Seeking Strategies 1 8
      • 7 types of “secret tests”: 1 6
        • 1. directness tests 1 6
          • directness tests whichinvolved direct questioning or disclosure about the relationship; 1 6
        • 2. endurance tests 1 6
          • endurance tests which werecharacterized by behaviors that tested the lengths to which the person would go for the relationship 1 6
        • 3. indirect suggestion 1 6
          • indirect suggestion which included hints or jokes about a relational matter (e.g. making fun ofa friend’s decision to move in with his partner to see how the other reacted to the idea 1 6
        • 4. public presentation 1 6
          • publicpresentation which involved attending to the way that the partner responded to a particular form of introduction (e.g. introducing him as your “boyfriend”); 7
        • 5. third party 7
          • third party which consisted of gatheringinformation from the partner’s friends or family 7
        • 6. separation 7
          • separation which meant not seeing one anotherfor a while as a way to gather information about his or her commitment to the relationship 7
        • 7. triangle tests 7
          • triangle tests which introduced third parties into the mix as possible romantic threats (e.g. flirtingwith someone else to see if one’s partner got jealous or testing the partner’s commitment by havingsomeone else flirt with him or her and testing his or her reaction 7

      TMIM 8 1

      • theory of motivated information management 8 1

        a framework to help understand information-seeking decisions in interpersonalencounters. 8 1

        The theory was developed in response to dissatisfaction with the comprehensivenessof existing uncertainty frameworks. It started by explicitly narrowing its scope to interpersonalencounters and to issues of import to the potential information seeker. It then brought to the areaof uncertainty management two significant components: first a focus on the role of efficacy in theinformation-seeking process and second explicit recognition of the interactive role played by theinformation provider during the exchange 8 1

      three-phase information management process 8

      interpretation phase 8

      • starts with a discrepancy between the amount of actual and desired uncertainty aboutan issue and the resultant anxiety (labeled the “interpretation phase”) 8

      evaluation phase 8

      • an evaluation phasethat includes an assessment about the expected outcome of the information search (i.e. outcomeexpectancies) and an assessment of efficacy 8

        In the evaluation phase individuals first consider the rewards and costs expected from a search for information from a particularsource and then make three efficacy determinations: 8

        (a) whether they are able to communicatewith sufficient skill to gather the information sought (i.e. communication efficacy 8

        (b) whetherthey can cope with the information they expect to receive (i.e. coping efficacy) and 8

        (c) whetherthe source is willing and able to provide the information being sought (i.e. target efficacy) 8

        TMIMargues that individuals are increasingly likely to seek information directly to the extent that the outcomeexpectancy is positive (i.e. they expect a relatively positive outcome of an information search)and the three perceptions of efficacy are high. 8 4

      decision phase 8

      The information management process 1 1

      Seeking Sexually Related Information from Partners 1

    Chapter 8. Self-Disclosure and Starting a Close Relationship 1

    • The self-disclosure transaction provides an important context in which decisions are made inbeginning a relationship with a new acquaintance. 1 9

      People use “self-disclosure” (includingwhat when and how thoughts and feelings are dis or not dis ) as well as reactionsby the disclosure recipient and the initial discloser to collect information about a prospectivepartner and to make forecasts about the possibility for a future relationship. 1 9

      It is also used by newacquaintances to infer how much they like and trust one another and whether they might identifythemselves as friends or as an intimate couple. 1 9

      What Is Self-Disclosure? 1

      • People may loosely define self-disclosure as anything intentional or unintentional that informs usabout what someone is like. 1

        However theory and research on self-disclosure—and this chapter—focus on self-disclosure as a deliberate or voluntary activity whereby people reveal information thoughts and feelings about themselves to at least one other person during an interaction 1

        Although selfdisclosureis usually studied as a verbal activity (e.g. “I think …” or “I feel …”) it may also referto nonverbal messages that are intended to communicate information (e.g. indicating relationshipcommitment by wearing a wedding ring or wearing a tattoo on one’s arm that says “I love Maisie”). 1

        Self-disclosure is a transaction that occurs between two or more persons in the roles of “discloser”and “disclosure recipient” or “listener” at cognitive emotional and behavioral levels. 1 1

        What when and how self-disclosure occurs on one occasion or over time influence and are influenced by the interaction and or the relationship that unfolds between the participants 1 –

        Self-disclosure varies in content. It may focus on facts about one’s self (descriptive disclosuressuch as “I listen to talk radio programs”) 1

        descriptive disclosures 1

        • such as “I listen to talk radio programs”) 1

        evaluative disclosures 1

        • subjective opinions and feelings 1

        personal disclosure 1

        • “I feel good about winning the lottery”) 1

        relational self-disclosure 1

        • “I enjoyed the time I spent with you thisweekend” 1

        personalistic 1

        • Self-disclosure may be perceived as personalistic 1
          • i.e. uniquely intended for a recipient 1

        nonpersonalistic 1

        • (i.e. intended for anyone 1

        responsiveness 1

        • The behavior of thedisclosure recipient and or the discloser may also vary in responsiveness 1

          Judgments about responsiveness based on perceptions about how the disclosurerecipient and the discloser responded during and across disclosure episodes are used to infer intimacyin an interaction and in a relationship 1

      aspects of disclosure or nondisclosure 1 –

      • privacy regulation 1 –
        • privacy regulation (how much control the discloser and the disclosure recipienthave over the process of what is said and heard as well as who owns the information and how“it” will be protected 1 –
      • truthfulness 1 –
        • truthfulness (the extent to which the discloser conveys information that he or she subjectivelyperceives to be about the “true” or “authentic self”) 1 –
      • informativeness 1 –
        • informativeness (how much information is conveyedfrom the discloser’s and the disclosure recipient’s behavior contributing to attributions aboutthe reasons underlying each person’s behavior) 1 –
      • effectiveness 1 –
        • effectiveness (how successful the discloser andthe disclosure recipient are in accomplishing important goals via their behaviors e.g. developing acloser relationship or keeping a social distance from the other person). 1 –

      Self-Disclosure at the Start of a Relationship 1 3

      • Social Penetration Theory 1 3
        • Accordingto this theory at the start of a relationship prospective partners may be limited to fairly stereotypedand superficial behaviors. But as a relationship progresses individuals are predicted to increase therange of activities they share with one another including disclosing more personal information toone another. 1

          Prospective partners also compose a mental picture of one another based on positiveand negative experiences with the current partner and their value in comparison to prior relationshipexperiences. 1

          If this picture is favorable based on a favorable benefit–cost ratio from previous interactionsand based on a favorable forecast for the future then the budding relationship progresses. 1

          Close relationships develop in variable ways. But whatever the specific pattern social penetrationtheory gives a distinctive emphasis to self-disclosing behaviors because a relationship beginsand is maintained by the “the gradual overlapping and exploration of their mutual selves by partiesto a relationship”

          Social penetration theory identified several dimensionsof self-disclosure that are associated with the development of a close relationship: how manydifferent topics are dis (topic breadth) how much information is dis about a particulartopic (breadth frequency) how much time is spent talking about a particular topic (topic time) andhow intimate the level of disclosure is (topic depth).

      • 4 dimensions SPT
        • topic breadth
          • how manydifferent topics are dis
        • breadth frequency
          • how much information is dis about a particulartopic
        • topic time
          • how much time is spent talking about a particular topic
        • topic depth
          • how intimate the level of disclosure is

      Social penetration theory predicts that relationship development is a continuous and usually a gradualprocess. 3

      Self-disclosure in social interactions moves from superficial to more personal levels (i.e. increases in topic depth) and the partners divulge information about a wider range of topics (i.e. increases in topic breadth) as a relationship progresses. 3

      The Clicking Model 3

      • Social penetration theory predicts that relationship development is a continuous and usually a gradualprocess. Self-disclosure in social interactions moves from superficial to more personal levels (i.e. increases in topic depth) and the partners divulge information about a wider range of topics (i.e. increases in topic breadth) as a relationship progresses 3

        proposed a “clicking model” of relationship development suggesting that relatively high levelsof self-disclosure and the development of close relationships may occur quickly rather than graduallyover time. 3

        The clicking model assumes that relationship partners make an assessment rather soonafter meeting someone that the other person fits (or may fit) the prototype for a friend or intimatedating partner. In turn these rapid assessments about the “new relationship” fitting the picture of a“close relationship” lead to an acceleration of intimacy-linked behaviors—including greater breadthand depth of self-disclosure spending lots of time in social activities together accommodation toone another’s needs and identifying each other as a “partner” or “close friend 3

      Managing the Risks (Including Self-Disclosure) in Starting a Relationship 1 4

      • Despite the usefulness of self-disclosure in beginning a relationship people must weigh the benefitsof self-disclosure against its risks including uncertainty about the other’s reaction and concernsabout trusting the other not to divulge sensitive information to unwanted third parties 1 4

      Resp onsiveness in Conversations andPerceptions of Relationship Intimacy 8 3

      • The intimacy process model predicts that emotional disclosures (revealing feelings and opinions)have more impact than descriptive disclosures (revealing facts and information about oneself) inaccelerating perceptions of intimacy in a social interaction. 1 2

        relational responsiveness 8 1

        • The term relational responsiveness refers to partners’ perceptions that each person “demonstratesthat he or she is taking another’s outcomes needs or wishes into consideration” 8 1

        three components responsiveness 8

        • Content 8
          • Content refers to the extent to which the disclosure recipient’s responseaddresses the discloser’s previous communication (e.g. expressing concern about what the speakersaid matching disclosure topics matching intimacy or elaborating on what the initial discloser said). 8
        • Style 8
          • Style refers to showing enthusiasm and interest in what the other person said as opposed to actingdisengaged or uninterested (e.g. involving “immediacy” cues such as direct eye contact head nods standing close to the speaker longer speech responses to the discloser’s input and saying “I see”). 8
        • Timing 8
          • Timing refers to how quickly a response occurs to the discloser’s input (e.g. responding immediatelyor delaying one’s response). 8

        interpersonal process model of intimacy 9

        • intimacy 9
          • intimacy is an emergent feature in a conversation and or close relationship based on one person’s self-disclosure input and the other’s reactions 9

            self-expression 9

            The firstperson (in the role of discloser) reveals or more generally “self-expresses” thoughts and feelings toa second person (in the role of listener). The term self-expression most often refers to voluntary selfdisclosures but it also encompasses any involuntary and or unconscious behaviors that reveal someone’sthoughts and feelings. 9

        Intimacy qualifier 9 6

        • feels understood 9 6
        • validated 9 6
        • cared for 9 6

        Intimacy disqualifier 9 6

        • discloser feels misunderstood 9 6
        • invalidated 9 6
        • nonsupported 9 6

      Gender’s Impact on Self-Disclosure atthe Start of a Relationship 1 1

      • Womengenerally disclose more about themselves than men in various kinds of relationships 1

        But the genderdifference in self-disclosure to a relationship partner is also greater in close relationships (e.g. afriend spouse or parent) than in interactions with a stranger or new acquaintance 1

        they found that men either equaled or exceeded women in self-disclosure 1

        Thesestudies suggest a strategic role for self-disclosure in the first encounter between a man and womanas the partners abide by gender-related expectations about the role of initiator and reactor. 1 2

        Whensomeone has the goal of becoming better acquainted with their opposite-sex partner then the manmay be more likely than the woman to use “his” self-disclosure input to accelerate “getting to knowone another”—to let his partner know more about himself and to find out more about his partner byencouraging disclosure reciprocity 1 2

        men take theinitiator role in an initial meeting with an opposite-sex partner the men selected more intimate topicsthan the women to talk about and they reported exercising more influence on the course of theinteraction. On the other hand the women took on a reactive role. 1 5

        the women weremore likely than the men to reciprocate the level of intimacy of their partner’s disclosure input andthe women took on a (sort of) “consensus role” by going along with the intimacy of topics selectedby the male partner. 1 5

        The women may have been “a shade reluctant” (Davis p. 691) comparedto the men to participate in this acquaintanceship exercise: The women enjoyed the acquaintanceexercise less than the men in these mixed-gender pairs 1 5

      Self-Disclosure and “Jump Starting” aRelationship on the Internet 2 5

      • There are features of the Internet that may increase self-disclosurebetween online compared to face-to-face partners in an initial interaction and accelerate thedevelopment of a close online relationship 3 –

        First the relative anonymity ofmany forms of Internet-based compared to face-to-face communications reduces the risk of rejection. 3 –

        People might disclose fairly intimate information to “strangers on the Internet” based on the expectation that they are unlikely to interact with their online partners ever again. 3 –

        Second Internet venues may lack and or filter out the sorts of “gating features” (e.g. physicalappearance and or social skill deficits such as behavioral shyness and nervousness) that may inhibitself-disclosure between new acquaintances in a face-to-face encounter 3

        Third individuals may select Internet siteswhere they are likely to meet others who share similar interests and or opinions. For instance ifsomeone joins a newsgroup focusing on say climate change he or she knows that other persons whoaccess the site are likely to have common interests. The perception of common interests may in turn increase self-disclosure 3

        If people believe that they are disclosing their “authentic self” on the Internet and that theother person has the qualities of an “ideal” friend then the partners in an online encounter maymove more quickly in developing a relationship 3

        Other research by McKenna et al. ( 2 Study 1) found that the tendency to disclose the “realself” over the Internet and in turn to accelerate the development of personal relationships viaonline versus offline interactions is greater among those who lack the social skills to communicateeffectively in face-to-face interactions 3

        The participants for this research were recruited from Usenetnewsgroups. Individuals who were more compared to less lonely and anxious reported that it waseasier to disclose personal information to someone they knew on the Internet than in “real life. 3

        Inturn if participants found that it was easier to disclose to someone on the Internet than in real life(locating the “real me” online versus offline) then they also reported greater intimacy and greaterspeed of developing intimacy in these online relationships. These online interactions increased toinclude interactions in offline settings 3

        The more participants reportedinteracting with someone online (e.g. via Internet Relay Chat) the more likely they were to engagein offline activities with these acquaintances such as writing postal letters talking on the telephone and eventually meeting the other person. 3

        In a follow-up study McKenna et al. ( 2 Study 2; alsosee Chan & Cheng 4) reported that friendships and romantic relationships started on the Internet were durable over time. After a 2-year period relationships started online remained relativelystable: % of the friendships started on the Internet were intact and % of the romantic partnershipsstarted on the Internet were still intact. 4

        A word of caution is appropriate about the role of self-disclosure in starting a close relationshipover the Internet. As Bargh et al. ( 2) indicated the self-disclosure transaction may begin in relativeanonymity on the Internet; and the “projection bias” associated with the tendency to perceiveidealized qualities in those initially liked on the Internet may intensify an online relationship beforethe “real” qualities of the partner are revealed 4 8

      The Acquaintance Exercise: A Laboratory-BasedProcedure (Incorporating Self-Disclosure)for Developing Temporary Closeness 4 2

      acquaintance exercise 4 3

      • Set I of the closeness condition 4 3
        • “Given the choice of anyone in the world whom would you want as a dinner guest?” 4 3
        • “Do you have a secret hunch about how you will die?” 4 3
        • “Take 4 minutes and tell your partner your life story in as much detail as possible.” 4 3
      • Set II 4 3
        • “If a crystal ball could tell you the truth about yourself your life the future or anything else what would you want to know?” 4 3

          “How close and warm is your family? 4 3

          Do youfeel your childhood was happier than most other people’s?” 4 3

      • Set III 4 3
        • “Make 3 true ‘we’ statements each. For instance ‘We are both in this room feeling …’” 4 3

    Chapter 9. On Becoming “More Than Friends” The Transition from Friendship to Romantic Relationship 2

    • Romantic relationships can develop in countless ways. Sometimes people meet feel an instantattraction and quickly develop a committed romantic relationship. Other times romanticrelationships unfold more gradually as two people who are physically attracted to oneanother become increasingly committed over time. 2 2

      transitions to romance 2 4

      • First research has demonstrated that friendship is an important component within orfoundation for many romantic relationships 2 4

        People tend to be especiallysatisfied with their romantic relationships when they consider their partner to be a close friend 2 4

        This suggests that friendships provide a good starting point formany romantic relationships 2 4

        Second as we demonstrate in this chapter the transition from friendshipto romance challenges traditional explanations of relationship development and extends theoriesrelated to uncertainty and expectancies 2 4

      Theoretical Persp ectives on theFriendship-to-Romance Transition 3 2

      Stage Theories of Relationship Development 3 2

      • (a) acquaintanceship to romantic relationship 3 9
        • The Traditional Trajectory: Acquaintanceship to Romantic Relationship The traditionalromantic development trajectory is marked by a gradual increase in intimate self-disclosure emotional closeness and sexual intimacy that is preceded by physical attraction. Such linear trajectoriesare common in stage theories of relational development 3

          four stages 3

          • intimacy—orientation 3
          • exploratory affective exchange 3
          • affective exchange 3
          • stable exchange 3

          five stages relationship 3

          • The initiating stage involves greetings andsuperficial information exchange. 3

            The experimenting stage is similar to the exploratory affectiveexchange stage in social penetration theory; partners engage in small talk to discover commonalities and reduce uncertainty 3 5

            The intensifying stage occurs when partners become emotionally connectedand decide to move their relationship to the next level. Romantic couples often first say “I loveyou ” during this stage. 3 5

            The integrating is marked by a fusion of the individuals so thatthey share a relational identity. When couples reach this stage not only do they see themselves as acouple but other members of their social network also regard them as a pair 4 – 4

            the bonding occurs when couples institutionalize their relationship by making a formal commitment such as marriage. 4 – 4

      • (b) platonic friendship to romantic relationship 4 4
        • three types of attraction 4
          • friendship attraction 4
          • physical-sexual attraction 4
          • romantic attraction 4
      • (c) “friends with benefits” to romantic relationship 5 7
        • FWB 5 7
          • People define themselves as FWB when they have sex with one another onmore than one occasion but do not label their relationship as romantic 5 7

            Anotheralternative to the traditional trajectory is a move from being “friends with benefits” (FWB) to becominga romantic couple 5 7

          FWB relationship is different than a hookup 5 7

          Hookups are sexual encounters (usually one-nightstands) that occur between strangers or mere acquaintances without the expectation of developingany type of relationship 5 7

          FWBrelationships in contrast typically occur between people who hope to maintain a friendship. Recentresearch suggests that the FWB relationship is not uncommon 5 7

          The rules for maintaining this type of friendship ofteninclude staying emotionally detached promising not to get jealous and agreeing not to fall in love 5 7

          in some cases people in FWB relationships cannothelp getting jealous or falling in love. Hughes et al. ( 5) found that although some people wereable to maintain the status quo and stay “friends” despite being lovers others stopped having sex orended their friendship altogether whereas still others ended up becoming a romantic couple despitetheir initial intentions not to. 5 7

          distinction – romantic relationshipsfrom friendships. 5

          • passion 5
          • mutual love 5
          • exclusivity 5

      The Influence of Relationship History 5

      • peoplewho transition from friendship to a romantic relationship differ in terms of the kinds of intimacy theyhave developed. 5 1

        relationship history would play a substantial role in determiningthe relationship trajectory. 5 1

        how well partners knew each otherexerted an important influence on the transition to a romantic relationship 5 1

        Dating 5 1

        • Dating served as a testing ground rather than as a clear marker thatthe relationship had turned romantic. In these cases partners tended to ease into a new relationshipdefinition while at the same time making sure that they did not harm the existing friendship. 5 1

          By using dating as a testing ground friends could try the new relationship “on for size” before fully committing to it. 5 9

        nature of the relationship 5

        • relationship history also influences behavior during thetransition to a romantic relationship. 5

          in terms of first dates first sexual interaction andfirst significant disclosure they argued that the nature of the relationship tends to exert a strongerimpact on women’s behavior when compared with men’s behavior. 5

          women’s sexual responses would be more strongly influenced by relationship statusand history than would be true for men. 5

          Men tend to have much more positive views of casual sexthan do women; however men and women are much more similar in their views of sex in the contextof a close personal relationship 5

          relationship history effects on first-date communication expectations such that closefriends were expected to communicate much more intimately than acquaintances 5

          This relationshiphistory effect however was significantly stronger for women when compared with men. In otherwords just as was true with sexual interaction relationship history played a more important role inwomen’s (when compared with men’s) communicative expectations for first dates 5

      The Influence of the Social Network 4

      • Romantic relationships do not occur in a vacuum 1

        Instead they occur in the context (and many times in the presence) of family friends and coworkers. 1

        A romantic couple does not spend all their time together alone 1

        Instead they spend considerabletime with their social network. 1

        the conceptof “group dating ” or the process of “hanging out” in mixed-sex groups on repeated occasions. 1

        Thesesocial contexts allow people to interact and reduce uncertainty without the anxiety and pressure ofan “on-record” first date. The social network can be useful in facilitating (or inhibiting) interactionbetween potential partners. 1

        When partners discover mutual attraction they can split off from thegroup and develop a dyadic identity while alone. This pattern differs quite a bit from the traditionaltrajectory of romantic relationships wherein couples get to know each other first and then introduceone another to their social networks. 1

        people may be aware that integration into one’s social network is an important part of relationship development. In their studyon cross-sex friendships Guerrero and Chavez found that women tended to report relatively lowlevels of social networking (i.e. hanging out with each other’s friends and family and having commonfriends) when they wanted to keep the friendship platonic but perceived their friend wantedthe relationship to turn romantic 7 – 8

        many cross-sex friends face a public presentationchallenge. In other words cross-sex friends have to cope with how people outside of their relationship including their social network perceive their friendship. Cross-sex friends are sometimesasked to explain the state of their relationship to others who question whether they are really “justfriends.” 7

        women report using less social networking with male friendswho they are rejecting as romantic partners 7

        Women may not want to lead the man on or to send thewrong signal to their social networks. 7

      The Turning Point Approach 7 7

      turning point approach emphasizes that relationships often developin a nonlinear fashion. 7 7

      turning point as “any event or occurrencethat is associated with change in a relationship 7 7

      turning points are often relatedto changes in commitment or relational satisfaction 7 7

      When turning points are mapped out based onpeople’s recollections they often show a pattern of highs and lows rather than a gradual increaseor decrease in intimacy 7 7

      studies suggest that the linear trajectory of gradually increasingor decreasing intimacy only fits about to 5 % of friendships 7 7

      Relationships transitioning from friendship to romance may be particularly unlikely tounfold in a linear fashion for two reasons 7 7

      • First the transition itself may be a period of turbulence 7 7

        second they may experience turning points in the context of both their friendship and theirnewly forming romantic relationship 7 7

      What are the common turning points in romantic relationships andfriendships? 7

      get-to-know time 7

      conflict 7

      disengagement 7

      special occasions 7

      (e.g. taking a trip together and meeting someone’s family) 7

      signs of commitment 7

      • (e.g. droppingrivals moving in together and getting married) 7

      physical separation 7

      reunion 7

      In friendships engaging in special activities together and helping each other in times of crisisare common turning points related to increased closeness 7

      turning points such as physical distance and moving out after beingroommates were common turning points related to decreased closeness in friendships 7

      exclusivity 7

      serious commitment 7

      external competition 7

      • (such asfeeling jealous) 7

      “friends with benefits” 7

      • “friends with benefits” appear to understand the importance of these turning points becausethey often try to stay emotionally detached uncommitted and nonjealous 7

      turning points 7

      • when people feel jealousthey might realize they have romantic feelings for their friend 7 1
      • These turning points may also mark the transition to romance 7 1

      romantic relationship transition 8 –

      • the romantic relationship transition(RRT) as a macrolevel turning point that captures “that point or period in time when a relationshipchanges from being either platonic or nonexistent to being romantic” 8 –

        All romanticrelationships contain at least one RRT whether they evolved from friendships acquaintanceships or “friends with benefits ” or occurred when the couple “fell in love at first sight” 8 –

      Uncertainty Reduction Theory 8 1

      Discovering a friend’s romantic and or sexual interest may also constitute an important turningpoint. Sometimes such a discovery helps reduce uncertainty about the nature of the relationshiptwo people share. Paradoxically however such a discovery can also increase uncertainty about one’sown feelings and or the direction the relationships might take 8 3

      Uncertainty reduction theory helpsexplain the process of seeking information to be able to better understand other people and our relationshipswith them 8 3

      The theory was originally advanced to explain how people seek information toreduce uncertainty during initial encounters 8 3

      According to the theory people are uncomfortable when they perceive that they cannot predict and explain the behavior ofothers. Therefore in initial interactions people seek information to reduce this uncertainty 8 3

      6. Common events leadingto uncertainty 8

      • 1. competing relationships 8
        • (e.g. a friend suddenly starts dating someone) 8
      • 2. unexplained loss of contact or closeness 8
        • (e.g. a friend stops calling for no particular reason) 8
      • 3. sexualbehavior 8
        • (e.g. a friend reveals something surprising about her or his sexual history) 8
      • 4. deception 8
        • (e.g. a friend is caught lying or concealing important information) 8
      • 5. change in personality or values 8
        • (e.g. a friend starts acting more flirtatious than usual) 8
      • 6. betraying confidence 8
        • (e.g. a friend sharesprivate information with a third party). 8

      4 types of relational uncertainty 1 1

      • 1. Behavioral norms uncertainty 1 1
        • Behavioral norms uncertainty refers to uncertainty aboutwhat constitutes acceptable versus unacceptable behavior in a relationship 1
      • 2. Mutuality uncertainty 1
        • Mutuality uncertaintycomprises uncertainty about whether or not one’s feelings are reciprocated 1
      • 3. Definitional uncertainty 1
        • Definitional uncertaintyoccurs when people experience uncertainty about the nature or state of the relationship 1
      • 4. future uncertainty 1
        • future uncertainty taps into uncertainty about commitment and the direction the relationship willtake in the future. 1

      tensions challenge 8

      • emotional bond challenge 8
        • the emotional bond challengerefers to the tension cross-sex friends sometimes feel regarding the potential romantic nature oftheir relationship 8

          Because men and women are socialized to see one another as potential romanticpartners rather than friends cross-sex friends may be confused by their feelings of intimacy andcloseness. Thought of in a different way people may feel uncertainty over where the line betweenfriendship- and passion-based intimacy is drawn in cross-sex friendships 8

      • sexual challenge 8
        • the sexual challenge involves coping with the potential sexual attraction that can occurin cross-sex friendships among heterosexuals 8

          Sexual activity can lead to uncertainty about the stateof the relationship at the present time as well as in the future 31

      Expectancy Violations Theory 5

      • People usually have general expectancies of how friends and romantic partners will and shouldact. These expectations can change dramatically throughout the course of a relationship as wouldlikely be the case if friends transitioned into a romantic relationship 5

        Part of the turbulence inherentin romantic relationship transitions comes from changing expectancies 5

        Given the differences in expectancies between relationship types and given the centralityof expectancy change to relationship turbulence Burgoon and Hale’s ( ) expectancy violationtheory (EVT) can help explain the process of transition from friendship to a romantic relationship. 5

        3 Sources EVT expectancies 5

        • what we know about the other person 5
          • (i.e. communicator characteristics) 5
        • what we know about the situation 5
          • (i.e. context characteristics) 5
        • what we know about the relationship 5
          • (i.e. relational characteristics). 5

      different setsof expectations 5

      • The different setsof expectations may set up a conundrum for cross-sex friends who are uncertain about the natureof their relationship. 5

        who should drive? 5

        Should they each pay for their own ticket andrefreshments or should one friend offer to pay for the other? 5

        Is a kiss goodnight acceptable or would such behavior be inappropriate? 1 – 9

      reward value 1 1

      • Reward value is associated with characteristics such as physicalattractiveness social attractiveness and status 1 1

      rewardingness 1 1

      • Someone who ishighly rewarding can violate expectancies without as much penalty as someone who is unrewarding. 1 1

        highly rewarding communicators are usually perceived more positively after violatingbehavioral expectations 1 1

        For example people are much more likely to respondpositively to a display of affection by a rewarding than nonrewarding person. Furthermore when arewarding person engages in a negative behavior such as acting unusually crabby and surly peopleare likely to compensate by asking the rewarding person “What’s wrong? Is there anything I can dofor you?” rather than reciprocating the negative behavior as they would for a less rewarding person. 1 1

        people in romantic relationships were likelyto verbally compensate for a partner’s negative behavior even if they ended up reciprocating negativeaffect nonverbally 1 1

      common expectancy violations 1

      • relationship escalation 1
        • relationship escalation includes behaviors thatintensify commitment such as saying “I love you ” or giving an especially personal gift 1
      • Acts of devotion 1
        • Acts of devotioninclude behaviors that show that someone is important and special such as helping someoneduring a crisis or doing a favor for someone. 1
      • Uncharacteristic relational behavior 1
        • Uncharacteristic relational behavior refers to actionsthat are inconsistent with how a person defines the relationship such as wanting to have sex with aOn Becoming “More Than Friends” 5friend or asking a friend out on a formal date 2
      • gestures of inclusion 2
        • gestures of inclusion refer to behaviors thatshow a person’s desire to include someone in her or his social network by actions such as asking theperson to meet one’s parents or spend the holidays together 2
      • female date initiation 2
        • Men also have higher sexual expectations when the woman initiates the date 2

          When actual male- and female-initiated first dates arecompared however there is evidence of less intimacy both in terms of communication and sexual activity on female-initiated first dates when compared with male-initiated ones 2

      • 5 first-date goals 2 3
        • 1. having fun 2 3
        • 2. reducing uncertainty about thepartner 2 3
        • 3. investigating romantic potential 2 3
        • 4. developing a friendship 2 3
        • 5. engaging in sexual activity 2 3

      Communication in Cross -Sex FriendshipsWith Romantic Potential 3

      • 3 communication issues 3 8
        • 1. Topic Avoidance 3 5
          • Whereas theories such as social penetration theory (Altman & Taylor 73) emphasize the role thatself-disclosure plays in the process of developing and intensifying relationships other scholars haveexamined topic avoidance in regard to relationship development 3

            Topic avoidance occurs when aperson deliberately decides to avoid disclosing information on a particular subject 3

            relationship issues 3

            • (e.g. talkingabout the “state” of the relationship or sharing feelings for one another) 3

            negative experiences andfailures 3

            • (e.g. rejection embarrassing situations or being abused) 3

            romantic relationship experiences 3

            • (e.g. past dating or marital partners 3 2

            sexual experiences 3 2

            • (e.g. sexual preferences or sexual history) 3 2

            outside friendships 3 2

            • (e.g. feelings for other friends or activities engaged in with other friends). 3 2

            Uncertainty 3 4

            • Uncertainty is also associated with topic avoidance in cross-sex friendships 3 4

            theory of motivated information management 4 1

            • people’s strategies for reducing uncertainty are based on twojudgments: 4 231
              • 1. how positive or negative they expect the information they receive will be 4 231
              • 2. how effectivethey expect to be in gathering and coping with the information 4 231

            this theory helps explainwhy cross-sex friends would be most likely to avoid relationship talk when they fear their romanticadvances will be rejected. In cases where cross-sex friends believe that their partner reciprocatestheir romantic interest direct strategies for reducing uncertainty such as disclosing one’s feelingsor questioning the partner may be much less threatening. 4 231

            Moreover cross-sex friends may be mostlikely to discuss the state of the relationship when they believe they can cope with rejection and theirfriendship can survive the turbulence that could accompany such a disclosure 4 1

        • 2. Secret Tests 4 1
          • In cases where cross-sex friends fear rejection and or worry about negative consequences of disclosingtheir feelings they may decide to use secret tests to reduce their uncertainty about the nature ofthe friendship 4 4

            Secret tests are indirect strategies that help people determine their partner’s feelingswithout directly asking them for information 4 4

            Such strategies if undetected allow people to save face if the information they receive isnot what they wanted or expected 4

            6 types of secret tests –

            • 1. third-party tests –
              • (e.g. asking amutual friend to find out if your cross-sex friend is romantically interested in you) –
            • 2. triangle tests –
              • (e.g. taking a break from each other to see if your friend misses you) –
            • 3. endurance tests
              • (e.g. decreasingrewards to see if your friend will still stick by you)
            • 4. separation tests
              • (e.g. taking a break from each other to see if your friend misses you)
            • 5. public presentation tests –
              • (e.g. joking or hinting about becoming a “couple” to see how your friend reacts). –
            • 6. indirect suggestion tests
              • (e.g. joking or hinting about becoming a “couple” to see how your friend reacts).

            people in friendshipswith romantic potential were in general more likely to report using secret tests than peoplein platonic friendships or romantic relationships 1

            people in friendships with romanticpotential were more likely to report using indirect suggestion tests and separation tests than werepeople in the other two relationships. 1

            people feel more comfortable using indirect ratherthan direct strategies for acquiring information when the relationship is in transition from friendshipto romance.

            As relationships develop past this transition point research suggests that partners willuse less secret tests in general and more direct communication to reduce uncertainty

        • 3. Relational Maintenance Behavior 5
          • So far we have discussed the difficulty that cross-sex friends sometimes have in talking about thestate of their relationship and using direct communication to reduce uncertainty especially whenromantic feelings surface for one of the partners. Obviously however some cross-sex friends talkabout their feelings and eventually make the transition to a romantic relationship. One way to accomplishsuch a transition is through the use of relational maintenance behavior 5

            relational maintenance “need notimply that a relationship is static and unchanging” 6

            relationships are dynamic entities 6

            Adapting to the changing needs and goals that characterize a relationship is a critical ingredient inmaintaining satisfying relationships 6

            Friendships that are transitioningfrom a friendship to a romantic relationship exemplify how change can be integral to maintaining relationships 6 – 2

            4 types of cross-sex friendships 6 –

            • 1. strictly platonic 6 –
              • Participantsin the strictly platonic situation perceived that neither they nor their partner wanted thefriendship to turn romanti 6

                The finding for flirting parallels that of Messman etal. ( ) who found that cross-sex friends in platonic relationships avoid flirtation as a way of keepingthe friendship from turning romantic 6

            • 2. mutual romance 6 –
              • mutual romance situation perceived that both they andtheir partner wanted the friendship to evolve into a romantic relationship 6

                Their results demonstrated that cross-sex friends were especially likely to report using prosocialmaintenance behaviors if they perceived themselves to be in the mutual romance situation 6

                those in the mutual romance situation reported relatively high levels of routine contact andactivity (e.g. calling or visiting each other and doing things together) emotional support and positivity(e.g. providing comfort and acting optimistic and cheerful) relationship talk (e.g. talking aboutthe state of their friendship and the feelings they have for one another) instrumental support (e.g. sharing tasks and giving advice) and flirtation. 6

                findings also highlight how important mutuality is for a successfulromantic relationship transition 6 2

                5 Signs of Mutual Romance 6

                • 1. Relatively high levels of routine contact andactivity 6
                  • (e.g. calling or visiting each other and doing things together) 6
                • 2. emotional support and positivity 6
                  • (e.g. providing comfort and acting optimistic and cheerful) 6
                • 3. relationship talk 6
                  • (e.g. talking aboutthe state of their friendship and the feelings they have for one another) 6
                • 4. instrumental support 6
                  • (e.g. sharing tasks and giving advice) 6
                • 5. flirtation 6
            • 3. desires romance 6 –
              • People in the desiresromance situation reported that they wanted a romantic relationship but thought that their frienddid not. 6
            • 4. rejects romance 6 –
              • those in the rejects romance situation reported that they did not want thefriendship to turn romantic but thought their friend did. 6

            how cross-sex friends in the rejectorversus would-be lover positions communicate 7

            • They found that women in the desires romance positiontended to report using relatively high levels of antisocial behavior such as arguing complaining and expressing frustration 7

              Women in the desires romance position likely experience negative affectwhen their cross-sex friend rejects their romantic overtures leading them to report more antisocialbehavior. 7

              men did not report higher than usual levels of antisocial behavior when theywere in the would-be lover position 7

              One explanation for this sex difference is that women are lessaccustomed than men to having their romantic advances rejected (Motley & Reeder 1 5) whichcauses them to experience more negative affect 7

• Section III: Diverse Context of Relationship Initiation
  • Chapter 10. The Social and Physical Environment of Relationship Initiation: An Interdependence Analysis 2
    • There are a myriad of factors that might influence the onset of a romantic relationship. Variousfactors may influence whether two people are more or less likely to meet (e.g. whether theyhave overlapping social circles) likely to interact (e.g. whether they tend to visit similar establishments) and likely to continue on a course toward a relationship (e.g. whether they enjoy doingthe same things). 2

      Overview of Social and Physical Environments 2 4

      • social environment 2 4
        • We have previously used the term social environment to refer to the network of important individualswith whom couple members feel close bonds 2 4

          social environments as comprising the interrelations linkingcouples to their respective networks of kin relations and friends 2 4

          social environmentto include all persons who potentially affect relationship processes even persons who are mere acquaintances but nonetheless exert an influence. This can include among others family members friends past partners religious groups and work groups 2 –

          A substantial body of researchdocuments the ways in which social environments exert direct and indirect influences on couples’behaviors 2

          Indeed being embedded in social networks can create opportunities to meet others andinitiate relationships described “social proximity effects” on relationship initiation namely that two people are more likely to initiate a relationship with each other if they are embedded in social networks that have linkages (i.e. chances of meeting increase as the number of social “links” separating any two people decreases). 2

      • physical environment 2
        • We define the physical environment in relationship settings as the physical properties of a situationthat affect interpersonal behavior 2 7

          people organize their environmentbased on their immediate activities and that their environment may influence activities 2 7

          people seek relationships in particular physical environments and that some environmentsallow for relationship initiation more than others 2 7

          For example those interested in meetingothers are more likely to go to an informal restaurant with a bar area than a formal restaurant circularchair arrangements for group meetings are more conducive to interacting with others than linearrangements in which everyone faces the front of a room and a lecture to the same group of studentsmay differ if it is to be delivered in a pizza parlor versus a classroom. 2 7

      Expectations and the Onset of Relationships 2 7

      • Expectations about Anticipated Interactions 2 7

        In many anticipated interactions people have expectations or hunches about aspects of interactions—for example expectations about what each person will say or do how rewarding the interactionwill be or whether there will be future interactions 2 7

        Visits with friends the home environment the workplace and other settings in which people spend significant amounts of time typically aresaturated with opportunities to interact with others in predictable ways so much so that people oftengive little thought to their expectations about the interaction (e.g. automatically greeting someone atwork by saying “Hey how’s it going?” and anticipating a reply such as “Fine and you?” rather thana genuine analysis of how it really is going). 2 7

        Interdependencetheory 2 –

        • Interdependencetheory describes expectations in terms of a comparison level or CL 2 –

        comparison level or CL 2 –

        • is the standard against which individuals evaluate the “goodness versus badness” of specific interactionoutcomes. 2 –

          Outcomes that exceed one’s CL are experienced as positive and satisfying andoutcomes that are below one’s CL are experienced as negative and dissatisfying. 2 –

          Research has shown that people are happier with their close partners to the extentthat the partner matches or exceeds their internal standards 2 –

          An individual’s CL is shaped by his or her own prior and current experiences by observinginteractions and relationships of comparable friends and kin and by noting norms for relationshipsthat are conveyed in popular media and other sources of information 2

      Expectations about Interactions Not Experienced 2

      • In addition to expectations about a current interaction interdependence theory describes expectationsregarding alternative interactions in terms of a comparison level for alternatives or CLalt 2

      Physical and Social Influences on Expectations 2 6

      • Characteristics of the physical environment influence generalized expectations for the type of interactionthat might occur 2 6

        Physical settings are saturated with expectations that have been learned asa result of being raised in a particular culture (Valsiner ); for example people anticipate somberinteractions rather than joyous ones in funeral homes (even when a funeral is not taking place) livelyinteractions at a wedding reception low-key interactions in a library and respectful interactions ina doctor’s office 2 6

        Physical settings can influence a person’s generalized expectations in ongoing relationships as isthe case in long-distance relationships (i.e. those in which couple members see each other less than they would otherwise because they are separated by a large physical distance). The general shared expectation about long-distance relationships is that they are doomed to failure 2 6

        • % of individuals in a long-distance relationship believed that the average long-distance relationshipwould end within a year 2 –

        Why continue in a relationship that is expected to fail? 2 –

        Trust 2

        • Trust which is an expectation about whether a partner will be caring responsive and faithful is a key factor in any relationship but it is particularly important in long-distance relationships. Some individuals may be less likely to venture into a long-distance relationship because they are insecure and unable to trust others or because they had negative past experiences in similar situations making the prospect of a long-distance relationship much less likely 2

      Interaction: The Role of Situations and Personal Motives 2 8

      “Interaction is a function of the Situation Person A and Person B” 2 8

      • The Given Situation 2 8
      • “geo-behavioralenvironment” 2 865
      • The environment 2 –
        • The environment refers to the physical setting (i.e. the immediatespace within which an interaction takes place the objects within immediate reach that may beof use to the interaction partners and primes or objects that bring to mind specific ideas such asposters music bookshelves guns and other symbols) as well as the social setting (e.g. the type ofsocial event knowledge of the typical social behaviors for that social event and the actual or impliedpresence of known or unknown others). 2 –
      • genericqualities 2 –
        • The second component of the given situation concerns what one can refer to as the genericqualities of interaction partners: their generalized characteristics at the time of interaction (i.e. their current mental and physical states broadly speaking) how most people of a particular socialgroup would approach the given interaction in light of their physical abilities (e.g. being able to movearound freely and being capable of given physical tasks) and generally shared assumptions that havebeen acquired through basic learning processes (e.g. carrying more things is more onerous thancarrying fewer things being around happy people is more pleasant than being around sad people and a $ bill is better to have than a $1 bill). 2 –
      • Interdependence theory 2 31
        • Interdependence theory provides a sophisticatedset of ideas for analyzing given situations which we only briefly mention here (see Kelley etal. 3 or Rusbult and Van Lange 3 for a more detailed description). It suggests that thereare a few key characteristics or properties that are most relevant for understanding and predictingthe interactions that are likely to take place in a given situation 2 31

      The Given Situation as Defined by Social Network Members and Physical Features 2 6

      placemaking 4

      • the term placemaking to captureways that a couple’s home communicates to others something about the couple. For example couplemembers may display photographs of them together rather than photographs of them apart to conveythey are a unit. In addition to communicating to others home objects may remind the couplemembers themselves of a special occasion or moment in their lives together (Arriaga et al. 4).These objects may have no meaning to others but they hold special meaning for the couple and actas behavioral cues. Even a token gift at the early stages of a relationship can take on special meaningif the partners anticipate a committed long-lasting relationship 4

      relationship dispositions 4

      • By relationship dispositions we are referring to thosestable tendencies that develop over the course of interaction that are dyadic in nature suchas trust and commitment 4

      Interaction and Inferring Partner Motives 6

    Chapter 11 . Speed-Dating: A Powerful and Flexible Paradigm for Studying Romantic Relationship Initiation 4 8

    • “bogus stranger” 4

      Not All Reciprocity Is Created Equal 3

      • Reciprocal liking or the tendency for individuals to like those who like them has long been consideredone of the great principles of attraction 3

        reciprocity of liking is even found among strangers who are meeting for thefirst time 3

        However the volume of research examining reciprocity specificallywithin a romantic setting is somewhat meager 3

      Predicting “Breakoff” from Perceived Regard andPartner-Specific Attachment Anxiety 3 7

      Close relationships researchers have revealed numerous predictors of relationship maintenance andwell-being 3 7

      perceived regard 3 7

      • One important predictor is perceived regard or the belief that one’s romantic partnervalues accepts and feels positively toward the self 3 7

        For example individuals who do not feel positively regarded by their partners are more likelyto feel threatened by their partner’s negative behavior and devalue their relationship as a result 3 7

        Although perceived regard has been almost exclusivelySpeed-Dating 7examined within ongoing romantic relationships this construct is likely to encourage the developmentof fledgling relationships as well. 2 – 9

        In other words participants should be more likely to pursue aromantic relationship with a potential partner if they believe that partner also regards them highly a prediction that is reminiscent of a simple reciprocity hypothesis 2 – 9

      romantic passion 2 – 9

      • hope 2
        • (e.g. beliefs that the love interestdesires the self) 2
      • uncertainty 2
        • (e.g. doubt that the love interest desires the self). 2

      partnerspecificattachment anxiety 2

      • “I worry that [name] doesn’t care about me as much as I careabout him her” 2

    Chapter 12. MySpace or Your Place: Relationshikp Initiation and Development in the Wired and Wireless World 3

    • three different kindsof relationships that occur online
      • naturally forming
      • targeted
      • networked relationships

      Social mores dictate that conversational topics generally begin at the superficial level when wemeet others in person and then gradually become more intimate should we choose to pursue therelationship further

      By following online group discussions or by reading through someone’s personal blog prior to interacting a reader can initiate a discussion with a new online acquaintance already armed with a greatdeal of knowledge about that person’s opinions values background and behavior 5

      5 Influential Factors for OnlineRelationship Facilitation

      • 1. Absence of Gating Features
        • Physical appearance and mannerisms play an essential role in impression formation

          Together theycreate the primary initial “gate” that determines whom we will approach when in a crowded roomof strangers whom we will befriend and with whom we will develop romantic relationships

          Without being aware that we are doing so we habitually and automaticallyuse physically available features to immediately categorize others (e.g. by their ethnicity attractiveness or age

          For example research on impressions at thezero-acquaintance level (that is having only been shown a photograph of a stranger’s face with noadditional information provided) has shown that there is extremely high consensus about the judgmentspeople tend to make about a given person across a wide variety of personality measurements based only on physical appearance

          In otherwords based solely on our facial features others may tend to assume that we are smart kind witty honest and outgoing—or they may form less flattering impressions—before we have ever exchangeda single word and before they have had a chance to learn a single thing about us beyond the physicalcharacteristics our parents bestowed upon us.

          Research has shown that first impressions tend to be lasting impressions. That is it is rather difficultto get past our first impressions (e.g. Fiske & Taylor 1 1) because people tend to selectivelyfocus on information that confirms rather than disconfirms their initial judgment when they interactwith these same people again

          Gating Roles 5

          • physical appearance 5
            • attractiveness 5
          • an apparent stigma 5
            • (e.g. obesity) 5
          • apparent shyness or social anxiety 5
      • 2. Identifiability
        • Anonymous communication on the Internet is one difference between online and offline interactionthat has been made much of in the past. In our face-to-face lives we frequently and often repeatedly interact with others (e.g. the man who runs the nearby gas station or the woman who maintainsa similar workout schedule at the gym) to whom we do not reveal personal information. However despite the relative anonymity we have with these people they may still be able to easily recognizeus in a different setting 325

          “strangers on a train” 325

          the “strangers on a train” phenomenon.That is we may share deeply intimate details of our lives details our partners parents and closestfriends may not know with the perfect stranger in the seat next to us 325

          We generally feel safe makingsuch disclosures to complete strangers whom we expect to never see again because of the very factthat we do not think we will ever see them again—they do not know us or our social contacts and sowe are assured that our disclosures remain “safe” and do not reach the ears of the family and friendswith whom we may not have shared these details 325

          even when people interact openly (i.e. using their true names and providing pictures andinformation about their profession) on the Internet they often still feel relatively anonymous or rather nonidentifiable 2 8

          One “anonymous” blogger expressedit this way: “I’ve got my picture up and blog under my first name. I’m sure I’ve left enough clues thatsomeone could find me if they really wanted to but I never think about it when I’m posting 2 8

          “strangers on the Internet” 2

          • Due to this sense of anonymity online users often engage in a “strangers on the Internet” phenomenon.Unlike disclosures made to strangers on a train they disclose personal intimate information toothers whom they may well encounter online again. These disclosures can thus form the groundworkfor a continuing and close relationship. As has been noted elsewhere the ability to interact anonymouslyalso allows people to join groups and explore aspects of self on the Internet that they mightotherwise keep hidden in their existing relationships and to form relationships with others who sharethis aspect of identity or interest 2
      • 3. Control 2
        • Online interactions also allow individuals to control their side of interactions in a way that is not possiblein face-to-face or telephone communication. In spoken interactions one is expected to respondimmediately and “off the cuff.” 2 3

          an immediate response is not always expected in onlinecommunication 2 3

          People realize that typing a reply can take time and that people tend to multitaskwhile chatting online (and often to engage in multiple chat conversations simultaneously) and thustheir attention may be momentarily devoted to something else on the computer screen. 2 3

          Pauses thatmay seem unnaturally long in speech or that may be filled with many statements like uhhhh andwell you know as the person searches for the right response can go unnoticed in an online instantmessage. 2 3

          those verbal indicators (e.g. uhmmmm) that may suggest that the individual isnervous or unsure how to respond also go unnoticed online when after a brief delay a polishedtext response pops into your chat box. 2 3

          Instantaneous replies to e-mails are not expected becausewe know that it often takes time for people to check their e-mail and write a response. The opportunityto delay response provides individuals with the chance to edit their message before sendingit. It gives them more time to think about and formulate what they are going to say. This removesthe pressure to respond instantaneously and allows for a more thoughtful response if the sender sochooses 2 4

      • 4.Discovering Similar Others 2
        • Another relationship-facilitative aspect of the Internet is the ease with which people can discover andconnect with similar others 2 7

          Online people can participate in interest groups at times that are most convenient forthem. There is no need for the other members to necessarily be online at the same time 2 – 3

      • 5. Knowing the Other before “Knowing the Other” 2
        • A final unique aspect has emerged in recent years and it is being put to use by many ranging frompotential employers to those unseen strangers who follow the daily musings of a blogger. This aspectis of course the ability to obtain a great deal of information about another person prior to initiatingan interaction with him or her. This is especially the case when it comes to those who maintainpersonal blogs but it is also true of those who take part in online dating sites and online discussionforums as well as those who leave a “Google-able” trail online. 2 3

      Relationship Formation 2 5

      • 1. Naturallyforming relationships 2 – 7
        • naturallyforming relationships—relationships that develop out of the interaction as opposed to those inwhich the interaction is specifically for the purpose of potential relationship formation 2 – 7

          The extent to which individuals feel better able to express their true or inner self online than intraditional interaction settings has been shown to be an important factor in whether or not closerelationships will form online between participants in electronic groups 2

          important ingredients 2 3

          • One of the important ingredients for the formation of close relationships over the Internet is thetendency to engage in greater self-disclosure there 2 3

            Anonymity shared interests and interacting in the physical absence of one’s communication partnercan produce this heightened tendency to disclose 2 3

            The fact that people tend to more readily engagein acts of self-disclosure on the Internet has been well documented 2 3

            self-disclosureis important to the development of intimacy as it entails being able to express and having acceptedone’s true personality and inner feelings 2 2

            Situation-appropriate self-disclosure fosters feelings of likingbetween people: We tend to like those to whom we self-disclose to like those who disclose tous and to disclose more to those we like ( 2 2

            Early mutual self-disclosureshould lead to greater liking for the other (see Aron Melinat Aron Vallone & Bator 1 7) and inturn to the relationship developing more quickly 2 2

          greater intimacy 2

          • greater intimacy develops over time among online partners thanthose who meet and interact in person. 2

          new acquaintances 2 9

          • new acquaintances can achieve greaterintimacy through online communication than they do in parallel face-to-face interactions particularlywhen the interactions take place over time. 2 9

            Those who interacted over an extended period of time online developedgreater affection and closeness for their partners than did those who interacted over a shorter periodof time (online or face-to-face) and those who interacted in long-term face-to-face interactions 2 9

            Once intimacy has been established and the online relationship becomes an integral part ofa person’s life he or she is generally reluctant to leave the relationship solely in the virtual realm 2 9

            People tend to be motivated to make their important online relationships into a social reality 2 9

        2. targeted relationships 2 – 7

        • will be discussed here mainly in terms of the interactionsand relationships that take place in online dating sites 2 – 7

          The findings discussed above however do not appear to apply when it comes to interactions betweenparticipants in online dating sites 2 5

          There are important differencesbetween interactions that take place in forums where participants meet to discuss common interestsand those that take place in online dating sites 2 5

          users of dating sites routinely selectpotential interaction partners to contact based on the pictures in their profiles: If the picture passesmuster they then look at the other attributes listed in the profile 2 5

          physical attractiveness is the first and most important factorin their selection of potential partners. In other words we use the same criteria as when we selectpotential partners and friends in our traditional interactions 2 5

          As noted previously dating site participantswill thus form a priori assumptions about the person based on his or her evident physicalcharacteristics and will tend to filter any further information they receive through these 2 5

          Sequential Gating 2 5

          • physical appearance “gate ” 2 5

            income 2 5

            occupation 2 5

            hobbies 2 5

            previous marital status 2 5

            If all of these factors seem to bedesirable the participant will send an introductory e-mail and wait to see if he or she in turn passesthe other person’s criteria and is contacted in return 2 5

          users in the online dating sites are extremely conscious of the self that they are presentingthrough their profile and are very strategic about that self-presentation 2

          they arehighly aware of the fact that others that is their potential dating partners are also engaging instrategic self-presentation 2

          Daily Lies Statistics 2 4

          • the average person over the course of an average day will tell 1 to 2 lies including liesin the workplace or at home between family and friends 2
            • %-people lied most frequently to others via the telephone 2 4

            27% -deceptions in face-to-face situations 2 4

            21%-online environment 2 4

            • %-e-mail exchanges 2

        networkedrelationships 2 – 7

        • those connections made through a friend of a friend for instance 2 – 7

        It is old news now that relationships can and do form over the Internet and that these relationshipscan become intimate and close potentially leading to lasting friendship or marriage 2 5

        It is not for nothing that millions of people have turned to onlinedating. However there are important differences in the ways in which relationships are initiated andunfold in different kinds of online venues. Different processes are at work when relationships developin common interest groups than when they develop between participants in online dating sites although they may lead to a similar result: The perfect match is found or a good friend is made. 2 5

        motivation for participation 2 5

        • dating sites 2 5
          • the primary motivation is straightforwardly to find a mate or sexualpartner 2 5
        • common interest groups 2 5
          • in common interest groups the motivation is generally to discuss and share with othersthe interest in question 2 5

        stranger with a recommendation attached 2

        • As in the face-to-face world such connections tend to be perceived and coded somewhat differentlythan meetings with rank strangers. Although the new person in question is indeed a stranger he or she is a stranger with a recommendation attached. This recommendation may be positive ornegative. There may be a sense of ready acceptance because of the shared connection with the friendor relative if one values the friend or relative and has found in the past that other friends of theirs are“my kind of people.” Equally there may be a healthy skepticism about the new prospect if one doesnot hold the mutual relationship in high regard or has found through experience that his or her tastein friends does not always dovetail with one’s own 2

        In dating sites 1

        • In dating sites physical attractivenessis what drives the contact with opinions values and interests coming in much lower on the scale 1

          the opinions values and interests of those who fail the physical appearance test arenever explored at all. In this respect dating sites are not at all dissimilar to traditional face-to-facemeeting places for singles such as bars parties and cafés 2

        reticent 2

        • Interactionsthat take place in common interest groups often are initiated and early disclosures made with participantsnever intending to meet one another in person. It is on the very basis of the closeness thatdoes develop through such mutual self-disclosure that many of these participants do eventually gettogether in person. Conversely contacts are made through dating sites with the very intent of meetingthe other in person from the outset. Under these conditions participants may be more reticentabout making intimate disclosures. More reticent still may be those who use the social-networkingsites—disclosures made to the people met in this fashion may well end up being disclosures theyin turn make to the mutual friend who connects them. In other words there may be fear that thedyadic boundary not only can but also will be broken thus hindering one’s willingness to discloseinformation that is not already known to those in one’s social circle 2

    Chapter 13. TheBusinessofLove.com: Relationship Initiation at Internet Matchmaking Services 2

    • bogus stranger experimental study 2
      • people indicated how attracted they were to a stranger (a “bogus”person unbeknownst to them) after receiving information about him or her 2
    • Questions? 7 5
      • What scientific principles are being used to match people at the major relationship websites? 7 5

        How does relationship initiation through online datingwebsites differ from relationship initiation that occurs through more traditional ways of meeting such as introductions from friends? 7 5

        Is it possible that commercial websites could help the scientificcommunity of relationship scholars advance scientific knowledge about relationship initiation anddevelopment? 7 5

    • Attitudes About Relationship Initiationat Internet Matching Services 8
• Section IV: Attraction and Other Emotions in Relationship Initiation
  • Chapter 14 . Attraction and the Initiation of Relationships: A Review of the Empirical Literature 6
    • Extended Nonverbal Cues to Attraction 2
    • Constructivism: Processes in Perceivers Making Others Attractive 3
    • constructivism 3
      • itemphasized the active generating process from within the perceiver that influences attraction toother persons 3

    Chapter 15. Insider Perspectives on Attraction

    • Attraction 2
      • Attraction is the essential motive underlying many attempts at relationship initiation. Peoplebecome attracted to another often based on minimal visible information and then wantto initiate a relationship. 2

        Attraction can then escalate if the early interactions involved inrelationship initiation are rewarding 2

        Attraction is most often conceptualizedas an attitude toward another consisting of feelings cognitions and behaviors (Berscheid 85) and may be experienced in an intense form (romantic sexual attraction) or a mild form(friendship attraction or liking). 2

        Attraction to a partner continues at more committed stages although often itis then referred to as love; see the Aron et al. chapter in this volume on the topic of falling in love 8

      Determinants of Attraction 46

      four causal factors 3

      P (person) 3

      • P factors consist of qualities of the person who potentially experiences attraction for the other 3

        For example readiness to enter a relationship strong affiliation needs and social deficiencies (e.g. shyness) may affect the process of becoming attracted to another 3

      O (other) 3

      • Ofactors frequently examined in attraction research are qualities of the other 3

        Some O characteristicsare stable internal characteristics of the other (personality characteristics attitudes and beliefs). 3

        Other O variables are extrinsic characteristics such as physical attractiveness wealth and possessions. 2

        the ideal characteristics of a partner into three categories:warmth and loyalty (e.g. the partner is understanding considerate and sensitive) vitality and attractiveness(e.g. he or she is attractive and outgoing) and status and resources (e.g. the partner has agood job and is successful). 2

        Although the focus has primarily been on desirable characteristics of theother (e.g. Aron et al. 89) Cunningham and his colleagues (e.g. Cunningham Barbee & Druen 1 6) have argued that it is important to also examine repulsion to O’s negative traits (e.g. annoyinghabits and traits) which they refer to as social allergens 2

      P × O 3

      • P × O variables unique to the association between P and O are the third category of causalvariables. This causal source however can be further divided into two types. 6

        One type refers to theintersection between P and O attributes such as similarity or complementarity 6

        In order to determinewhether P and O are similar the attributes of both P and O must be considered. The othertype of P × O causal factor refers to the properties that emerge through their joint interaction suchas quality of communication 6

      E (environmental) factors 3

      • E variables are the final set of causal factors and refer to the environment of P O or P andO together. 6

        There are two types of environmental variables that can affect attraction. The socialenvironment consists of family and friends surrounding P and O. 5

        Family and friends can try tofacilitate experiences that lead to attraction or conversely they can attempt to hinder attractionfrom developing between P and O. 5

        The second type of E variable is the physical environment whichincludes conditions that could contribute to people’s good mood (e.g. temperature sunshine and or pleasant smells) or provide interaction accessibility to each other (e.g. spacing of residence hallrooms). It could also include negative environmental conditions such as bad weather. 5

      reinforcement theory 7

      • people willlike those who provide rewards as well as those who are present when the individual experiencesrewards. –

        For instance someone who has desirable qualities is intrinsically rewarding. As anotherexample meeting someone in an unusual and pleasant situation can be reinforcing and associatedwith positive affect which then can become associated with the person who was met in that situation.The emphasis of this theory is on positive affect that is experienced as a result of reinforcement direct rewards or association with rewards

      equity theory

      • certain factors will lead to attractionif they increase the likelihood that the relationship between the two individuals can be equitable

      matching hypothesis

      • certain factors will lead to attractionif they increase the likelihood that the relationship between the two individuals can be equitable.An equitable relationship exists when the ratio between inputs and outcomes for one individual isapproximately equal to the ratio between inputs and outcomes for his or her partner. Whereas equitytheory has been applied more frequently to ongoing relationships than to the very early stages of relationships the theory in a basic form predicts that people will become attracted to those others whooffer the opportunity of creating a well-matched pair equal in social worth.

      cognitive consistencyand balance

      • balance theory has been used to explain whyboth similarity between P and O and positive social support from network members for the couple’srelationship can lead to attraction. In both cases the two people come to like each other becausethey have a similar relationship or attitude toward an outside object or person

      arousal leading to attraction

      • A very different setof theories focuses on arousal leading to attraction. People can experience physical arousal due toextraneous sources (e.g. exercise) and label it as attraction to the other

      evolutionary principles

      • evolutionary principles have become popular to explain the association foundbetween some predictors (e.g. physical attractiveness or wealth) and attraction. According to thisperspective humans become attracted to those whom they believe (subconsciously or consciously) willmaximize their opportunities for conception birth and survival of their offspring

        The theory argues that people’s attraction strategies have evolved through naturalselection; that is the attraction strategies that allowed our ancestors to reproduce and have offspringwho survived have been naturally selected (

      self-expansion theory 6

      • This theory argues that people have a desire to expand themselves which includes the acquisitionof resources perspectives and identities. One way to achieve self-expansion is through relationshipswith others. According to the theory people become attracted to those who have attributes orresources that are perceived to present opportunities to increase self-expansion 6

      Methodological Iss ues

      The Scientific Potential of Self-Reports of Attraction Predictors

      A Primer on the Method 7

      Research on Predictors of Intense Attraction 9

      three studies to examine people’s accounts of intense attraction or fallingin love. They began by reviewing various literatures to identify the major variables that could beclassified as predictors of falling in love or an intense attraction 9

      Eleven variables 9

      • (a) similarity 9
      • (b) propinquity 9
      • (c) desirable characteristics of the other 9
      • (d) reciprocal liking 9
      • (e) social influence 9
      • f) filling needs 9
      • (g) arousal and or unusualness 9
      • (i) readiness for entry into a relationship 9
      • (k) mystery 9

      Importance of Predictors of Attraction 6

      • Types of Similarity and Other P × O Factors
        • Similarity on attitudes and values
        • Similarity on interests and leisureactivities
        • Similarity on social skills
        • Similarity on backgroundcharacteristics
        • Complementarity on personality
        • Reciprocal liking (P’s liking for O)
        • Familiarity of the other
      • Characteristics of Other (O
        • O’s warmth and kindness 4
        • O’s (desirable) personality 4
        • Something specific about O 4
        • O’s intelligence and or competence 4
        • O’s ambition 4
        • O’s physical attractiveness 4
        • O’s money and or earning potential 4
      • Environmental Factors 4
        • Proximity 4
        • Support from significant others 4
        • Special setting 4

      Reasons for Entering Relationships

      • (a) physical (e.g. physically attractive)
      • (b) fun (e.g. good sense of humor)
      • (c) caring (e.g. nice)
      • (e) similar (e.g. commoninterests)
      • (f) exciting (e.g. spontaneous)
      • (g) open (e.g. self-discloses)
      • (h) dependable (e.g. honest)
      • (i) easygoing (e.g. laid-back).

      Most Frequent Types of Self-Reported Romantic Attractors –

      • Reciprocal liking and desirable characteristics –
      • Personality reciprocal liking and physical appearance –
      • Personality warmth and kindness and reciprocal liking –
      • Physically attractive fun and caring –
      • Motivated extraverted and physically attractive –

      Reasons for Commitment and Relationship Outcomes 6

      2 types of subjective premarital relationships 4

      • relationship driven 4
        • Relationship-driven commitments reflect compatibility-testing theories of mate selection(e.g. Huston Surra Fitzgerald & Cate ) which suggest that partners regularly evaluatethe degree to which they are well matched on the basis of their interactions. 4
      • eventdriven 4
        • Event-driven commitments on the other hand are those in which the reasons cited for commitment focus on externalevents such as separate interactions with the couple’s social network (e.g. one partner’s meetingwith a parent) or making attributions about network members (e.g. getting along well with friends). 4

      Fatal Attraction 25 2

      • reasons for relationship commitment influence relationship outcomes 25 2

        The qualities that individuals cometo dislike in their partners can be an exaggerated version or a negative interpretation of those thatfirst drew them to their partner in the first place 25 2

        A confident partner for instance may eventuallybe seen as “too confident ” or arrogant. This process is referred to as “fatal attraction” 25 2

        Contrary to the public’s perception of fatal attraction as portending death social psychologistsdefine fatal attraction as “fatal” in the foretelling of an inevitable sequence that can result inconflict and sometimes disillusionment 25 2

        fatalattractions may reflect the presence of opposing relationship tensions that occur in intimate relationships. 25 5

        Dialectical theory maintains that couples encounter contradictory forces such as autonomyand connection novelty and predictability and ness and openness 25 5

        Fatal attractions may occur because individuals seek a partner on the basis of one poleof a dialectical force (e.g. novelty) but then find that their relationship is deficient in terms of theopposing pole (e.g. predictability 25 5

        Second an individual’s strengths and weaknesses are apt to be entwined. This notion is a themein both the popular and clinical psychology literature 25 2

        What are virtues in the firstplace? 25 2

        Virtues are likely to be positive traits displayed in the extreme. Yet extreme qualities may beparticularly prone to exhibiting a downside and this downside may be inextricably linked to theupside. 25 2

        A person who is unusually nice for instance may be too passive or even a pushover. Thus when people pursue a partner because of that person’s virtues they simultaneously encounter thatperson’s “shadow side ” and therefore they may come to reject aspects of the very quality that first interested them 25 723

        Findings suggest that attractions to extreme qualities in an individual or to dissimilarity are particularlyvulnerable to subsequent disenchantment

        fatal attractions are significantly morefrequent when individuals are attracted to extreme partner qualities

        or those described in an exaggerated manner (e.g. unusually confident).

        They also occurmore often when individuals report being drawn to partner qualities that are dissimilar or differentfrom their own (e.g. unique; Felmlee 1 8a 1) and are less frequent when similarities orcommon interests are the source of attraction

        These findingsunderscore the argument that although dissimilarity between partners may be initially alluring italso is liable to serve as a source of subsequent relationship discontent

      Illustrations of fatal attractions 25 2

      • 1. Illustrations of fatal attractions (Felmlee 1 8b) include a woman who was drawn to her partnerbecause of his “I don’t care I’ll have fun anyway” attitude but then reported that she did not likehis “immaturity.” 25 2

        2. Another example is a man who said he initiallyliked his wife because of her “strong character and beliefs.” He later was irritated that she was“pushy loud domineering and always took the initiative.” Thus pushiness or domineering behaviorappears to be the vice associated with the virtue of character strength 25 2

      Summary and Future Research Directions 7

      • First individuals frequently report being attracted to the desirable or positive personality characteristics of O such as being fun or warm and kind. 7

        A second factor that appears invirtually all insider studies of attraction is the physical attractiveness of O with men typically ratingit as a significantly more salient factor than women 7

    Chapter 16. Satisfaction Love and Respect in the Initiation of Romantic Relationships 6

    • Have you ever planted a flower garden? If you have did you think about what you wantedyour garden to look like visualizing it in green growing glory fresh with dew in the earlymorning and fragrant with blossoms in the warmth of a summer afternoon? Did you planyour flowers by variety and color and growth pattern so that something would always be bloomingand so that colors would “pop”? Or perhaps you are a less planning-oriented gardener picking whatcatches your eye at the nursery or in the garden section of a discount store thinking about price orhardiness or simply what is easiest to plant and care for? 2

      Whether you are a thoughtful systematic gardener or a more casual spontaneous one however you are still a gardener! Whether you begin a relationship carefully thinking about what you seek inyour romantic partner and envisioning what you want your relationship to look like down the road or you simply meet someone to whom you are attracted and begin a relationship spontaneously youare a relationship initiator! 4

      Both gardens and relationships can be meticulously manicured or be free-form displays of flowers.Both may either be cared for or be neglected and go to seed. The current volume is one ofa landscape design of romantic relationships presenting options for the borders perennials andannuals that may comprise a relationship. It is concerned with how relationships are “planted.” Thischapter offers what might be considered a mix of annuals and perennials. Annuals last only a seasonand must then be replanted whereas perennials once soundly rooted may appear dormant for atime but then faithfully reappear in due course 4

      Relationship satisfaction is a bit like an annual. It may burst with color but then die out requiring replanting periodically 4

      What is relationship initiation and why does it occur? – 2

      • relationshipinitiation is the formative process that occurs as two people begin forging a romantic relationship thoughwe realize that initiation occurs also with friendships relationships with newly acquired in-laws and thelike – 2

        For romantic relationships we view initiation as not the first sighting the first introduction or thefirst hookup. Rather we view it as the period during the first few months of the life of the relationship – 2

        Forexample Campbell Lackenbauer and Muise ( 6) required couples to have been in a relationship for atleast 3 months to be considered for a study of short-term and long-term relationships – 2

      Evolutionary Theory –

      • The evolutionary psychology approach emphasizes reproduction and the fact that humans are among thespecies requiring two mating parents. In order to ensure reproduction and survival of the species matingmust accommodate women’s and men’s somewhat different mating strategies 9

      The Need to Belong 3

      • One compelling way to consider the “why” question is that relationships are initiated and formedbecause there is a fundamental need for humans to bond with one another and to belong 3

        “human beings have a pervasive drive toform and maintain at least a minimum quantity of lasting positive and significant interpersonal relationships” 3

        (a) people need both frequent and emotionally positive interactions with somenumber of close others 3

        (b) these interactions and presumably the relationships they constituteshould be stable over time. 4

      Satisfaction 9

      Satisfaction is a very important and complex aspect of a romantic relationship 9

      It is typically considered to be a person’s subjective emotional and cognitive evaluation of his or her romantic relationship – 6

      The term relationship satisfaction (especially marital satisfaction)has been used interchangeably with words such as adjustment happiness and quality althoughcontroversy exists about the terms’ meanings and measurement 6

      term relationshipsatisfaction to refer to someone’s overall pleasure in and contentment with their close romanticrelationship 6

      “a relationship begins.”

      • The wording “as a relationship is begun” is very intentional on our parts although it is morecustomary to say that “a relationship begins.” The latter phrasing can give the impression of a relationship“rising from the dust” of its own accord. Rather we wish to emphasize an individual’sintentionality and responsibility in choosing to initiate a relationship. Unlike wildflowers that maygrow without human intervention a sustainable relational garden requires volition—though notnecessarily meticulous planning

      Satisfaction in Context 3

      • six basic components of satisfaction 3
        • “relationshipquality 4
        • commitment 4
        • intimacy 4
        • love 4
        • passion 4
        • trust 4

        3 quality of satisfaction-characteristics 4

        1. enduring vulnerabilities (e.g. the temperaments andpersonalities that partners bring into the relationship) 4

        2. stressful events (e.g. illness addiction and or job loss) 4

        3. adaptive skills (e.g. the abilities to problem-solve and cope successfully). 4

      Satisfaction in Different Relationship Stages 9

      • newlywed couplesare typically very satisfied with their relationship. This satisfaction decreases during the first year ofmarriage but is still solid. Satisfaction continues to decline albeit more gradually for another coupleof years and then levels out for a few years at which time it may begin declining more. Yet absolutelevels of satisfaction remain in the “satisfied” range. 9

        Wives and husbands seem to have similar satisfactiontrajectories. 9

        satisfaction levels decrease more rapidly for people who are less satisfiedat the beginning of their marriage 9

      interpersonal factors contribute to relationship satisfaction

      • self-disclosure to the partner
      • commitment to the relationship
      • the ability of someone to take his or her partner’s perspective or “stand in the partner’sshoes ”
      • conflict strategies that avoided aggression and hostility
      • passionate and companionate love and sexual satisfaction

      majorrelational turning points

      • marriage
      • parenthood
      • empty nest

      Satisfaction Summary

      • Having lovelyflowers in a garden does not guarantee the garden’s health but the presence of a crop of weeds is asure sign that the garden needs attention. 1

        Relationship satisfaction may be defined as someone’s subjective evaluation of hisor her relationship 2

        It is also considered by some scholars to be just one aspect of overall relationshipquality. 2

        Marital satisfaction has been studied in depth and it appears that it is typically high at thebeginning of marriage and decreases over the course of the marriage though still remaining in the“satisfied” range. 2

        Qualities such as self-disclosure love perspective taking and many others influencesatisfaction positively 2

        Some research has shown virtually no differences in satisfaction betweenpersons in the relationship initiation period and persons in long-term relationships and it appearsthat satisfaction can remain strong throughout the years 2

        satisfaction will ebb and flow tosome degree but it can remain high in a relationship if the partners concentrate on maintaining thepositive aspects of their interaction. Like any annual flower it requires periodic replanting 2

      Love

      • One of the most profound influences on how relationships are initiated and maintained is love—thelove that romantic partners have for each other

        love as based either on someone’s essence as a human being called“bestowal ” or on someone’s positive and negative attributes called “appraisal.”

        romantic love is primarily of twotypes. One type is passionate love which is love that is intense emotional and like a hot flame.Companionate love on the other hand is almost like a magnified form of liking in that it is quiet andsteady-state.

        2 types of romantic love

        • passionate love
          • love that is intense emotional and like a hot flame
          • passionate love is the exotic hothouse variety
        • Companionate love
          • is almost like a magnified form of liking in that it is quiet andsteady-state
          • It is more like a glowing ember than a roaring flame
          • companionate love is more like the garden variety oflove”

        triangle of love

        • intimacy
        • passion
        • commitment

        8 forms of love

        • 1. consummate love
        • 2. companionate love
        • 3. empty love 8
        • 4. fatuous love
        • 5. infatuated love
        • 6. liking
        • 7. romantic love
        • 8. nonlove

        The Love Styles 8

        • eros
          • (passionatelove)

            eros is a passionate love style that may respond to a partnerwith intense attraction sometimes called “love at first sight.”

            the eros lover would initiatequickly seeking to know the partner mentally emotionally and physically.

            Marathon dates withheavy self-disclosure and warm physical contact would characterize the eros initiator. It would notbe unusual for eros initiators to meet see sparks and then be virtually inseparable from that timeforward.

            Passionate love is viewed by some scholars (e.g. Hatfield & Rapson 1 3) as the classictype of romantic love that takes place not only during a relationship’s initiation stage but alsothroughout the life span and across virtually all cultures

            Eros is intense

        • ludus
          • (game-playing love)

            Ludus is a playful and much less serious love style and the ludus lover would likely initiate a relationshipwith attention to appropriate distance that would contrast with eros’s attention to closeness. 5

            The ludus lover undertakes the “game” of love taking care that both partners in a relationship enjoythe relationship experience yet avoiding commitment 5

            A ludus lover would likely maintain several(certainly more than one) romantic relationships at one time with relationship initiation characterizedby activity-oriented and “fun” dates that would occur frequently enough to keep the relationshipalive yet infrequently enough to keep the new partner from getting too serious. 5

            Although therecan be a darker manipulative aspect to ludic behavior in Lee’s conception of ludus in its truest form it is playful rather than manipulative 5

            ludus is playful

        • storge
          • (friendship love)

            Storge is a love style based on solid friendship shared values and steady commitment to “growing”a relationship

            It might be difficult to pinpoint how a storge lover would initiate a relationshipbecause the process would indeed be a process

            People inclined toward storgic love would becomecompanionable with a partner sharing more and more time and experiences in an everyday way and gradually easing into a deeper connection. 465

            Early on the storge lover would not necessarily haveformal dates with the partner but might rather be part of a group that includes the partner slowlybut surely spending more and more time with the partner both as part of the group and eventuallyas a twosome. 465

            This gradual evolution of a relationship contrasts with the intense involvement of erosas well as with the studied distance of ludus. Over the long term storge love might assume the depththat an eros lover would attempt to achieve more quickly. A seasoned observer of love might evengive storge higher odds of relationship success than some of the other love styles 6

            storge is slow

        • pragma
          • (practical love)

            Pragma is a practical love style but differs from ludus in that serious commitment is actually apragma lover’s goal.

            Such a lover has some of the calculating qualities of the ludus lover but employspractical calculation in the service of finding an appropriate and compatible long-term romanticpartner.

            A pragma lover would do her or his homework in trying to wisely select a partner and wouldlikely initiate a relationship slowly firmly and strategically attempting to secure the best possiblerelational outcome

            For example early dates would be well planned and might include dinner and a movie or tickets to a play or concert depending on the age and preferences of the partners. Practicalefforts to get to know each other rather than heavy self-disclosure (as in eros) or avoidance ofdisclosure (as in ludus) would likely prevail – 2

            pragma is practical

        • mania
          • (possessive dependent love)

            Mania as the name implies is a somewhat emotionally volatile love style. The mania lover maybe possessive and dependent fervently wishing for rapid involvement and intensity in the relationshipwhile at the same time staying alert for any signal that the partner may be losing interest. –

            Themanic lover hopes for more than the best and fears more than the worst which makes for a rathertumultuous courtship. –

            Relationship initiation may be exciting and intense almost resembling theearly connection that characterizes an eros-based relationship. At some point however the manialover becomes possessive of the partner’s time not so much out of a sense of “wanting” the partnerbut more out of a sense of “needing” the partner. Relationship initiation is thus likely to be “bumpy ”including lovers’ quarrels dramatic reunions and the like –

            mania isvolatile

        • agape
          • (altruistic or “gift” love).

            agape love is “all about the partner.” As agape is centrally altruistic sometimes moreconcerned about the partner’s well-being than one’s own well-being an agape lover is likely toinitiate a relationship carefully and with great consideration for the partner’s needs wants andpreferences.

            It is not necessarily an exaggeration to imagine two agapic partners discussing whatto do on a date and having a very difficult time deciding: “What do you want to do? I want to dowhat you want to do.” “No I want to do what you want to do!” Eventually of course the partnersdecide on a course of action and the date—and the larger relationship—proceed

            agape is gentle

        Love Matching and Satisfaction 4

        • Based on the research discussed previously it appearsthat certain love styles are more conducive to relationship initiation and maintenance than others.It is also possible that partners who are similar in one or more of the love styles (i.e. have “matching”love styles) might be more likely to initiate and maintain a relationship successfully 4

        Love across Ages and Stages 4

        Recent Research on Love 1

        Importance of Respect –

        • Feeling respected is an important part of being human. “Peoplerequire standing respect a feeling of worthiness [and] individual and collective identity” –

          Although there has been considerable research on disrespect (see review by Miller 1) respect has been relatively understudied. Yet it keeps surfacing in various venues particularlythose involving intimate relationships. For example Hirsch ( 3) provided a detailed ethnographicaccount of Mexican transnational couples who move back and forth between Mexico and the UnitedStates. Respeto (formal respect) has been an integral part of traditional Mexican marriages butmore recently this respeto has broadened to include confianza (trust) in these marriage relationships.Thus spousal role-related respect now more often is accompanied by the relationship-related trust –

        Warning Signs of Marriage Failure

        • Contempt-the lack of respect
        • Criticism-Disapproval expressed by pointing out faults or shortcomings
        • Defensiveness-Excessive sensitivity to criticism
        • Stonewalling-Stalling or delaying especially by refusing to answer questions or cooperate

        six dimensions inherent in respect

        • attention
        • curiosity
        • dialogue
        • empowerment
        • healing
        • self-respect

        Satisfaction Love and Respect 3

        Love and satisfaction have been linked in a number of studies (e.g. Hendrick et al. ). Lovemay be necessary for most love relationships but is certainly not sufficient in and of itself. Relationalgardens need more than just one type of flower. 4

        ability to see the world through one’s partner’s eyes 4

        • perspective taking 4
        • empathy 4
        • role taking 4

        The best predictors of relationship satisfaction were ultimatelypositive love (a combination of passionate altruistic and friendship love) felt for the partner theabsence of game-playing love the perception that one did not use aggressive conflict tactics in therelationship and the perception that the partner was able to take one’s perspective 4

        Resp ect Toward Partner Scale 5

        • 1. I respect my partner. 5
        • 2. I am interested in my partner as a person 5
        • 3. I am a source of healing for my partner 5
        • 4. I honor my partner 5
        • 5. I approve of the person my partner is 5
        • 6. I communicate well with my partner 5

    Chapter 17. Falling in Love 32

    • Romantic love is a universal or nearly universal phenomenon appearing in every culture forwhich data are available (Jankowiak & Fischer 1 2) in every historical era (Hatfield &Rapson 2) and in every age group 32 2

      Romantic love seemsto be a key factor in quality of life generally. It can be a source of some of the greatest joys includingconnectedness ecstasy and fulfillment and some of the greatest problems including depression rage stalking suicide and homicide 32 2

      What Is Falling in Love? 6

      • “falling in love” as “the onset of a strong desire for a close romantic relationship with a particular person … the transition from not being in love to being inlove” 6

        The metaphor of “falling” suggests a particularly rapid transition 6

        many individuals when asked to describe an“experience of falling in love” in fact report on a gradual transition sometimes over years as froman acquaintanceship or friendship to an intense passion 6

        falling in love refers to a transition fromsomething not at all intense to something quite intense 6

        It involves a major redirection of one’s attentionand energy. 5

        It is more than just a passing or ephemeral attraction to or valuing of an individual;it corresponds to the early stages of intense passionate love 5

      “What is love?”

      • “the constellation of behaviors cognitions andemotions associated with a desire to enter or maintain a close relationship with a specific otherperson” 1

      Types of Love 1

      • familial love 1
      • compassionate love for strangers 1
      • love of God 1
      • love of country 1
      • Romantic love 1
        • Romantic love is love in the context of romantic relationships—that is relationships of the kindthat typically have an explicit actual or potential sexual component such as dating and maritalrelationships 1
      • -item Love Scale 1

      How Ordinary People Construe Love 35 3

      Falling in Love versus the Onset of Sexual Desire 9

      Variations in Falling in Love 3

      Personality 3

      • There appear to be consistent effects on love and falling in love for individual differences in attachmentstyle. Those who fall in love most often and most intensely are people with preoccupied (alsocalled anxious-ambivalent) attachment styles (Hazan & Shaver ). Individuals with preoccupiedattachment styles are generally characterized as being hungry for love and needy and thus tend to seek love more avidly and to be more engaged in concern about the partner’s response. Further because their relationships tend not to last as long as compared to those of people with secureattachment styles (Hazan & Shaver ) perhaps individuals with a preoccupied attachment styleare more often o

      Gender 1

      • Patterns of falling in love seem to differ somewhat for women and men 9

        men reported being in love more timesthan women. 9

        women were more likely to report being currently in love that they weremore deeply in love and that love was more important to them 9

        When asked about the number oftimes they have been in love men were also more extreme in their responses indicating they hadeither never been in love or been in love three or more times. 9

        men report greater degrees of passionatelove 9

        larger correlations between passionate love and positive or negative affect for men than women 9

      Cultural Context 5

      • Many studies have compared romantic love including falling in love across cultural contexts 8

        With regard to precursors to falling in love it has been found that European Americans mentionfilling needs (of the self and partner) most often in their narrative accounts of the experience whencompared with Mexican Americans and Asian Americans 8

        With regard to other aspects Hatfield and Rapson ( ) found that intensity of passionate lovewas similar among Americans of European Filipino and Japanese ancestry 2

        However Simmons vom Kolke and Shimizu ( 86) found romantic love to be less positively valued by Japanese than byAmericans and Germans. Further the Japanese sample had a complex pattern of responses endorsingboth traditional romantic ideas and the attitude that romantic love should be controlled. Theyviewed love as a dazed state and considered jealousy to be integral to the experience of love; theyalso most strongly endorsed the idea that true love lasts forever 8

      Rate of Falling in Love 39 396

      • Riela and colleagues ( 6 7) conducted a systematic content analysis of free-response narrativesof falling in love experiences in U.S. samples. Participants were asked to briefly describe theirmost recent falling in love experience including what led up to it (e.g. specific events) and how theywere feeling. Judges coded the narratives from a list of items for precursors to falling in lovesuch as reciprocal liking and desirable characteristics (as outlined by Aron et al. 89). In addition experiences were coded for rate of falling in love. Fast experiences were defined as those occurringover a short period of time or as a result of a strong upsurge in attraction. Slow experiences weredefined as those occurring gradually over time or without a strong upsurge of attraction. (This is notto say that the experiences were less intense; rather the experience was not rapid.) 39 396

        Across the studies for those narratives that could be coded for rate of falling in love the majority(approximately %) were classified as fast. As might be expected the narratives of those who fell inlove slowly were more likely to have mentioned having been already familiar with the person beforefalling in love. Among individuals falling in love quickly some emphasis was placed on readiness forentering a relationship as well as specific characteristics of the other person (e.g. eyes and smile).Another study using a Spanish sample found that physical attractiveness was more important forlove at first sight compared with gradual or reciprocally developed love 39 396

      Whether or Not the Love Is Reciprocated 39 6

      • Most U.S. college students have had at least one experience of loving someone who did not love them 39 6

        accounts of being rejectedand of being the undesired object of someone’s attraction. They found that rejection can lead tostrong organization as well as strong disorganization of thoughts behaviors and emotions; both therejector’s and rejectee’s behaviors are mostly passive; both wish (but do not necessarily act) for differentbehaviors and outcomes from the other; and both usually end up disappointed 39 6

        intensity of unrequited love was predicted by three factors 39 7

        • perceived desirability of the partner and the relationship (e.g. high ratings for“How perfect is this person in your eyes?”) 39 7

          the second most important was perceived desirability of the state of being in love whether reciprocated or not (e.g. “How fulfilling is it to love this personeven though it is unrequited?”); – 6

          the least important (but still significant) was mistakenly believingat the outset that the other would reciprocate the love (e.g. “Even though you don’t feel thisperson loves you as much as you would like to what extent has this person done things that wouldmake most people think he or she loves you?”). – 6

        unrequited love 7

        • not returned 7

          Secure individualswere least likely to experience unrequited love; when they did they were the group with thestrongest association with mistaken expectation of reciprocation 7

          Avoidant individuals were somewhatmore likely than secures to experience unrequited love; when they did they were the groupwith a strong positive association with desirability of the state of being in love 7

          unrequited love is a chance to experience the culturally valued state of intense lovewithout having to deal with a relationship 7

          anxious-ambivalent individuals were most likely to experience unrequited love and were thegroup with the strongest association with desirability of the partner. Desirability of the partner wasvery highly correlated with intensity for them; however desirability of the state of being in love wasclearly negatively correlated for them with intensity of the love. 7

      Romantic Attraction 7

      • Among desirable characteristics across many cultures kindness and intelligence (Buss 89)are especially important for both women and men 493

        men somewhat more than women areattracted to partners who shows visual signs of youth health and beauty; 493

        women more than men areattracted to partners who exhibit signs of status and resources 493

        women are slightly more affected thanmen by desirable personality traits 493

      Factors variables of Romantic Attraction 3

      • propinquity-being close together 3
        • exposure or “propinquity” may strongly influence the falling in love process mainlyby providing an opportunity. 3

          This mayarise because platonic friendships are a common beginning for romance via the romantic attractionsthey often include 3

      • partner filling one’s need 3
        • The partner filling one’s needs also appears to be instrumental to falling in love 3

          Filling needsrefers to satisfying the needs of another individual such as happiness and alludes to personalitytraits of the other person (e.g. compassion and honesty) that are highly valued. 3

          women mention filling needs more oftenthan men which may be consistent with research suggesting that men are more autonomous andwomen more relational 3

      • social appropriateness and social networks 327
        • There are few studies of the role of social appropriateness and social networks in falling in love 327
      • arousal at time of meeting the partner (the“arousal–attraction effect”) 327
      • readiness for falling in love 327
        • specific cues 327

          people are less likely to fall in love with PersonA when they have just fallen in love with Person B and may be more likely to fall in love when theyhave just broken up with someone 493

          a striking difference betweenthose “in love” and not in love (e.g. including those who reported never having been in love) was thatthe “in love” group reported having had a strong readiness. 493

      Effects of Falling in Love 1

      • focused attention 1
      • strong motivation 1
      • goal-orientedbehaviors 1
      • heightened energy 1
      • sleeplessness 1
      • loss of appetite 1
      • feelings of euphoria 1
      • obsessive thinkingabout the beloved 1
      • heightened attraction during adversity in the relationship 1

      Is falling in love a good thing? 1

      • falling in love when reciprocated would lead to an enhancement of the self-concept including increased identity domain greater senseof self-efficacy and greater self-esteem. 1

        The key results were that participants who fellin love showed significant increases in diversity of the self-concept and increased self-efficacy and selfesteemfrom the testing session before to the testing session after they fell in love 293

        falling in love may be much less thana good thing

        The most obvious is unreciprocated love

        if one is alreadyin a relationship falling in love with someone else could be quite disruptive

        The way love is interpreted can also be less than completely positive

      Is falling in love especially falling in love intensely a good thing? – 2

      • 1 couplesfor years starting from their wedding day. – 2

        Couples who divorced within 2 years were significantlyless in love as newlyweds compared to all the other couples in the study – 2

        Also among couples stillmarried at the -year testing those who were more deeply in love as newlyweds were considerablyhappier than those who were less deeply in love as newlyweds – 2

        couples who idealized one another as newlyweds were less likely tosuffer declines in love over time – 2

        • couples those who stayed together after 2 months were initially significantly more in love – 2

      The Biological Basis of Falling in Love 5

      avian and mammalianspecies have evolved three distinct brain systems for courtship mating reproduction andparenting 5

      (a) the sex drive characterized by a craving for sexual gratification 5

      (b) attraction (“favoritism ”“sexual preference ” or “mate choice”) characterized by focused attention on a preferred partner heightened energy motivation and goal-oriented courtship behaviors 5

      (c) attachment characterizedby the maintenance of proximity and affiliative gestures and expressions of calm when in socialcontact with a mating partner and separation anxiety when apart (as well as parental behaviors suchas territory defense nest building mutual feeding grooming and other parental chores). 5

      emotion–motivation system 2

      Each emotion–motivation system varies according to the reproductivestrategy of each species and evolved to play a different role in courtship mating reproduction and parenting. 2

      The sex drive 2

      • The sex drive evolved principally to motivate individuals to seek sexual union with arange of partners. 2

      Attraction 2

      • Attraction evolved to motivate individuals to prefer particular mating partners andfocus their courtship attention on these mates thereby making a mate choice 2

      neurochemical mechanisms

      • Beach ( ) and Liebowitz ( 83) proposedthat the neurotransmitters associated with arousal dopamine and or norepinephrine may beinvolved. Fisher (1 8) hypothesized that attraction (romantic love) may be associated with elevatedactivity of the brain’s pathways for dopamine and or norepinephrine and decreased activityof the brain’s serotonin system

        dopamine plays a central role in the focusedattention motivation and goal-oriented behaviors associated with romantic love 6

        In sum the considerable data on mate preference in mammalian (and avian) species and theassociation of this mate preference with subcortical dopaminergic pathways in human and animalstudies suggest that attraction in mammals (and its human counterpart falling in love) is a specificbut dynamic biobehavioral brain system; that it is associated with at least one specific neurotransmitter dopamine; and that this brain system evolved to facilitate a specific reproductive function: matepreference and pursuit of this preferred mating partner –

      How Does Falling in Love Work? –

      Love as Emotion 1

      • Many emotion theorists have treated love as an emotion (e.g. Gonzaga et al. 1; Shaver et al. ; Shaver Morgan & Wu 1 6). Shaver and colleagues for example noted that it is typicallythe first response given when participants are asked for an example of an emotion. Similarly whenone focuses on “moments of love ” love shows many of the features of emotions 2

        On the other hand although love is highly emotional it may be better characterized as a goal-oriented motivational stateand not as a specific emotion in its own right (Aron & Aron 1 1). As Fisher ( 4) noted it tendsto be hard to control is not associated with any specific facial expression is focused on a specificreward and like basic drives (Pfaff 1 9) is associated with subcortical dopaminergic pathways inthe brain 2

      Love as Attachment 46 8

      • The theory positsthat love develops out of three behavioral systems that evolved to promote the developmentand survival of infants in humans and perhaps other primates or even other nonprimate species 46
        • attachment 46
        • caregiving 46
        • sexuality 46

        In human adults according to this model passionate love is a combination of the desires forattachment and sexuality 46

        Further this model emphasizes that early experience with caregiversstrongly shapes individual differences in adult love experiences. Thus for example those who havehad inconsistent caregiving (e.g. those high on the anxious-attachment or preoccupied dimension)are much more likely to experience intense passionate love and more likely to experience intenseunrequited love given their propensity to easily fall in love but not find true love; in contrast those who experienced a consistent lack of security (e.g. those high on the avoidance dimension)are especially unlikely to experience passionate love in adulthood given their tendency to rejectpassionate love as real 46

      Love as a Story 46 1

      • loving relationships can be described accurately by the peopleinvolved through narrative autobiographies often suggesting culturally prototypical “stories.” Forexample the story of a couple locked in constant struggle is common as is the story of couplesgrowing to love each other over time. 46 1

        Each type of story has a characteristic mode ofthought and behavior that often corresponds to other views of love (e.g. someone with a game-basedlove story will behave in ways consistent with the ludus love style). 46 1

        Having a particular love story canalso impact one’s expectations of what a romantic relationship should be like 46 1

        People tend to seekromantic partners with similar love stories and complementary roles within these stories. Finally these stories are inextricably linked with the rest of one’s life: Particular stories can influence behaviorin a relationship and stories can also be shaped and modified by one’s experiences. 46 1

      Evolutionary Approaches 46 4

      • Because courtship and mate choice are central aspects of reproduction in avian and mammalianspecies it seems plausible that the experiences behaviors and neural underpinnings of falling inlove might be strongly shaped by evolution. 46 6

      Self-Expansion Model 31

      • the exhilaration and intense focused attention of passionate love arise from the rapid rate ofincluding the other in the self often associated with forming a new romantic relationship 31

        Falling in love according to this model ariseswhen one perceives the opportunity for substantial self-expansion by including a particular otherperson in the self 31

        self-expansion model posits 31

        • (a) a primary human motivation to expand one’sself in terms of potential to attain desired goals 31

          (b) that a main way people seek to expand the selfis in terms of “including others in the self” through close relationships so that the other’s resources perspectives and identities are treated to some extent as one’s own 31

    Chapter 18. The Emotional Landscape of Romantic Relationship Initiation

    • Hello I love you won’t you tell me your name? 2

      more realistic lyrical verse 2

      “Hello you seem to be emitting positive affect which leads me to feel some typeof arousal as I look at you and as I appraise these sensations I believe they suggest some degree ofattraction although I am not sure if it is merely physical attraction or something deeper. Could webegin communicating so I can assess our degree of compatibility and your self-perceived level ofarousal so I can better characterize what these sensations are that I am feeling?” 2

      early stages of relationship formation 4

      • characterized byemotional uncertainty 4
      • scenes of beauty and awe 4
      • scenes of potentialdanger and threat 4
      • (fear of failure and disappointment 4

      bright emotions 4

      • passion 4
      • infatuation 4
      • warmth 4
      • anticipation 4
      • joy 4

      dark emotions 4

      • anxiety 4
      • uncertainty 4
      • fear 4
      • envy 4
      • embarrassment 4

      emotional complexity during initial encounters 4

      • 1. Initialencounters are novel and unpredictable which evoke both positive and negative arousal; 4

        2. personalitydispositions such as social anxiety and shyness serve as filters that shape attitudes behaviors attributions and ultimately emotional experience; and

        3. a positivity bias encourages people toexpect and express positive emotions and hide negative emotions

      list of cognitive behavioral and affectiveindicators

      • affective indicators suggest positive emotions

        “Felt like you were ‘oncloud nine’ or ‘walking one foot off the ground’ during or after being with this person”

        “Felt anemotional connection to this person that you never imagined you would feel in any relationship.”

        Other affective indicators suggest negative emotions that arise ironically from the very fact thatanother is highly valued for example

        “Felt like it would be extremely difficult to carry on with yourlife if something tragic ever happened to this person”

        “Became very distressed following anargument or disagreement with this person.”

      3. months

      • the euphoric state of walking on cloudnine was experienced by 91% of the respondents after only 2. months whereas the distress followingan argument was experienced by % of respondents after 4.25 months. The actual behavioralstatement of “I love you” seems to occur somewhere between these affective states with 84% statingit on average 3. months after the first meeting.

      The Sociofunctional App roach to Emotions 5

      • display rules-emotions 72
        • The term display rulesrefers to the “socially learned often culturally different rules about the management of expression about who can show which emotion to whom and when they can do so” 72

          simulation 72

          • (displaying emotion that is not felt 72

          inhibition 72

          • expressing no emotion when one is in fact feeling an emotion 72

          intensification 72

          • (creatingthe appearance that emotions are felt more strongly than they are 72

          deintensification 72

          • creating theimpression that emotions are felt less strongly than they are 72

          masking 72

          • displaying an emotionthat is different from the emotion actually being experienced 72
      • “I love you too ” 73
        • Emotions might be expressed verbally or nonverbally with or without conscious thought and likeany message their expression exists on a continuum of veracity. We smile during a greeting exchangewhether we feel happy or not; we show sadness when hearing of another’s distress even when we wouldprefer to say “I told you so.” And of course we respond to “I love you” with a comparable expression “I love you too ” whether we are experiencing some level of passionate arousal or not. 73
      • emotional drunkenness 73
        • “[E]motional responses are an important part of intimate relationships but sometimes these relationships develop through an orderly dispassionate and sober process”in contrast to the “emotional drunkenness that so often characterizes romantic intimacy” 73

      Relationship Schemas and Scripts 73

      • Relationship initiation is a goal-directed enterprise 73 4

        Initiation goals vary intheir scope focus and hierarchical configuration. That is some goals are vague and unfocused (e.g. to have a fun evening) whereas some are more specific and self-focused (e.g. to appear attractive toa target of interest) or other focused (e.g. to learn more about a particular other person 73 4

        Some goalsare short term (e.g. to have a one-night stand) and some are long-term (e.g. to find a person 73 4

        some goals are preexisting (e.g. If Mary comes to the party without a date I hope Ican spend time with her) 73 4

        some goals are contextual and emergent (e.g. I am enjoying this conversation;I need to keep it going). 73 4

      Schemas 73 4

      • Although there is some variation across disciplines concerning the specific definition of the termschema a synthesis at the conceptual level suggests that the term schema generally refers toknowledge structures or prototypes that aid in the organization and evaluation of information relevantto domains of social roles and social activity. 73 7

        For example cultural expectations for “appropriate”qualities attitudes and behaviors associated with men and women are gender role schemas thatare shaped by cultural and co-cultural norms 73 7

      Scripts

      • As indicated in Baldwin’s (1 2) description of developed relationships when knowledge structuresguide specific interactional patterns they are referred to as scripts 2

        Scripts are a particular type ofschema that organizes interaction sequences and moves: who says and does what to whom when and (presumably) why. 2

        Some scripts are fairly standardized rituals widely shared within a culture(e.g. wedding and funeral rituals) and some are more idiosyncratic and localized (e.g. a family’sunique dinner script) 2

        greeting ritual 2

        • They are culturallyderived from relevant schemas but are loosely structured sequences that allow for some degreeof innovation and adaptation in accord with preexisting and emergent goals in a given context. Forexample the simple normative script known as a greeting ritual may consist of nothing more thanacknowledging another’s greeting and returning a similar greeting matched in level of formality anddetail. 2

      First Meeting Scripts 5

      • quasi-courtship behavior sequence contains four steps 5
        • courtship readiness 5
        • preening behavior 5
        • positional cues 5
        • resolution 5
          • (actions of appeal or invitation). 5

        typologyof courtship moves 5

        • attention 5
        • recognition 5
        • interaction 5
        • sexual arousal 5
        • resolution 5

        nonverbal behaviors 5

        • eye gaze of various durations 5
        • smiling 5
        • primping 5
        • lip licking 5
        • head tossing 5

        Early studies of verbal and nonverbal signals of interest during a firstmeeting identified sequences of “moves” exhibited by potential partners 5

      First Date Scripts 5

      • Assuming that an initial meeting leads to a first date potential partners thenmove through a series of episodes in which more specific goals become salient 6

        Although many ofthese interaction goals are similar for men and women (e.g. getting acquainted and judging compatibility) and some behaviors are common to both (e.g. groom for the date and engage in small gender-role expectations distinguish certain goals for men and women and prescribe appropriatebehaviors to meet those goals

        For example men are expected to initiate plan and orchestrate the date;display their resources (usually by paying for the date); and test for female sexual availability – 4

        Womenare expected to wait for and then accept the date request display their physical attractiveness andrespond with restraint to tests of sexual availability. – 4

      pursuit of three broad goals 3

      • (a) entering the scene with poise and emotional availability 3
      • (b) attracting others through displays ofaffiliation and evoking affiliative responses 3
      • (c) facilitating uncertainty reduction 3

      Emotions and Relationship Initiation Enactment

      • Entering the Scene: Poise and Emotional Availability 6
        • Negative Affective States 7
          • Negative affect particularly fear is traditionally associated withresponses to environmental threats. However in the context of relationship initiation scenes fearis more aptly seen as responses to prospective social evaluation 7

            A person tends to experience an immediate emotional response to the face which a contact withothers allows him … his “feelings” become attached to it … . If events establish a face for him thatis better than he might have expected he is likely to “feel good”; if his ordinary expectations arenot fulfilled one expects that he will “feel bad” or “feel hurt.” 29

            during initiation respondents reported that they would feel such affective states asnervous anxious uneasy uncomfortable awkward afraid and scared presumably because theyare opening themselves to loss of face.

            Self-presentational concerns prove to be particularly problematic for those who have experiencedfailure in the past

            Such individuals are more likely to fear rejectionthan those who are feeling confident when entering an initiation scene

            Fear of rejection is a localizednegative affect that prompts individuals to assume a “self-protective” interaction demeanor much like the response to fear in a nonsocial context.

            signal amplification

            • Fearful individuals also assume they communicate signals of interest and attraction to a muchgreater degree than they actually do a phenomenon known as signal amplification

              Ironically their own inhibitions foster restraint in the level of expression of affect and interestcues a tendency that increases as levels of attraction to a target other increase. When potentialpartners do not respond to what the fearful person believes to be obvious signals of interest his orher expectation of rejection is confirmed 2

        • Positive Affective States
          • Entering a scene where dating potential is present in a state of positiveaffect is highly functional. Unlike negative emotions which tend to narrow response tendencies positive emotions particularly contentment and joy tend to broaden the range of response tendencies

            Positive emotions promote openness; facilitate approach behaviors; activate interest levels optimism and creativity; and open individuals to the pleasure of play

            Positive emotions also enhance “broad-minded” coping or the ability to assesssituations objectively and generate a range of possible options for responding

        • Attracting Others: Displaying Affiliation and Evoking Affiliative Responses 7
          • The incredible proliferation of “emoticons” in the public media and Internet messages may bringgroans from some people. However their utility as communicative mechanisms is indirectly evident inscholarly research. Empirical and theoretical scholarship suggests that emotional expressivity contributesto interpersonal attraction 3

            However the use of a particular constellation of nonverbal cues associated with affiliation(e.g. hand gesturing facial expressions and postural matching proximity and variation in vocalpitch) increased over time in the liking condition but decreased over time in the disliking condition.This pattern suggests that the broad cultural mandate to signal positive affect is subtly adapted toemergent goals of signaling interest in extending or alternatively curtailing future interaction. Inshort to form relationships people must be able to exhibit and be willing to reciprocate expressionsof positive emotion 6

      • Reducing Uncertainty 4
        • Relationship initiation is often marked by both cognitive and emotional uncertainty. Although thedating scripts described previously are useful devices for coordinating initiation moves the lack ofperson-specific knowledge is an uncomfortable state that individuals attempt to reduce 4

          three strategies 4

          • passive 4
            • (observing the target preferably in an unstructuredsituation) 4
          • active 4
            • (seeking information from others about the target) 4
          • interactive 4
            • (employing selfdisclosure questions and relaxation techniques to encourage the target’s participation) 4

          seductive voice 5

          • During interaction potential partners manipulate their emotion expression and evocation tocreate an emotionally open and secure environment that facilitates the self-disclosure and relaxationnoted by Berger ( ). In a study of the male “seductive” voice Anolli and Ciceri ( 2) found thatmen who were successful in arranging a second meeting with a woman randomly assigned to themdisplayed the seductive voice to a much greater degree than the men who were not successful 5

            The beginning of the sequence is marked byhigher pitch elevated intensity and faster rate of articulation. The middle phase shifts gradually toa lower weaker and warmer voice which the authors referred to as the “self-disclosure voice.” Thethird phase moves back to a higher pitch higher intensity and accelerated rate when actually making 5

          importance of self-disclosuregenerally and emotional disclosure more specifically

          • These descriptions were then codedfor initiation goals and strategies. Findings across both studies confirm the importance of self-disclosuregenerally and emotional disclosure more specifically. The authors concluded that “the mostfrequently used behaviors in romantic relationship initiation are those that promote emotional intimacy(emotional disclosure in Study 1 and seeking love talking and spending time together

          verbal expression of love 4

          • The verbal expression of love is typically studied as a relationship intensification strategy ratherthan a relationship initiation strategy (e.g. Tolhuizen 89). However it can also be employed asan indirect strategy to reduce uncertainty about a potential partner 4
            • % of the sample reported that men said “I love you ” first 4

            half of the sample linkedthe expression of love to true feelings 4

            about % to situational influences (e.g. had a delightfulevening or “made love” for the first time) 4

            about % attributed the expression to a specificmotive such as gaining sexual compliance or testing how the other person would respond 4

            Whetheror not the statement of love functions as intended (i.e. sexual compliance is granted or expression oflove is returned) the speaker nonetheless learns relevant information about his or her partner. 4

      Managing Hope and Disappointment

      • loneliness 89
        • loneliness isnot simply a cognitive assessment of being isolated from or unfulfilled by social connections butalso an affective response to this cognition that includes feelings of disappointment confusion sadness and perhaps even hurt 9
      • Depression 9
        • Depression is a mood state of variousdegrees of intensity and duration accompanied by a complex negative affective system with a strongsadness component 9

      Individual Differences: Shyness and Self-Monitoring 6

      • the fear of rejection is a localized inhibitor for relationship initiation 6

        However it is transient to the extent that if this fear is alleviated by successful enactments the individualis generally comfortable revealing aspects of his or her personality during the dating stages 6

      Shyness

      • Shyness is a dispositional tendency characterized by high levels of social anxiety and social fear

        Shy individuals have less success in face-to-face interactionsand derive less enjoyment from such interactions compared to nonshy individuals

        shy individuals are self-conscious and self-deprecating have loweropinions of themselves

        have lower self-esteem compared to nonshyindividuals

        They also evaluate their social skills negatively and believe that theydo not have the skills necessary for successful social interaction

        Such negative self-evaluations are particularly problematic during initial encounters. When shyindividuals do engage in interaction they have low expectancies for the outcomes of interaction

        whereas most people attempt to gain social approval through positive self-presentation shy individuals are more concerned with avoiding disapproval rather than gaining approval 3

        shy individuals are so fearful of being negatively evaluated (e.g. not doing the right thing or not enacting a script properly) that they engage in systematic avoidantbehaviors. 3

        Contrary to popular beliefs shy individuals do not necessarily avoid interaction (Ward &Tracey 4) but they do avoid assertive communication behaviors 4

        For example they do not initiateconversations tend to speak less allow for longer and more frequent silences in conversation andavoid interruptions 4

        They avoid prolonged eye contact speak softly and refrainfrom demonstrating assertiveness by avoiding requests or criticism and remaining neutral in opinion 4

        By not expressing strong opinions a shy person avoids disapproval and negativeemotional arousal 4

        As functional as theseadaptations may be for the shy person to avoid increased emotional distress they simultaneouslylimit what a potential partner can learn about the shy person during face-to-face interactions and byobserving him or her in conversations with others. 4

        shyness in men appears to be more problematic during initial interactions than is shynessin women 6

        The behaviors exhibited (or not exhibited) by the shy men not only influencedtheir partners’ negative evaluation of the interaction but also caused the women to become more selfconsciousand anxious and inhibited their efforts to sustain mutual gaze. By contrast women’s shynessdid not induce feelings of discomfort or inhibit nonverbal or verbal behaviors in their male partners.Indeed shyness in women is sometimes seen as a positive quality indicating modesty (Crozier 1).In general then shyness is problematic but particularly during initial interactions and particularly sofor men due to the inhibitory effect of shyness on the enactment of male gender roles. 82 6

      Self-Monitoring 82 1

      Self-monitoring refers to the use of social cues during interaction to guide judgments about theappropriateness of self-presentation strategies and or expressive behaviors 82 1

      Highself-monitors are keenly attuned to their changing social environment and use cues embeddedwithin these contexts (e.g. others’ emotions social scripts and status hierarchies) to guide theirexpressive behavior as well as self-presentation (i.e. presenting a desirable image) 82 1

      high self-monitors respond better to thesituational demands of emotion expression compared to low self-monitors who use their internalaffective states or psychological motivations such as attitudes and values 82 1

      Given the highly scripted nature of relationship initiation and the normative expectations regardingpositive and negative emotion displays it is not surprising that high self-monitors are skilledinitiators. In a study examining the relationship between self-presentational goals (ingratiation andself-promotion) and the expression of emotions during social interactions for individuals high andlow in self-monitoring needs 82 3

      across goal type high selfmonitorsdisplayed less negative emotion (i.e. fear anger and disgust) and more happiness than lowself-monitors and were rated by judges as more competent and likeable 82 3

• Section V: Challenges and Problematic Relationship Initiation
  • Chapter 19. Hookups: A Facilitator or a Barrier to Relationship Initiation and Intimacy Development? 67
    • What is the potential of hookups as a stage in initiating a committed romantic relationship? 93 2

      What typically happens after a hookup ends? 93 2

      How often do committed relationships resultfrom hookups? 93 2

      What is the emotional experience of hookups? 93 2

      What sense do young people make fromtheir hookup experiences? 93 2

      What lessons and insights fears and worries and hopes andexpectations do youth take forward to future relationships? 93 2

      The Developmental Significance ofAdolescence and Young Adulthood 93 9

      • Meaningful connection with others is a critical element of humans’ health and well-being. Interpersonalconnection can expand our mind deepen our emotions and sustain our health 93 5 5

        Seekingmeaningful connection is a lifelong pursuit. 93 5 5

        Whereas childhood is an important “playground” forattachment building and early relationship exploration arguably the most intense time for relationshipexploration is adolescence when the full array of human needs emerges and youth take onincreasing personal volition in working social interactions to satisfy needs 93 5 5

        Adult love relationships have their roots in adolescent and young adult sexual and emotionalintimacy exploration 93 5 5

        research demonstratesthat positive romantic relationship experiences during adolescence can promote well-being 4

        advance identity development and parent–child individuation (Furman & Shaffer 3) lower stress and loneliness (Moore & Leung 2) and contribute to subsequent relationship functioning 4

        However negative romantic relationship experiences increaserisk of early and frequent romantic involvement 4

      Youth Sexual and Relationship Experience 6

      • Exploration and experimentation with sex and relationships are challenging to young people asthey struggle to develop their capacity for intimacy

      Characteristics of Casual Sexual Hookups 95

      • Hookups presumed to be noncommittal and emotionally inconsequential sexual interactions areregarded as casual sexual encounters and have sometimes been referred to as “one-night stands.” 95

        Recent research suggests that more than three quarters of college students have experienced at leastone hookup (but typically numerous hookups 95

        Nearly one half of young men’s and one third of young women’s hookup experiences involved sexualintercourse although hookups often involved other sexual behavior such as kissing petting and oralsex 95

        Hookups 95 5

        • Hookups tend to involve two neverbefore-acquainted partners 95 5

        most commonfactors leading up to a hookup 95 5

        • Flirting 95 5
        • drinking 95 5
        • alcohol 95 5
        • hanging out 95 5
        • partying 95 5

        Often youth (both men and women) “plan” to hook up althoughthe plan may not specify a particular hookup partner but rather a general intention to hook up 95 5

        Hookups most often occur at parties or in a dorm or fraternity house but any available place will do 95 5

        Alcohol is typically involved 95 5

        severity of alcohol intoxicationpredicted both the likelihood of hooking up and the likelihood that hookups included sexual intercourse 95 5

        Precautions to prevent STD transmission and or pregnancy are infrequently taken 95 3

        Verbalcommunication about personal or sexual matters during hookups is uncommon; only 4% of youthreported that hookup partners talk about what is happening 2% reported that partners talk aboutfuture interaction and only 1% reported that hookup partners talk about sexual history preferences or precautions 95 3

        Hookups typically end when one person leaves or passes out orwhen one or both partners reach orgasm 95 3

        The emotional experience during a hookup often includesfeeling good aroused or excited as well as anxious and confused 95 3

        After hookups common emotionswere regret or disappointment (see also Kilmann Boland West Jonet & Ramsey 1 3) as well ashappiness and satisfaction. 95 3

        What is the function of such experiences in relationship formation and intimacy development? 95 4

        Inwhat ways and how effectively do hookups contribute to building romantic relationships and developingyouth’s capacity for future intimate relating? 95 4

      The Effectiveness of Hookups in Initiating Relationships 95 5

      • Only a few studies have examined the extent to which casual sexual interactions have persisted intorepeat interaction and or developed into relationships (i.e. intimate interaction over time rather than aonetime interaction). 95

        hookup experience that included sexual intercourse reported that after hooking up they did notinteract with their hookup partner again. 96 –

        hookups that do not involve sexual intercourseappear to be more likely to result in future interactions; % of individuals who hooked up but did notengage in sexual intercourse during hookups reported interacting with the hookup partner at anothertime 96 –

        Some youth have a “hookup buddy” with whom they hook up multiple timesand only interact during hookups 96 –

        Other youth hook up with a friend known as “friends with benefits” 96 –

        Few hookups appear to evolve into a committed romantic relationship 96

        only % of youth reported a hookup experience that evolved into a romantic relationship and the average duration of these romantic relationships was only 4 months. 96

        thelikelihood of hookups evolving into romantic relationships appears to be related to the valence ofthe hookup experience (i.e. perceived as good or bad experiences). 96

        • % of hookup experiences perceived as “best” evolved into relationships whereas only 3% ofhookups reported as “worst” persisted 96

        What might explain the fact that hookups only rarely lead to longer term relationships? 96 4

        It may bethat relationship partners who met during a hookup later define the relationship by what it evolvedinto rather than how it started 96 4

        the frequencyof hookup interactions that evolved into romantic relationships. Another explanation for theapparent paucity of relationships that develop from hookups is that there is no well-developed scriptfor these youth to follow. Relationship scripts are cognitive roadmaps specifying the key events inromantic relationships and the typical order in which they occur (Baldwin 1 2). Scripts can pertainto specific relationship events (e.g. a first date or a relationship breakup) or can be broad construalsof how relationships develop. 96 4

        Another factor that prevents the development of relationships from hookups is the fact thatmany hookups take place while on vacation such as spring break 96

        Results from these studiesindicate that between and % of advanced high school and college students who go on springbreak have sexual intercourse with a person they had just met while on vacation and a muchhigher percentage of these students “fool around ” broadly defined with a person they had metwhile on vacation 96

        Students in Mewhinney et al.’s (1 5) focus groups indicated that there is asense of anonymity on spring break where students can engage in behaviors that would otherwisebe unacceptable at home. Youth believe that vacations are also times to relax one’s inhibitions andfocus on having a good time with less regard for consequences 96 5

        Three aspects of hookup experiences may foretell the differentialpotential of hookups for initiating a romantic relationship –

        • (a) motivations for hookingup –
          • Youth hook up for different reasons—reasons that may foretell what happens after hookups. Someyouth hook up solely for sexual experimentation exploration and gratification 1

            sexual gratification is the most common reason for both men and womento engage in casual sexual encounters 1

            Many of these individuals express little interest in romanticrelating and may even be skeptical of the “emotional baggage” they perceive as part of longer timelove relationships 1

            Still others are concurrently involved in a “committed” romantic relationship andare “cheating” on their romantic partner by hooking up with someone else

            Thus the low likelihoodof hookups as effective relationship initiators may in part be because many youth engage in hookupsfor reasons other than relationship initiation.

            other youth indeed report that they hookup with the hope that their hookup will turn into a longer term relationship

            some individuals engage in casual sexual encountersfor the purpose of finding a desirable mate or a more desirable mate than they currently have

            Hookupsmay sometimes go awry because the partners have different motivations and expectations leavingone or both partners with expectations or intentions that are unrequited.

            sexual desire was the third strongestmotivation for women to engage in casual sex 3

            female participants in Weaver and Herold’s( ) study indicated that they engage in casual sex to “live it up ” because they enjoy the noveltyof new partners and because they feel like they are doing something “forbidden.” 3

            men generally are more oriented to short-term sexual encounters than are women inmany circumstances women also engage in short-term sexual encounters (e.g. when they have greateraccess to political power and resources). 5

            motivations may differ across specific hookups; sometimesmen and women reported they “just” wanted to hook up to have a sexual thrill or to “fit in”with their peers 5

            some men and women reportedthat they were looking for interpersonal comfort and had some hope that the connection would continue. 5

          (b) the subjective experience of the hookup –

          • hookups were best when 9
            • (a) there wasinterest and attraction and the partner was good-looking 9
            • (b) sexual behavior was enjoyable 9
            • (c) they felt wanted and cared about 9

            worst hookup experiences were often described as quite distressing for youth. Alcoholplayed a large role in the worst hookups although it also played a role in young men’s besthookups. 4

            The worst hookups occurred more often in a car or in a club or bar 4

            At times they endedwhen one partner stopped the hookup because it was going too far. 4

            Partners in the worst hookupswere unlikely to see each other again. 4

            worst hookups 4

            • combinationof good 4
            • aroused 4
            • excited 4
            • confused 4
            • unsure 4
            • regretful 4
            • embarrassed 4
            • nervous 4
            • scared 4
            • uncomfortable 4
            • anxious 4
            • used 4

            profile of the best hookups 4

            • (a) communication
            • (b) enjoyment (albeit a little anxiety) and posthookup feelings of comfort and security
            • (c) interest in and care about the partner
            • (d) peer support
            • (e) conscious involvement (i.e. lack ofintoxication)

            advancing the hookup into a relationship – 5

            • communication and self-disclosure – 5
            • enjoyment and satisfaction – 5
            • interest in and affection 9
            • social networks 8
            • conscious and chosen involvement in sexual interaction 2

            Alcohol 2

            • Alcohol reduces self-awareness 2
            • clouds rationaldecision making 2
            • blurs short-term memory 2

            hookups are more likely to develop into relationshipswhen neither partner feels pressure to engage in sexual activity and neither partner experiences asense of regret about the hookup in its aftermath 8

            Hookups seem to lead to relationships when thereis a sense of connection with the hookup partner such that the interaction spontaneously unfolds and both partners have similar emotional experiences and expectations for the future 8

            The aftermathof the hookup also contributes to the likelihood that a relationship will develop based on the degreeto which hookup partners receive positive reinforcement from others in their support network. 8

          (c) the emotional realities of hooking up –

          • Casual sex has been a popular topic of investigation given the risky physical consequences of suchsexual behaviors 9

          minority of hookups turns into longer term relationships

          Hookups are most likelyto evolve into longer term relationships when

          (a) both partners had positive emotional experiencesduring and after the hookup

          (b) there was communication during the hookup

          (c) both partnershad similar motivations for the hookup

          there are many characteristics of hookups thatdecrease the likelihood that they will facilitate the initiation of a new relationship

          “hookup script”

          • a central part of the “hookup script” may very well be the notion that relationships donot evolve from hookups. In the next section we consider the implications of these contemporaryyouth relationships for intimacy development and relationship functioning in the long term

      The Effectiveness of Hookups inAdvancing Intimacy Development 5 1

      • romantic relationships contribute to experience in four behavioral systems 1 2
        • (a) affiliation 1 2
        • (b) sex reproduction 1 2
        • (c) attachment 1 2
        • (d) caregiving 1 2
      • romantic relationshipdevelopment progresses through a four-phase sequence 1
        • initiation phase 1
          • young adolescentsexpand their self-concept to include being a romantic partner. 1
        • status phase 1
          • The status phase follows inwhich adolescents feel pressure for social acceptability; choosing the “right” romantic partners canimprove one’s social standing 1
        • affection phase 1
          • In the third phase the affection phase adolescents turn their attentionto the romantic partner deepening care and commitment and expanding sexual activity 1
        • bonding phase 1
          • Thebonding phase follows in which romanticism is combined with pragmatism (the reality of maintaininga relationship for the long term) and connection is balanced with individuality 1

    Chapter 20 . Romantic Relationship Initiation Following Relationship Dissolution 8 6

    • Why should we attempt to understand how new romantic relationships are initiated? This topic isimportant not only because virtually all ex-partners enter into another romantic relationship but alsobecause there is a wealth of evidence that there are both emotional and physical health benefits forthose who are in romantic relationships 8 1

      factors 8 3

      • finances 8 3
      • advancing age 8 3
      • the presence of children 8 3
      • different personal and relationship histories 8 3
      • differing goals and objectives for later relationships 8 3

      Theoretical Persp ectives and RelationshipInitiation Post Diss olution 9 7

      1. The investment model 9

      • The investment model a variant of social exchange theories suggests that relationship stabilityis most strongly determined by the levels of commitment that the relationship partners have to therelationship 9

        each partner’s level of commitment is determined by his orher level of relationship satisfaction the quality of perceived alternatives and the level of investmentsmade in the relationship. 9 1

        relationship satisfaction is based on the balance of rewardsto costs experienced in the relationship relative to the reward–cost ratio one expects to have (i.e. comparison level) 9 1

      2. The feminist perspective 9

      • The feminist perspective is important because it directs us to attend to how power and authorityare distributed in new relationships 9

        The feminist perspective is very compatible with the investment model as in the investmentmodel one could argue that having an egalitarian relationship is considered to be a relationshipreward and that being expected to perform (and actually performing) the majority of householdand childcare tasks is a cost. 4 –

      3. communication privacy management (CPM) theory 4

      • communication privacy management (CPM) theory individualscontinually face a dialectical dilemma between revealing and concealing personal information 4

        Thetheory delineates the factors that individuals consider in making these decisions and places communicationat the center of the process because the theory “focuses on the interplay of grantingor denying access to information that is defined as private” 4

      seven key tenets of the lifecourse perspective: 4 4

      • time 4 4
        • timerefers to several interacting dimensions of change that influence how new relationships are initiated including ontogenetic time (i.e. each individual’s particular stage of development) generationaltime (i.e. each individual’s and couple’s generational stage such as “baby boomers” or “GenerationXers”) and historical time (i.e. the particular cultural ethos and Zeitgeist of the era) 4 4
      • context 4 4
        • contextexamines how individuals’ and couples’ development is directly influenced by the environment andcircumstances in which they live their lives. 4 4
      • agency 4 4
        • Agency a third construct acknowledges that individualsand couples are not passive in their responses to environmental circumstances and changes overtime but are active in creating their own contexts (including their close relationships) and in creativelyadapting to changes in their environments 4 4
      • linked lives 4 4
        • linked lives is a concept that suggests that individuals’ development does not occur inisolation and that in particular individuals’ development is intertwined with that of others withwhom they are close. In terms of relationship initiation this notion suggests that two partners’ developingrelationship will be affected by linkages in their own personal development as well as linksbetween their development and that of others in their social networks 4
      • process 4 4
        • process refers to thenature of interactions as the new relationship unfolds including communication processes involvedin beginning new relationships how and when to disclose information about previous relationships how finances are managed the benefits and hindrances of social support and social networks andpossible differences in values. 4
      • meaning 4 4
        • Meaning is the term used to describe how individuals’ interpretationsand thoughts assigned to different life events influence their developmental trajectories. Alsoincluded in this aspect of the life course perspective are social cognitions that individuals have regarding their relationships in particular and relationships in general. 4
      • diversity. 4 4
        • diversity refers tothe notion that individuals’ and couples’ developmental paths are likely to differ depending on suchdimensions as race and ethnicity sexual orientation gender socioeconomic status nationality andage 4 –

      6 possible explanations for the more rapid relationship development 3

      • 1. The previous relationship may have been dissatisfying and there is the hope that enteringa new relationship will return one to the desired state of happiness. 3

        2. The initiator may be more adjusted to the ending of a relationship than the noninitiatorbecause he or she spent more time preparing for the dissolution. 3

        3. The initiator may be more capable of attracting new partners 3

        4. The initiator may have a personality that is more open to change 3

        5. A new partner may have been present before the previous relationship ended. 3

        6. Initiators may have idealistic views about and high expectations for marriage that eventhough they may have led to dissatisfaction in the prior relationship still persist and leadthe initiator to want to try again soon. 3

      6 types of postdivorceadjustment “personalities” 4 5

      • 1. enhancers 4 5
        • Enhancersbecome more competent and well-adjusted after a divorce and have much higher self-efficacy thanthose in the other types of adjustment. This group of mostly women eventually moves on into newmarriages that are more successful than the first marriage 4 5
      • 2. goodenoughs 4 5
        • Goodenoughs are described as the averageperson trying to cope with life and the changes associated with divorce. 4 5

          Goodenoughs exhibitqualities very similar to those of enhancers but are less well adjusted. The agency of the Goodenoughsis lower than that of the Enhancers. As a result Goodenoughs’ remarriages are often quitesimilar to their first marriage. 4 5

      • 3. seekers 4 5
        • Seekers quickly and actively seek new partners 4 5

          Seekers who arepredominantly men depend upon women for support and encouragement. 4 5

          They utilize agency inthe short term as they seek new partners but their agency becomes limited in the long term becausethey are independent and autonomous only until they secure another relationship 4 5

      • 4. swingers 4 5
        • Swingers enjoythe freedom of divorce and engage in serial uncommitted relationships of varying durations. 4 291

          Theypossess agency but use it for their own personal expression of emancipation from the previous marriage rather than for establishing committed intimate relationships. 4 291

      • 5. competent loners 4 5
        • Competent loners also exhibithigh levels of agency but choose to continue life without a partner. 4 291

          Their quality of life is high andthey utilize friend and social networks to alleviate potential loneliness. 4 291

      • 6. defeated 4 5
        • the defeated havelow levels of self-efficacy possess poor social skills and often partake in unhealthy behaviors suchas alcohol or drug abuse. 4 291

    Chapter 21. “Thanks but No Thanks…” : The Occurence and Management of Unwanted Relationship Pursuit 4 8

    • conjunctive affairs 4 1
      • Some relationships grow out of spontaneous interactions between people; others are strategicallysought. In either case relationships are normally thought of as conjunctive affairs 4 1

        Theiremergence and development suggest that the parties at least to some degree possess compatiblegoals experience forms of mutuality and coordinate their actions 4 1

    • disjunctive 4 1
      • some relationshipsare disjunctive in nature reflecting nonmutuality and a mismatching of goals and expectations 4 1

        One prototypical form of disjunctive relationship occurs when two people desire different levels ofconnection with one another 4 1

        Although relationship initiations can represent conjunctive efforts they exhibit disjunction when one person resists and eschews the efforts of another person 4 1

        to (a)begin a new relationship (b) initiate a new kind of relationship (e.g. escalate intimacy in an existingrelationship) or (c) rekindle a terminated relationship. 4 1

    • The Origins of Unwanted Relationship Pursuit 4 3
      • Unwanted relationship pursuit occurs when two individuals possess and pursue incompatible goalsregarding the type of relationship (if any) they desire to have with one another 4 3

        The incompatibilitymay simply reflect the fact that one person wants to interact and the other person does not 4 3

        Or itcan reveal itself when two people do not want to share the same kind of relationship such as whenone person desires friendship and the other pursues romance 4 3

        It should not be surprising that unwanted relationshipinitiations are commonplace. Attractions are not always mutual and most people can recall experiencesof unreciprocated lust and or unrequited love 4 3

        Often when romanticrelationships terminate one of the partners would prefer the relationship to continue 7 1

        Unwanted expressions of interest can befleeting and sometimes extinguished by ignoring them or by politely but strategically retreatingfrom the interaction 7 9

        Unwanted pursuit is problematic to the extent itbecomes persistent 7 9

        A common denominator of these forms of unwanted pursuit is the disjunctivegoal structure underlying the interaction 7 9

    • Persistence of Unwanted Relationship Pursuit 7 9
      • Persistence characterizes relationship initiations that are expressly rejected by the pursued partybut nevertheless repeated by the pursuer 7

        when a pursuedindividual explicitly conveys that the initiation behaviors are unwelcome continued or escalatedinitiation attempts represent excessive and sometimes obsessive behavior. 7

    • Mild persistence 1
      • Mild persistence involves typical affinity-seeking and flirtation behavior as well as maneuvers to bein proximity to the object of pursuit 1

        This includes pursuit behaviors such as unexpectedly “showingup” or approaching the object of pursuit in public places giving gifts and other tokens using thirdparties to obtain information or access to the object and contacting the object by telephone e-mail letters and the like 1

    • Moderately persistent 1
      • As pursuit becomes more pestering and invasive of the pursued person’s privacy it is moderatelypersistent and more aggravating and inconvenient 1

        Moderately persistent pursuit behaviors includesurveillance of the object of pursuit (i.e. observing following and driving by) trespassing stealinginformation stealing property badgering the object’s network members damaging the object’sreputation and other forms of harassment and intimidation 1

    • Severely Persistent 8
      • When pursuers behave desperately and are unrelenting in their pursuit activities persistenceseems “creepy” and is considered severe 8

        Severe pursuit can induce fear in the pursued individual(or at least the average person would be frightened) in which case the unwanted pursuit constitutesstalking 8

        Ironically the obsessive relationship pursuer can demonstratecoercive threatening abusive and violent behavior—actions that seem contrary to the goal of pursuinga relationship. 8

    • Factors That Contribute to the Persistenceof Unwanted Relationship Initiation 9 7
      • psychopathology 9 3
        • It is commonly assumed thatindividual pathologies such as borderline personality disorder antisocial personality disorder andschizophrenia might be root causes of stalking. Indeed in the population of stalkers who come tothe attention of law enforcement and forensic counseling such presenting diagnoses are not rare 9
      • interpersonal skill deficits 9 3
      • attachment losses. 9 3
    • Cultural and Contextual Catalysts of Unwanted Relationship Pursuit 9 6
      • Relationships are initiated and constructed in tacit ways. Because “the details of relationship definitionare neither explicitly negotiated nor precisely codified in verifiable text ” there is ample opportunityfor misunderstanding 9 7

        Ordinarily people do not explicitly discuss the relational implications of their utterances and gestures (Baxter & Wilmot 85). Rather theyenact “a web of ambiguity” by which they signal their relationship goals and intentions 4 8

        the relational meanings that two individuals respectively ascribe to their shared interactionscan diverge in significant ways 4 8

        One person’s casual conversation can be another person’s bidfor a more serious relationship. 4

        Flirtation can mean playful teasing to one person whereas it conveysserious sexual invitation to another 4

        Polite evasion of relationshipescalation cues can be taken as acceptance or encouragement. One can be the object of relationshippursuit and not even realize it. 4

        It is difficult to reject the intentions of another when it is not clearwhat the intentions are. In the absence of overt rejection relationship pursuit tends to persist 4

    • token resistance 4
      • contributing to the persistence of relationship pursuit is the occurrence of token resistance.Although studied originally in the context of feigning lack of interest in sex 4

        token resistanceextends to romantic relationship formation in the form of “playing hard to get.” 4

        Potential relationshippartners do not want to reciprocate romantic interest prematurely lest they be perceived as desperateor undiscerning. 4

        Moreover if a pursued object of affection initially rebuffs bids for a relationship then the pursuer presumably will value the relationship even more when it is attained 4

        Thus a pursuer may have difficulty determining if an initial rejection is token or real. Optimism tilts theinterpretation toward token 4

        Just as relationship initiations exhibit elements of ambiguity so do relationship breakups andreinitiations. Because breakups often are not mutually desired (e.g. Clark & Labeff 86; Hill et al. ) it is not uncommon for a former partner to seek reconciliation 4

    • persistence cultural script 4 3
      • Whether pursuing an initial relationship or attempting to reconcile a terminated one persistenceis fueled by the cultural script that success is a function of effort 4 3

        In virtually all facets of life weare taught 4 3

        “If at first you don’t succeed try try again” 4 3

        “No pain no gain”; 4 3

        “Quitters never win andwinners never quit” 4 3

        “Persistence pays off”; 4 3

        “If you fall off the horse get right back up in the saddle”; 4 3

        “Nice guys finish last.” 4 3

        Persistence is self-reinforcing precisely because it pays off so frequently and this appears to apply to the pursuit of relationships as much as it does to other important goals 4 4

        some degree of relationship pursuit persistence is normally expected and thereby toleratedby those who are pursued 4 4

    • trappings of romance and courtship 4 832
      • such as flowers and gifts contribute to mixed responses to unwantedrelationship pursuit 1 – 2

        These potent symbols serve to undermine a “sense of invasion by triggeringambivalence and confusion and thus masking the intrusive instrumental character of interactionthat follows the expressed desire that such interaction cease” 1 – 2

    • tacit moves and countermoves 1 – 2
      • The collective suggestion of these tacit moves and countermoves has led some to liken the processof courtship to a delicately choreographed game 1

        Games and their rules can be negotiated with lesser or greater clarity but one of the obvious complicating factors is that each individual in the game also is engagedin a constant process of sense making and sometimes that sense making goes wrong. 1

    • Relational Goal Pursuit Theory 1
      • Relational goal pursuit theory is predicated on the assumption that individuals pursue relationshipsbecause they are desired end states 1

        As with all goals the effort exerted to pursue a particularrelational goal is commensurate with the extent to which it is perceived to be desirable and attainable 1

        When goal achievement is blocked goalpursuit is intensified. 1

        Goal striving continues as long as the goal is seen as attainable and worth theeffort. 1 1

        When the costs of pursuing a goal exceed the value of its attainment or when goal achievementis deemed impossible then the goal is abandoned in favor of pursuing an alternative goal 1 1

        According to relational goal pursuit theory individuals who persistently pursue a relationship withanother person who expressly rejects the relationship tend to exaggerate the importance and feasibilityof their relational goal 1 1

        This leads the pursuer to experience a constellation of thoughts andemotions that drive escalated goal striving—that is intensified relationship goal pursuit. 1 1

    • Resp onses to Unwanted Relationship Pursuit 2 2
      • Much research and theory have examined the initiation progressive development deescalation andeventual ending of relationships. Far less examined are the processes involving “failure to launch” inrelationships: those relationships in which an attempt is made to initiate or escalate a relationship but the pursuer’s initiation is stalled by the response of the person pursued. There are however variousrelatively isolated literatures investigating peripherally related types of episodes. 2 8

    Chapter . Emotional Disturbances and the Initial Stages of Relationship Development: Processes and Consequences of Social Anxiety and Depression 2 1

    • social anxiety 3 4
      • Social anxiety is defined as a fear of being negatively evaluated embarrassed or judged byothers 3
    • Social anxiety can be regarded in two ways 3
      • personalitytrait 3
        • When it is viewed as a personalitytrait it is assumed to be a dimensional construct that is normally distributed in the general populationand correlates positively with discomfort in social and evaluative situations 3
      • clinical syndrome 3
        • withthe trait view of social anxiety diagnoses of social anxiety disorder (or social phobia as listed in theDSM) are categorical such that people either do or do not meet criteria for a diagnosis 3

          Diagnosesof social anxiety disorder are made when a person’s social anxiety exceeds a threshold such thatit causes significant life interference and or distress. 3

    • social anxiety disorder 3 2
      • (a) a marked or persistent fear of one or more social or performance situations in which the personis exposed to unfamiliar people or possible scrutiny by others for fear that he or she will act in away that is humiliating or embarrassing; 3 2

        (a) a marked or persistent fear of one or more social or performance situations in which the personis exposed to unfamiliar people or possible scrutiny by others for fear that he or she will act in away that is humiliating or embarrassing; 3 2

        (b) exposure to the feared social situation almost invariablyprovokes anxiety 3 2

        (b) exposure to the feared social situation almost invariablyprovokes anxiety 3 2

        (c) the person recognizes that the fear is excessive or unreasonable; 3 2

        (d) thefeared social or performance situations are avoided or else are endured with intense anxiety anddistress; 3 2

        (e) the avoidance anxious anticipation or distress in the feared social or performancesituation(s) significantly interferes with the person’s normal routine occupational or academic functioning or social activities and relationships or there is marked distress about having the disorder.Given that social anxiety by definition involves intense anxiety in and avoidance of the presence ofothers it is logical to assume that social anxiety would interfere with close relationships particularlythe development of new relationships when people are first getting to know each other 3 2

    • major depression disorder 3 2
      • characterized by at least five of the followingsymptoms that occur within at least a 2-week period 3 2

        (a) depressed mood 3 2

        (b) markedly diminishedinterest and pleasure in all or almost all activities 3 2

        (c) significant weight loss or weight gain or adecrease or increase in appetite; 3 2

        (d) insomnia or hypersomnia 3 2

        (e) psychomotor agitation or retardation 3 2

        (f) fatigue or loss of energy 3 2

        (g) feelings of worthlessness or inappropriate guilt; (h) diminishedability to think or concentrate or indecisiveness 3 2

        (i) recurrent thoughts of death suicide ideationwithout a specific plan a specific plan for committing suicide or a suicide attempt 3 2

    • social skills 4 4
      • a group of behaviors that enable an individual to effectively engage in maintain and succeed insocial interactions. These behaviors include the expression of both positive and negative emotions facial expressions the tone volume and speed of verbal expression posture and appropriatecontent. 4 4

        A socially skilled person will accurately perceive social cues evaluate their relevance to currentmotivations and goals and generate responses to advance these motivations and goals 4 4

    • Cognitive Tradition 5
    • Interpersonal Tradition 6 –
    • Social Anxiety and Relationship Initiation 4
      • The core features of social anxiety are avoidance of and distress in social and performance situationsin which a person believes there is a possibility of embarrassment humiliation or judgment. Sociallyanxious people would like to make a positive impression on others but doubt their ability to do so 4 7
    • Behavioral Tradition 4 4
    • Depress ion and Relationship Initiation
    • Intervention 4 –
    • Behavioral Intervention 4 –
      • Modeling 4 8
        • Modeling is a strategy by which patients learn socialskills by observing others which provides them with a guide for their own behavior and increasestheir confidence that success can be achieved. 4 8
      • Role playing 4 8
        • Role playing is a strategy in which patients practiceparticular communication and social skills strategies in session which allows the clinician to providespecific feedback to optimize patients’ performance. 4 2
      • homework assignments 4 2
        • homework assignments provide theopportunity for patients to practice their newly acquired skills in a naturalistic environment 4 2
    • Cognitive Intervention
      • cognitive restructuring
        • Cognitive interventions for emotional disturbances center on identifying and modifying situationalautomatic thoughts underlying core beliefs and pessimistic expectations a process called cognitiverestructuring

        Patients develop specific strategies to evaluate problematic situationsin a more balanced manner (e.g. “What’s the worst that can happen?” and “Does ____’s opinionreally reflect everyone else’s opinion?”).

        clinicians help emotionally impaired patientsto construct creative “experiments” to test out their maladaptive beliefs and expectations in theireveryday lives

    • Interpersonal Intervention 4 2
      • Interpersonal interventions not surprisingly focus on disruptions in close relationships andtheir association to psychiatric symptoms 4 2

        Patientsin IPT address conflicts and transitions in their current relationships and develop strategiesfor utilizing their social support network in times of stress 4 2

• Section VI: Cognitions Beliefs and Memories about Relationship Initiation
  • Chapter 22. Relationship Beliefs and Their Role in Romantic Relationship Initiation 4 1
  • Chapter 23. “So How Did You Two Meet?” Narratives of Relationship Initiation 1
    • Almost anyone in a serious relationship has probably been asked at some point to tell the storyof how that relationship began. Friends eager for gossip about the latest prospect parentsprobing as to where their offspring met a potential suitor children at an anniversary partycurious as to where their parents’ relationship began: 3

      To summarize in previous research higher relational well-being has been associatedwith relationship initiation stories that 4 8

      (a) were agreed on readily by both partners 4 8

      (b) were notparticularly romantic emotional or dramatic in tone; 4 8

      (c) reflected a we orientation 4 8

  • Chapter 25. The Role of Ideal Standards in Relationship Initiation Processes 5 4 1
    • Relationship-based knowledge structures involve three interlocking components 5 5

      (a) the self 5 5

      (b)the partner 5 5

      (c) the relationship 5 5

      Goals expectations and beliefs aboutideals should exist where the self the partner and the relationship intersect. 5 5

      Ideal standards therefore combine elements of the actual self the ideal partner and the ideal relationship 5 5

      ideal partner and ideal relationship standards should be stored and represented cognitivelyas separate semi-independent constructs 5 5

  • Chapter 26 . Perceptions of Goals and Motives in Romantic Relationships 5 1
    • Why People Care About a Prosp ectivePartner’s Goals and Motives 5 2
      • Imagine a social world in which you never thought about otherpeople’s goals and motives. For instance suppose you are sitting in an airport bar when an attractivestranger sidles up next to you and offers to buy you a drink. If you lacked a “theory of mind” that preventedyou from understanding other people’s desires and expectations (Malle & Hodges 5) youwould respond solely on the basis of your own inclination for another drink (and perhaps your flightschedule). Such a narrow interpretation of your new acquaintance’s behavior is characteristic ofcertain forms of autism (Baron-Cohen & Belmonte 5). Most adults would read quite a bit moreinto the stranger’s offer. They might infer that the stranger is lonely and wants a conversation partneror perhaps even that the stranger finds them attractive and is seeking a sexual partner. In general ifyou fail to engage in mind-reading—including making inferences about others’ goals—you will haveno chance of understanding the real meaning behind other people’s actions 5

        Along with furthering your understanding of prospective partners an appreciation of goals andmotives may allow you to better predict and control your interactions with them 5

        Forexample if you are happily married or otherwise committed to another person it may be importantto steer clear of persons who desire more intimacy than you do. 5

        The consequences of not doing socould include awkward interchanges hurt feelings and possibly aggressive confrontations 5

        Some evolutionary psychologists believe that we are “hard-wired” to read motives into otherpeople’s actions 5

        Early humans who understood the motives and desires of friends and enemiescould better anticipate their actions and thereby gained a survival advantage. 5

        it is often important to holdaccurate perceptions about the goals of a prospective or current relationship partner 5 6

        it is important that your partner’s goals meshwell with your own goals. 5 6

        Partners with similar goals (e.g. “climbing the corporate ladder”) mayinitially experience greater attraction or “hit it off ” 5 6

        But compatibility of goals may matter even more in the long run 5 6

  • Chapter 27. Ending the Beginning of Relationships
• Compiled By:
  • blindcaveman.wordpress.com
  • Rigel Arcayan