Social Psychology’s Effects on Attraction

Joshua Newton

PSY 326

Dr. Cindi-Marie Willoughby

How and what attracts us to others is interpersonal attraction. As a military student, I am continuously judging individuals when I initially meet them because I am constantly evaluating my placement in society. What initiated my interest to research social attraction was my weakness for the opposite sex. I was and still am inquisitive as to what draws me to all women and towards certain type of the opposite sex. Originally, I thought I was attracted only to women from a physical appeal in an initial meeting, but I found there is more to the question. Even though physicality is a considerable amount of interpersonal attraction, studies have proved there are numerous factors determining roles in attraction on initial engagements. Among the most reflective opinions I found, essentially the first interactions are proximity, similarity, and physicality. It is our acceptable appetite as humans to determine whom we are drawn to, even as infants. After further study from psychologists, I collected data elucidating what dictates interpersonal attraction for an assortment of people and its connotation in everyday life. We are continuously meeting new people, seeing new faces, and deciding whether we experience attractions to individuals deliberately or not. As a result, the first acquaintance of others is most significance in the likelihood of developing a general connection and/or attraction.

Seeing as interpersonal attraction is rarely conversed, I discovered the necessity to explain in its entirety what it entails. Generally, desirability is a personal interpretation of optimistic manners and reactions concerning others in a positive behavior. For decades, scientists considered attractions were culturally biased, but modern research in this past decade have proven that there truly are psychological means for what makes humans attracted to one another (Symons, 1995). This can appear in the appearance of optimistic attributes, optimistic feelings experienced, and/or optimistic dealings. The ability to decide who is good or bad for one's self in different realms, ranging from one's occupation to their mate, is "considered critical for their well-being and survival" (Kazdin, 2000, p. 317). Hence, the importance of interpersonal attraction is its ability to establish possible short term or long term important relations in one's life. The initial attraction occurs when one cognitively judges another based on distinguishing traits. This prognosis is developed by the combination of the three principles of interpersonal attraction I previously introduced: proximity, similarity, and physicality (Symons, 1995).

Proximity, in this text, is the distance one is relative to residences or workplaces and can be identified by availability of others. Proximity also associates with communicative distance, which is, who is in people's "communicative network" and how reachable they are for contact (Icek, 1995, p. 59). The more people one has to go through to reach an individual, the more doubtful interpersonal attraction will arise. For instance, this is true even to the people I sit next to in my classes; I am more apt to become friends with those sitting next to me than someone across the room because the most proximate students are highly accessible. People are more likely to be attracted to those who are short distances because they are much easier to be in contact with than someone who is far away (Johnson, 2000). For example, the people in the same work environment are likely to be friends with each other or at least acquaintances since the availability for attraction is extremely close by. When I worked at Victoria's Secret, those were the girls I became friends with immediately, not workers in other stores. Distance is very influential in who people become attracted to because the physically closest people are highly accessible for contact.

Although proximity increases attraction in the same job environment, proximity outside of the job is an even greater influence for the reason that the choice to interact is not forced. In agreement with this evidence, my closest friends have always been outside of my job because there was no pressure to become acquaintances with them. In the atmosphere of technology, the ability to contact more people has dramatically increased, but attraction is still hard to form if one has never met them (Johnson, 2000). The almighty Facebook.com fanatics like myself have over a hundred friends, but my real friends that have this global college networking, are the people I am in close physical proximity to; I think it is hard to have a true attraction to people through a photo and email since it is not in physical closeness and it seems unrealistic. A picture displayed online is not nearly as strong as actual physical contingence. Accordingly, the possibility of attraction on first encounters drastically increases if individuals are in close proximity to each other.

People in close proximity subsequentially increase their familiarity to individuals. Familiar people are more likely to be attractive because they are judged to be safe, least likely to cause harm, and inexpensive in time and effort. Initial appeal is most highly prominent when one is easy to physically approach (Kazdin, 2000). The people I see on Arcadia's college campus, I expect to be harmless and amenable for the reason of familiarity. To exemplify this, the exposure effect states that "the more exposure to a stimulus, the more apt we are to like them;" the more times I see someone at college, the greater likelihood I may be attracted to them (Icek, 1995, p. 61). Hence, attraction probability enhances when proximate others are comfortable to be around and are highly accessible. In a study of college students' friendships, their top three friends were recorded by their proximity. The data found that sixty-five percent were in the same building, forty-one percent were next-door, twenty-two percent were two doors away, and ten percent were at opposite halls. In my own similar incidence living in the dorms, my best friend lives directly across from me and one of my closest friends lives a couple doors down. This is evidence that the familiar individuals in people's lives are more likely to become attractive. Familiar people, who are in close proximity, increase the chance of attraction in the preliminary as well as in the long-term.

Another important factor for interpersonal attraction is the similarity effect, which happens when increased similarities foster increased odds for interpersonal attraction (Gilbert, 1998). If an individual examines comparable attributes to oneself in another person, attraction immediately increases. Similar people "provide validation for our characteristics and beliefs" and will increase one's self-esteem (Icek, 1995, p. 60). I tend to associate myself with people I think will have common attributes because it gives me confidence in my beliefs and reassurance in choices I make. Similarity is distinguished as common beliefs, interests, attitudes, personality, age, economic status, and/or demographics. Many times, if a person believes that another person has parallel beliefs and/or attributes, this can be sufficient for attraction (Johnson, 2000). For example, in my initial introduction to a student who was Jewish, smart, and my age; I was easily drawn to him because these traits are similar to my own. In its simplest terms, "we like others who are similar to us" (Kazdin, 2000, p. 319) as this has been true for me. In college, the people whom I was most commonly attracted to were those in my same major, psychology, and/ or played sports because I could assume that they have related values and ideals as myself. Since people with similar views and traits can be expected to appreciate my characteristics, the probability of attraction augments. Thus, people can expect easily, comparable characteristics of others to generally have an appeal for them.

Although the similarity effect is very powerful, its efficiency extends as far as resemblances actually matter for each person. For instance, religion to some people is extremely important and for others, it does not matter. Depending on the similarity at hand, it may vary from person to person on its significance level in interpersonal attraction (Icek, 1995). A branch of the similarity effect is reciprocity, which is "people like people who like them" (Kazdin, 2000, p. 320). In other words, people assume that similar individuals will have a greater fondness to them than dissimilar individuals will. It is difficult to find attraction to people who do not seem anything like you because it stems distaste and unfavorable outcomes. Since it is a natural tendency to desire to become involved with others who match in attributes, attraction on first encounters occurs more frequently if congruity is detected.

While proximity and similarity are very influential for interpersonal attraction, the strongest emphasis and item people usually notice first is physicality. From a solitary glimpse of a person, one can identify marital status, age, background, and/ or intent to marry. For example, I can observe the color of a person's skin for background, rings on their fingers for marital status, or condition of their skin for age and make a general conclusion about a person in seconds (Hendricks, 1998). If I see a male with a ring on his finger or wrinkly skin, I am automatically turned-off by this; appearance is extremely influential in the initial appeal. It is apparent in dating and mating to schooling and employment to infancy and old age. What instantly attracted to me to my ex-boyfriend from first semester was how good looking I thought he was; I was on a mission to meet this guy who I ended up dating for a couple months. The first encounter for me was extremely influential to my attraction to him. When looking at my employment choices, I went for a Hollister interview to find that I was not what they categorized as attractive and felt a complete misfit; it was obvious that they wanted blonde, tan, rail- thin girls to hire and I did not fit their desirability. Interpersonal attraction worked against me and I was not hired. Consequentially, physical attraction can make or break whom people see as pleasing on first encounters.

Almost exclusively, researchers have focused interpersonal physical attractiveness on facial features. People are most attracted to those with symmetrical or mathematical average faces because they are easy on the eye and are more familiar (Samter, 1996). In a study of beauty standards, adults rated female faces for attractiveness and then researchers showed to two to three month olds and six to eight month olds the same pictures in pairs. The same pictures that the adults rated as more attractive, the infants stared longer at (Symons, 1995), which says that genetics plays a large role in who is appealing. While facial allure can be greatly significant, it can work against itself. If a person is judged as too physically attractive, it may seem overpowering and numerous times, they will be avoided. To prove this, a study of sixty undergraduate males decided whom they would like to meet from a set of photographs. The most attractive women were "judged as egocentric and less kind;" most of the time, the men favored the moderately or averagely attractive women (Icek, 1995, p. 65). Comparable to this study, I find myself assuming extremely beautiful people, who I have initially met, to be stuck up or out of my league; in a way, I think it is a defense mechanism of mine to assume negative characteristics of highly attractive people because they seem overpowering to me. For other women specifically, it is sometimes due to jealousy and competition. Researchers have found that an average beautiful face is more favorable than a perfect face, which makes me feel more confident about my imperfections and attraction. Moreover, facial appeal is a significant factor in generating initial attraction.

Men and women's perception of physical beauty varies by what they think is exteriorly significant and how much credence they place on it. Although both sexes say that personal qualities are most important, males put a greater emphasis on the physical; from my own experiences with women, I believe this to be noticeably accurate by the manner I have seen female's critique males and vise versus before they know them (Samter, 1996). While men look almost solely for indications of youth and health on initial attraction, women consider socioeconomic status and ambitiousness. Women's judgment of men is much more complex where as men's is initially automatic and direct because this is purely how male and female brains are mechanized. Since high school into college, I have noticed how women unfalteringly will pass up a man if he does not meet her initial attraction standards and the obsession of men to attempt to meet these standards of attraction. These particular standards vary for each sex. Women cross-culturally favor men with broad shoulders, medium height, larger chest than average, prominent cheekbones, large chin, and broad jaw. On the other hand, men favor women with large eyes, small nose, narrower face, small chin, high eyebrows, large lower lip and smile, and polished hair (Hendricks, 1998). Since physical attraction is more important to men, women feel the need to be more conscious of their appearance to draw other males. To grab the attention of females, men aim to boost their egos by coming off as higher in rank, reputation, and hierarchy (Symons, 1995). I think this makes it obvious to see why many men attempt to look like they have a lot of money and appear suave, but I think this sometimes works against men by making them look phony or cocky. Men and women have different expectations that they seek in beauty.

Another factor that both sexes use to determine interpersonal physical attraction is the hip-to-waist ratio, which is an indication of long-term health. Since research studies show that the most appealing proportions are 0.85 to 0.95 for men and 0.67 to 0.80 for women, both sexes prefer average body types than fat or thin. For example, Playboy centerfolds, which are very curvaceous women and not model thin, have a ratio of 0.70 (Symons, 1995). I found this intriguing data beneficial since I was able to use Playboy as somewhat of a reference. On the other hand, I definitely agree that I am much more attracted to a woman who is proportional, fits the beauty standards, and has a nice physique. Thus, male and female interpersonal attraction varies by what they find physically appealing in the other sex.

Through scientific research, interpersonal attraction proves to be primarily caused by proximity, similarity, and physicality. After gaining knowledge on this subject matter, I have changed my prior beliefs of what initial attraction entails. I learned it is hardly culturally biased and it is mainly due to how humans are biologically and naturally attracted to certain aspects of people. Once I comprehended proximity and familiarity of interpersonal attraction, I could now reminisce on my personal experiences with other people to recognize how truly influential and essential they are in forming attraction on first encounters. Although familiarity and proximity are important, I supportively agree from research and my experiences that the physicality is the most powerful. Just from an initial meeting, one can indulge a huge quantity of characteristic information that can decide if there is an attraction. In general, people are unlikely to be attracted to those who are dissimilar, have little contact with, and do not like them, as well as are not physically appealing in some way. My new understanding of the three casualties of interpersonal attraction has exemplified how and why I am attracted to a certain women. Without interpersonal attraction, I think it is practically unfeasible for any sort of relationship to blossom with another human being. Thus, if one wants to meet other people, I consider it extremely important to integrate one in enjoyable activities which encompass many individuals, which is part of the reason I participate so greatly at college. I think it is important to meet as many different people as possible to know who is appealing and what to look for in friends and relationships.

References

Bashton, F. (1992). Interpersonal Attraction. Social Psychology. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Gilbert, D. (1998). The Concept of Attraction. The Handbook of Social Psychology. Vol. 2 (pp. 202-215). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hendricks, C. (1998). Cultural Aspects of Physical Attraction. Miami University.

Retrieved February 2, 2006, from

http://www.units.muohio.edu/psybersite/attraction/culture.shtml.

Icek, A. (1995). Attraction. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Psychology. Vol. 2

(pp. 57-65). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Johnson, M. (2000). The Theory of Attraction. Retrieved February 2, 2006, from

http://www.colostate.edu/Depts/Speech/rccs/theory08.htm.

Kazdin, A. (2000). Attraction. Encyclopedia of Psychology. Vol. 1 (pp.317-320).

Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Samter, T. (1996). Attraction. Retrieved February 2, 2006, from

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/psychology/attraction.shtml.