Notas de lectura
Interpersonal Relationships Radboud
- Grado
- Institución
Lecture notes of 34 pages for the course Interpersonal Relationships at RU (class notes)
[Mostrar más]Vista previa 4 fuera de 34 páginas
Vista previa 4 fuera de 34 páginas
Añadir al carrito
Añadir al carrito
Vendedor
Seguir
leniberasaluce
Comentarios recibidos
Vista previa del contenido
Interpersonal Relationships1. Relationship Impact on Well-being
Aristotle: first to state that “Humans are social animals”
- Heart failure study: 70% of males in happy marriages were still alive after 4 years but for
males in unhappy marriages it was only 45%.
- Classic Berkman % Syme study (70s): Chances of dying were much higher for people with a
low level of social integration.
- Social relationships support our immune system (the higher the level of social integration, the
lower the chances of becoming sick from rhino-virus injection)
Social support (associated with health)
- emotional support: psychological ability to rely on others
- instrumental support: practical things that others do for you
(both are very often confounded: something can be considered as both)
Social support needs to be calibrated to the needs of the receiver (if it’s too explicit can make you feel
worse even if the intentions are good)
But why does social support affect our well-being?
- Cohen & Wils→2 types of paths that lead social support to health:
Direct-effect Hypothesis (main effect hypothesis): a supportive network makes people take better care
of themselves (smoke less, eat healthy…); social influence/norms
People who perceive more support in their environment experience more positive affect throughout
their lives (happiness is associated with health)
Stress-buffering Hypothesis: social support doesn’t directly affect health, it depends on the
circumstances. Only when we experience a lot of stress, social support promotes health and prevents
us from stress undermining our health. Because stress (cortisol) is directly related to cardio-vascular
and immune system.
Strength and strain Model of Marriage:
it’s better to be alone than in a bad
relationship because they have the
opposite main effects. And then
there is the stress-buffering effect:
if there is outside stress, happy
relationships can buffer the
detrimental effects of stress but
marital strain can intensify the
impact of stress on health.
Social support is key, it has a direct and indirect (stress-buffering) effect. The role of relationships on health
and well-being is really underestimated in society, medical world and in psychology.
Need to belong
Humans have an evolved need to initiate and maintain relationships→critical for
survival
, 1. Changes in ‘belongingness’ (extent to which we are socially integrated)
evokes extremely strong effects (inclusion/social integration→healthy and
happy - exclusion/lonely→unhealthy and unhappy) *
2. Initiating social interactions seems to be innate and easy for humans
a. Universal: all humans around the globe form relationships with others
b. Minimal group research/paradigm: you divide people into 2 groups on a random
criterion, and you see people immediately start to identify with their group.
c. Mere proximity leads to relationships: being close to others in terms of actual distance
makes it more likely to form relationships.
d. Attachment literature: since you are born you form attachment with others.
e. Innate focus on others: face perceptual system (babies 30 minutes old attend their
gaze significantly more to faces than to other equally complex stimuli + we see faces
everywhere)
1. *Reactions to changes in ‘belongingness”→Social exclusion
(Bus ride paradigm: participants on a bus ride all talking to each other except to the excluded
participant.)
Immediate reactions to ostracism (exclusion from society/group)→Need-threat Model
➔ Ostracism threatens our fundamental needs:
- lower sense of ‘belonging’
- loss of control (over the situation)
- lower sense of meaningfulness (which is associated with social ties with others)
- lower self-esteem (sociometer theory: our self-esteem is an indicator of how strongly
we are included in groups/society)
Pain-overlap theory→similar neural mechanisms are involved in both social and
physical pain.
⤿Sensitivity to physical and social pain is linked to a common gene that makes them more sensitive
And they have similar psychological responses: both physical and social pain lead to loss of control,
lowered self-esteem, aggression, etc.
So can we treat social pain with painkillers (made for physical)? Paracetamol actually reduced ‘hurt
feelings’.
But there is also an important dissimilarity between both pains: Social pain has
longer lasting effects in life→the level of ‘relived’ pain is much higher for social pain
when thinking about it years later
Relationship between social exclusion and aggression: after the bus ride paradigm/ball-tossing
paradigm which are ways to exclude people, people tend to behave in a more aggressive/anti-social
manner. (it’s like a paradox: by responding to exclusion with aggression you lower your likelihood to
reconnect with people)
Why? The role of control and need of existence plays a fundamental role→by showing
aggression, you can regain a sense of control and you are ‘seen’ which gives
you meaningfulness. When you give people control (even if it’s unrelated to
what happened), the level of aggression is much lower.
1
, In addition, if you give people an opportunity for reconnection, people start to behave in a more
prosocial manner.
- In at least 12 out of 15
school shootings,
shooters suffered from
either chronic ostracism
(bullying) or acute
exclusion (romantic
breakup).
2. Evolutionary
Perspectives on
Relationships
Theory of Evolution (giraffes with longer necks were more likely to survive therefore the genes for long
necks were passed onto new generations) 3 basic ingredients:
1. Variation (there is variation in our genetic makeup when we are born because of mutations)
2. Heritability (those genes are passed onto next generations)
3. Selection (those with longer necks are selected by evolution for their survival/reproduction
chances)
In the 1970s… Sociobiology was introduced (revolution in psychology and biology, this term was later
replaced for Evolutionary Psychology)
⤷Basic idea: Certain behaviors (A) (like certain physical traits) have more survival and reproduction
(adaptive/fitness) value than other behaviors (Aalt).
Result: (Certain behavior or psychological processes that underlie our behavior are more adaptive
which makes them more likely to be passed on) Genes associated with the certain behavior (A) will-
over generations- increase in population, and non-adaptive behaviors (Aalt) will die out.
● 2 classic Sociobiology examples:
- Fear of potentially deadly animals (predisposed avoidance)→we fear spiders because in our
evolutionary past it was adaptive to get away from deadly animals.
- Preference for certain foods (predisposed approach)→we evolved to like the taste of
oranges because they are nutritious, not because they’re “tasty”.
Interpersonal mate preferences/attraction
- Male preferences for certain characteristics in women (smooth skin, youth, low WHR…) have
evolved. Because these features give reproductive advantages not because it's “prettier”. It's
associated with fertility and health in a woman.
- We experience “love” because it's designed to form long-term bonds in a relationship which are
adaptive because they support the upbringing of children.
- There is nothing intrinsically beautiful about beauty. Certain features have somehow provided
evolutionary advantages in our evolutionary past, but they are not necessarily “beautiful” or
attractive in themselves..
When is a trait adaptive?
1. It has Survival value (it helps you protect yourself from predators or to access
food)→Natural Selection
2. It has Reproduction value (the long tails of a peacock don’t promote survival or even
undermine it because they can make you clumsy, but they make them attractive to
females)→Sexual selection
If a trait/feature has more advantage to reproduction that it has cost for survival, then it is likely to evolve.
a. Intersexual Selection/Choice (including traits that attract potential mates)
2
, b. Intrasexual Competition (traits that help you get access to the other sex, help them
compete with other males)
Males tend to be more aggressive than females, one explanation could be because of intrasexual
competition. Study: among male targets, when they were playing against other males and mating
was activated (they were made to be horny), they suddenly became more aggressive towards the
other males. And when the opponents were females, they didn’t show this aggressiveness.
Another study: when smelling the scent of an ovulating woman, male participants increased their
level of testosterone. Men can somehow detect fertility in the scent of women, which increases
testosterone which is associated with aggression.
Is creativity related to mating motives? (example of intersexual choice in humans)
Study: when males were made horny, they became more creative. But this didn’t happen to females.
Creativity in human males is associated with sexual desire, which makes it the result of sexual selection.
The “Muse Effect”: Picasso got a creative outburst because he was in love with a woman. He transitioned
to a completely different style,
Interim Conclusion
● According to EP; Behaviors that promote reproduction operate particularly in situations when
mating motives are salient (active,important, noticeable).
● Certain behaviors are the result of natural or sexual selection.
Study: male and females confederates approached someone of the opposite sex with one of these
questions:
1. I like you, do you want to go out?
2. I like you, you wanna come to my apartment?
3. I like you, you wanna come to bed with me?
When women were approached, to question 1 they said yes, but to the other two they said no.
When men were asked, to 1 yes, it got higher in question 2 and then even higher in question 3.
● Women are much more selective than men, men desire short-term mating relationships to a
much higher degree than women do.
● Men prefer to have a higher number of sex partners in their lifetime than women.
● Men require less time before consenting to sex than women.
Parental Investment Theory (one of the central theories in evolutionary psychology)
- In many species including humans, there are differences in the investment males and females make in
their offspring. In humans, women tend to make a higher investment in offspring (pregnancy for 9 months,
lactation, they take more care in the upbringing of children) than men.
● The more investment, the lower the rate of reproduction is.
Women in their lifetime can only have up to 15 babies while males can have unlimited babies (they have
no biological constraint and therefore can be less selective). If you only have 15 chances of having
offspring, in terms of evolutionary advantage, you should be more selective (to make sure it’s worth your
investment). Another implication is that the sex that is less investing (in the case of humans: males) will
display more competition for access to the other sex (since the other sex, females, are more selective).
- Bateman’s Principle: the more investive sex will be more selective meanwhile the other sex
will be more competitive→variability in reproductive success (or reproductive variance)
is greater in males than in females
There is strong evidence for parental investment theory in the animal kingdom, but this is NOT sex-
specific (seahorses: men are more invested and females compete more)
Some further predictions from PIT…
⤷ Women should not only be more selective, but also they value other traits than men do:
- Women are more concerned about status, wealth, power, ambition, etc. in order to provide
resources and offer security for offspring.
- Men are relatively more concerned about physical features and youth.
3
Los beneficios de comprar resúmenes en Stuvia estan en línea:
Garantiza la calidad de los comentarios
Compradores de Stuvia evaluaron más de 700.000 resúmenes. Así estas seguro que compras los mejores documentos!
Compra fácil y rápido
Puedes pagar rápidamente y en una vez con iDeal, tarjeta de crédito o con tu crédito de Stuvia. Sin tener que hacerte miembro.
Enfócate en lo más importante
Tus compañeros escriben los resúmenes. Por eso tienes la seguridad que tienes un resumen actual y confiable. Así llegas a la conclusión rapidamente!
Preguntas frecuentes
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
100% de satisfacción garantizada: ¿Cómo funciona?
Nuestra garantía de satisfacción le asegura que siempre encontrará un documento de estudio a tu medida. Tu rellenas un formulario y nuestro equipo de atención al cliente se encarga del resto.
Who am I buying this summary from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller leniberasaluce. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy this summary for 10,79 €. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
45,681 summaries were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 14 years now