User:Emmajones1/sandbox

Similarity in attraction

Within social psychology, attraction refers to the feeling of interest, desire, or closeness that one person has for another, which leads to the development of platonic or romantic relationships. Similarity is a key factor within attraction theory, devised by Samuel Frenning (Pagelizabeth, 2013), and can be defined by the overlap in people’s life goals, characteristics, and physical appearances. The degree to which these aspects are shared correlates with the level of attraction between two individuals. The degree of similarity between two people can influence attraction as a dynamic force that draws them toward each other, promoting connection and making it difficult for them to part. This force plays a significant role in fostering relationships by encouraging closeness and emotional bonds.

Measurements

The Interpersonal Attraction Judgment Scale, developed by Don Byrne, is a tool used to assess how attracted one individual feels toward another. It evaluates various factors such as likability, intelligence, morality, knowledge of current events, and adjustment. By focusing on these dimensions, the scale helps researchers understand what influences interpersonal attraction and relationship dynamics (Byrne & Griffitt, 1973). The Implicit Association Test (IAT) is widely used as a measure of semantic similarity (De Houwer et al., 2005). The IAT has been used in research to explore implicit cognition—mental processes that occur without conscious awareness. These processes encompass areas such as memory, perception, attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes, helping to understand how they influence behaviour and decision-making without individuals being fully aware of it (Nosek et al., 2005). The degree of similarity between two individuals can be generally assessed by the IAT by examining the overlap in their attitudes and beliefs.

Theoretical Foundations

There are theories that can be drawn upon to explain the role of similarity in attraction.

Representation of the balance theory which influences attraction.

The balance theory

The balance theory, proposed by Fritz Heider, conceptualised that the central motive pushing us toward psychological balance is cognitive consistency (Heider, 1946). This balance is achieved when individuals' attitudes and interactions align in a way that supports harmony and consistency. Heider’s balance theory relates to similarity and attraction by suggesting that relationships are more likely to be positive and stable when individuals share similar attitudes. When two people have similar beliefs, their relationship aligns with the theory's idea of 'balanced sentiments,' where the emotional tone between them is harmonious. This alignment fosters attraction, as people are drawn to others who reinforce their own values and beliefs, thus reducing cognitive dissonance and enhancing connection.

Social comparison theory

Social comparison theory, introduced by Leon Festinger in 1954, posits that individuals are motivated to assess their own abilities and opinions by comparing themselves to others (Festinger, 1954). This process helps to reduce uncertainty and provides a framework for defining oneself. By evaluating others, people can gauge their own standing according to their personal values and emotional responses, which ultimately helps in understanding their identity and making more accurate self-assessments. When people perceive similarities with others, it reduces uncertainty and boosts self-confidence. These shared qualities lead to a sense of validation and alignment, fostering attraction. Similarity provides reassurance about one's identity and reduces anxiety, making it more likely that individuals will form connections with those who reflect their own values, beliefs, and behaviours.

Kin selection theory

Kin selection theory is a concept in evolutionary biology that suggests natural selection favours traits that enhance the reproductive success of an organism's relatives, even if they come at a cost to the organism's own survival and reproduction (Michod, 1982). The theory posits that individuals may be more inclined to form bonds with those who share similar genetic traits, as this indirectly benefits their own genetic lineage by supporting the survival of closely related individuals. This concept is explained by Hamilton's Rule and the equation rB > C, where r represents genetic relatedness, B is the benefit to the relative, and C is the cost to the individual (Hamilton, 1964). In the context of similarity and attraction, individuals are more likely to be drawn to those with shared traits, as this signals genetic similarity and strengthens kinship bonds, increasing the likelihood of mutual support for survival and reproduction.

Types of similarity

Physical Similarity

Physical attractiveness is the degree to which an individual's physical traits are perceived as aesthetically pleasing and beautiful. This phenomenon often centres around facial features (the most important determinant, according to research (Muñoz-Reyes et al., 2015)), physical dimensions, and non-visual cues such as scent (Groyecka et al., 2017). While some aspects of attractiveness are widely recognised across different cultures and time periods, personal preferences and societal factors play a significant role in shaping how people perceive beauty (Hönekopp, 2006).

The Matching Hypothesis

However, the matching hypothesis, proposed by Elaine Hatfield in 1966, argues that individuals are often drawn to others who are equally socially desirable in terms of physical attractiveness (Walster et al., 1966). This phenomenon can be explained by the concept of social self-preservation, where individuals are drawn to others who reflect their self-perceived attractiveness. By doing so, they minimise the risk of rejection, which could lead to feelings of inadequacy or self-deprivation. This was demonstrated in Huston's 1973 study, which investigated the influence of physical attractiveness on dating choice (Huston, 1973). The findings included that "subjects selected a more physically attractive female when assured of acceptance than when acceptance was left ambiguous" and "estimated that highly physically attractive females were less likely to accept them as a date than were either moderately physically attractive or physically unattractive females." This can be explained by the fear of rejection. However, the ecological validity of Huston's study was low due to the study setting lacking the complexity and uncertainty found in real-life relationships.

Mutual physical attraction enhances relationship stability and satisfaction because it fosters a sense of equality and mutual validation. When individuals perceive their partner as similarly attractive, it reduces insecurity or jealousy, contributing to a balanced relationship. This alignment of attractiveness also helps maintain self-esteem emotional comfort, as both partners feel accepted and valued, increasing overall relationship contentment. A study conducted by White in 1980 reported that high physical similarity between romantic partners correlated with higher self-reported ratings of happiness and love (White, 1980). Additionally, the study indicated that men can view relationships as a 'marketplace': if they perceive their partner as beneath them in terms of attractiveness, they tend to devalue the relationship and compare their partner to other more appealing alternatives, consequently reducing the relationship's overall satisfaction. This dynamic demonstrates the importance of mutual attraction in maintaining relationship satisfaction, where physical similarity serves not only as a catalyst for initial connection but also as a foundation for long-term relational stability..

Personality Similarity

Personality similarity refers to the degree of alignment in traits, temperaments, and behaviours between individuals. This includes shared characteristics such as introversion or extroversion, openness to experiences, and emotional stability. When two individuals share similar personality traits, they are more likely to understand each other, fostering compatibility and ease in communication.

Social Identity Theory

Social Identity Theory, developed by Henri Tajfel in 1979, explains how individuals categorise themselves and others into social groups, which influences their behaviour and attitudes (Tajfel & Turner, 2004). It suggests that people derive part of their identity from the groups to which they belong, leading to in-group favouritism and out-group discrimination. Consequently, shared personality traits between individuals enhance attractiveness as they perceive each other as 'in-group' members and receive confirmation where values, standards, and priorities match up. In-group preference stems from a fundamental process of self-validation, as affirmation of an individual's own qualities reinforces a sense of self-worth and identity.

Henri Tajfel's 1971 study using the Minimal Group Paradigm revealed that individuals tend to exhibit in-group favouritism even when group distinctions are arbitrary and lack meaningful differences (Tajfel et al., 1971). Participants allocated more resources to their in-group members, emphasising how social categorisation can reinforce group belonging. The findings of this study point to how individuals may gravitate toward those with similar traits, viewing them as part of their 'in-group,' and consequently more desirable. This perceived alignment fosters mutual understanding and comfort, increasing interpersonal attraction.

A meta-analysis conducted by Montoya and Horton revealed that perceived similarity significantly increases attraction and relational satisfaction (Montoya & Horton, 2012). The results suggested that similarity increases attraction because it facilitates understanding, validation of one’s self-concept, and smoother communication. It reduces uncertainty in social interactions and enhances relational harmony.

Research has consistently demonstrated that similarities in personality traits are crucial predictors of social evaluations, such as respect and first impressions. Studies by Jamieson, Lydon, and Zanna have shown that when individuals share high levels of personality similarity, they tend to experience greater social attraction, as these common traits foster a sense of connection and homogeneity (Jamieson et al., 1987). This shared similarity creates a positive feedback loop, reinforcing attraction. Low similarity can activate discomfort or dissonance, as individuals may struggle to relate to each other, thereby hindering social bonds.

Life Goal Alignment

Life goals can be categorised in terms of career, personal, and family-oriented aspirations. Consistency in these factors between individuals enhances attractiveness as congruency feeds into increased self-validation and confirmation.

The Investment Model of Commitment

The Investment Model of Commitment was first introduced by Caryl E. Rusbult and draws on interdependence theory (Paul A. M. Van Lange & Balliet, 2015) to explain why people remain in relationships (Rusbult et al., 2011). The model posits that individuals are more likely to pursue relationships characterised by high levels of mutual rewards and shared investments. When partners share life goals, the perceived value of these investments, such as time and resources directed toward joint aspirations, increases. This alignment strengthens emotional bonds, enhances relational satisfaction, and validates each partner’s worldview, contributing to a sense of security about the partnership's future. Consequently, congruence in life goals heightens attraction by rendering the relationship more fulfilling and appealing.

Self Determination Theory

Self-Determination Theory, developed by psychologists Edward Deci and Richard Ryan in 1985, explains the interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic forces in driving motivation (Deci et al., 2017). The theory explains how life goals can be divided into two categories, one of which is intrinsic aspirations, containing goals such as affiliation, generativity, and personal development (Kasser & Ryan, 1996). Studies on the subject have concluded that intrinsic life goals promote greater well-being, resilience, physical health, and stronger relationships (Vansteenkiste et al., 2004). Intrinsic life goals, therefore, can be related back to increased satisfaction and a deeper sense of purpose, as they fulfil fundamental psychological needs such as autonomy, competence, and connectedness. When individuals share similar life goals, especially intrinsic ones, they create an environment that satisfies their fundamental psychological needs, enhancing mutual attraction and deepening relational bonds.

Complementarity

Although similarity plays a significant role in attraction, complementarity is also crucial for sustaining relationships. Markey's 2007 study found that relational satisfaction and attraction increase when partners complement each other with differing traits. Pairing two dominant individuals often leads to power struggles, while balancing dominance dynamics—one partner being more submissive—promotes harmonious interactions and greater satisfaction (Markey & Markey, 2007). Carson's 1996 model of interpersonal complementarity supports these findings, stating that individuals opposite in dominance are most compatible (Markey & Kurtz, 2006). However, the study risks low construct validity due to potential mismatches between perceived and actual behaviour. For instance, dominant individuals sometimes viewed their partners as equally dominant, though observers noted their partners were actually submissive. While Markey's study focuses on dominance, real-life interactions are more complex, requiring a balance of warmth, empathy, and shared values to sustain long-term attraction.

Summary

Research into the role of similarity in attraction highlights how shared traits, goals, and values foster connection between individuals. Similarity plays a vital role in influencing appeal and interpersonal bonds. However, complementarity also contributes significantly by balancing dynamics in partnerships. Future research should explore the nuanced relationship between similarity and complementarity in attraction, examining how these factors interact to shape the dynamics of successful and enduring relationships.

References

Byrne, D., & Griffitt, W. (1973). Interpersonal Attraction. Annual Review of Psychology, 24(1), 317–336. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.24.020173.001533De Houwer, J., Geldof, T., & De Bruycker, E. (2005). The Implicit Association Test as a General Measure of Similarity. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 59(4), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087478Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4(1), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108Festinger, L. (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202Groyecka, A., Pisanski, K., Sorokowska, A., Havlíček, J., Karwowski, M., Puts, D., Roberts, S. C., & Sorokowski, P. (2017). Attractiveness Is Multimodal: Beauty Is Also in the Nose and Ear of the Beholder. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00778Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behaviour. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7(1), 1–16.Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and Cognitive Organization. The Journal of Psychology, 21(1), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1946.9917275Hönekopp, J. (2006). Once more: Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Relative contributions of private and shared taste to judgments of facial attractiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(2), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.2.199Huston, T. L. (1973). Ambiguity of acceptance, social desirability, and dating choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(73)90060-7Jamieson, D. W., Lydon, J. E., & Zanna, M. P. (1987). Attitude and activity preference similarity: Differential bases of interpersonal attraction for low and high self-monitors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1052–1060. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1052Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further Examining the American Dream: Differential Correlates of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(3), 280–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167296223006Markey, P. M., & Kurtz, J. E. (2006). Increasing Acquaintanceship and Complementarity of Behavioral Styles and Personality Traits Among College Roommates. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(7), 907–916. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206287129Markey, P. M., & Markey, C. N. (2007). Romantic ideals, romantic obtainment, and relationship experiences. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24(4), 517–533. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407507079241Michod, R. E. (1982). The Theory of Kin Selection. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 13, 23–55. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2097061Montoya, R. M., & Horton, R. S. (2012). A meta-analytic investigation of the processes underlying the similarity-attraction effect. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(1), 64–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407512452989Muñoz-Reyes, J. A., Iglesias-Julios, M., Pita, M., & Turiegano, E. (2015). Facial Features: What Women Perceive as Attractive and What Men Consider Attractive. PLOS ONE, 10(7), e0132979. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132979Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: II. Method Variables and Construct Validity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(2), 166–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271418pagelizabeth. (2013, April 25). Samuel Frenning: Attraction Theory. Exploring Psychology. https://mypsychologyexploration.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/samuel-frenning-attraction-theory/Paul A. M. Van Lange, & Balliet, D. (2015). Interdependence theory. In APA handbook of personality and social psychology, Volume 3: Interpersonal relations. (pp. 65–92). https://doi.org/10.1037/14344-003Rusbult, C., Agnew, C., & Arriaga, X. (2011). The Investment Model of Commitment Processes. Department of Psychological Sciences Faculty Publications. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/psychpubs/26/Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 149–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420010202Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004). The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. Political Psychology, 276–293. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivating Learning, Performance, and Persistence: the Synergistic Effects of Intrinsic Goal Contents and Autonomy-Supportive Contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 246–260.Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottman, L. (1966). Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(5), 508–516. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021188White, G. L. (1980). Physical attractiveness and courtship progress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(4), 660–668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.39.4.660