Sei sulla pagina 1di 14

Lecture NOTES

Social Psychology
CH 15

CHARACTER OVERVIEW

Joe Maggio
As a single father to a young daughter, Joe Maggio didn’t have much time to date. But
after joining Match.com, Joe finally found someone he was compatible with in Suzanne.
They shared the same interests and right from the start felt at ease together. After dating
awhile, they found that their initial attraction was on point and their relationship
flourished. Suzanne treated Joe’s daughter, Kristina, as her own, and the two fell in love.
After less than a year, Joe proposed and the couple was married. In addition to Kristina,
the couple now has infant triplets—two sons and a daughter. Despite a busy and full life,
the two remain very much in love.

Julius Achon
Growing up in Uganda was not easy for Julius Achon. At the age of 7 he barely survived a
case of measles, and at 12 he was kidnapped by a government resistance group known
as the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and forced to become a soldier. In the LRA he was
compelled to raid villages and faced punishment if he did not comply with his captors.
After three months, Julius was able to escape and return to his home village, where he
began to concentrate on running. After running barefoot in his first race and winning,
Julius began to compete in, and win, races all over the world. Running allowed Julius to
attend high school in the capital city of Kampala in Uganda and to graduate from George
Mason University in the United States.

Despite his success, Julius didn’t forget about his home. While visiting in 2003 he came
across 11 orphans living under a bus. He took them home, fed them, and eventually his
family adopted all of them. Julius sent money home for their care. He didn’t stop with
those orphans. After taking a job with Nike in Portland, he gained the support of others
and began the Achon Uganda Children’s Fund (AUCF), a nonprofit organization dedicated
to improving the living conditions of children in the rural areas of northern Uganda. The
fund has built a clinic near Julius’s home, named for his mother, who was killed by the
LRA. He has taken his difficult childhood and made a difference for others like him.
BRIEF CHARACTER OVERVIEW

Joe Maggio
Raising his young daughter alone didn’t give Joe Maggio much time to date, so he turned
to Match.com. Through the site he met Suzanne, who was a wonderful match for him.
The two fell in love and were married and are now raising Joe’s daughter, Kristina, along
with their infant triplets. Despite a busy and full life, they are still very much in love.

Julius Achon
Growing up in Uganda was difficult for Julius Achon. At the age of 12 he was kidnapped
by a government resistance group known as the LRA and forced to become a soldier. He
was able to escape after three months and began a running career. After running his first
race barefoot, he went on to compete and win all over the world. He eventually
graduated from George Mason University in the United States. Visiting home, he came
across 11 orphans, all of whom his family then adopted. Wanting to do more for those
suffering in his home country, Julius gained the support of others and began the Achon
Uganda Children’s Fund (AUCF), a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving the
living conditions of children in the rural areas of northern Uganda.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After reading and studying this chapter, you should be able to:

LO 1 Define social psychology and identify how it is different from sociology.


LO 2 Describe social cognition and how we use attributions to explain behavior.
LO 3 Explain how attributions lead to mistakes about the causes of behaviors.
LO 4 Describe social influence and recognize the factors associated with persuasion.
LO 5 Define compliance and explain some of the techniques used to gain it.
LO 6 Evaluate conformity and identify the factors that influence the likelihood of
someone conforming.
LO 7 Describe obedience and explain how Stanley Milgram studied it.
LO 8 Recognize the circumstances that influence the occurrence of the bystander
effect.
LO 9 Demonstrate an understanding of aggression and identify some of its causes.
LO 10 Recognize how group affiliation influences the development of stereotypes.
LO 11 Compare prosocial behavior and altruism.
LO 12 Identify the three major factors contributing to interpersonal attraction.
AN INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

What Is Social Psychology?

Over the last two decades, online dating has exploded, with the Internet becoming the
second most common way to connect with a potential partner behind introduction by
mutual friends. Because of this enormous change in how people meet romantic
partners, Internet dating has become a topic of interest in social psychology, the study
of human cognition, emotion, and behavior in relation to others, including how people
behave in social settings. Many ask how this differs from sociology; the answer is that
social psychology studies how people behave in relation to each other and in groups,
while sociology studies the groups themselves.

Social psychologists use the same research methods as other psychologists, but often
with added deception to prevent people from altering their reactions because they are
being observed. Social psychologists may use confederates, people secretly working for
the researchers, who play the role of participants, experimenters, or bystanders and do
and say what the researchers tell them to in advance. The deception used is most often
revealed when participants are debriefed at the end of a study. Even after learning of the
deception, most participants report that they would still take part in subsequent
experiments.

SOCIAL COGNITION

Attributions

Our interactions with the people around us are influenced by social cognition, the way
we think about others, attend to social information, and use this information in our lives,
both consciously and unconsciously. When meeting a new people, we evaluate them,
both consciously and unconsciously, and consequently make decisions about our future
interactions with them.

One critical facet of social cognition is attributions, which are the beliefs we develop to
explain situations as well as human behaviors and characteristics. The many types of
attributions can be difficult to differentiate between, and psychologists often describe
them along three dimensions: controllable–uncontrollable, stable–unstable, and
internal–external. In the latter, external attributions are referred to as situational
attributions, which is the belief that some environmental factor is involved in the cause
of an event or activity. In contrast, internal attributions come from within an individual.
These include dispositional attributes, which is the belief that some characteristic of an
individual is involved in the cause of a situation, event, or activity.
When making attributions, people are often guessing about the causes of events or
behaviors, leaving room for error. Social psychologists look at four common attribution
errors.

 The fundamental attribution error refers to the tendency to overestimate the


degree to which the characteristics of an individual are the cause of an event,
and to underestimate the involvement of situational factors. In this error one
might attribute a friend not replying to an email to the friend being angry, when
in fact the person may not have received it because of a typo in the address.
 The just-world hypothesis refers to the tendency to believe the world is a fair
place and individuals generally get what they deserve. This error causes people
to tend to believe that “bad people” will experience bad outcomes and that
people with bad outcomes must have done something to deserve them.
 The self-serving bias is the tendency to attribute successes to personal
characteristics and failures to environmental factors. This bias leads people to
believe that some outside factor makes them a victim, rather than some error of
their own, and that any successes are of their own making.
 The false consensus effect refers to the tendency to overestimate the degree to
which others think or act like we do. This mistake most likely occurs because we
have much more information about ourselves than we do about others, making it
easy to use our own characteristics to explain others’ behavior.

Video/ Deliveries Gone Wild (2:38)


A fun way to practice identifying the different types of attributions is to watch
this video compilation of delivery truck drivers mishandling packages. As practice
try to find attributions for their actions that display the dimensions discussed in
the text: controllable-uncontrollable, stable-unstable, and internal-external. For
an example of situational versus dispositional attributions, watch this video of a
pizza delivery man picking off some toppings from a pizza and eating them before
he makes the delivery. What might be a situational attribution (e.g., maybe he
was really, really hungry and didn’t have enough money to buy any food) as
opposed to a dispositional attribution (e.g., he is a disgusting person who does
not care about other people).

Video/ Foul Ball—What a Jerk! (2:17)


How could someone be so mean? Watch this video of a couple who celebrate
getting a baseball that was thrown into the stands at an MLB game, while the
child next to them cries uncontrollably. Watch how the announcers talk about
the couple. The couple with the child is interviewed, and they state that the
couple next to them was actually very nice and likely did not even notice their
child in all of the commotion. Who in this video do you think was guilty of the
fundamental attribution error and who was making situational attributions.
For a humorous look at attributions of a person’s physical features you can watch the
classic “shrinkage” clip from the television show Seinfeld.

Attitudes

Attitudes are the relatively stable thoughts, feelings, and responses one has toward
people, situations, ideas, and things. Psychologists suggest that attitudes are composed
of cognitive, affective, and behavioral components—with cognitive referring to one’s
beliefs or ideas about an object, person, or situation; affective referring to one’s mood or
emotion; and behavioral referring to the way in which one responds.

Nurture appears to dominate the development of attitudes, which come about as a


result of our experiences and interactions with people in our lives. Genetics is also a
factor as shown through twin studies. This genetic influence seems to be through
heritable personality traits that predispose us to developing certain attitudes. Many
researchers have studied whether or not these attitudes can predict our behaviors. They
found that attitudes can be a factor, based on the specificity of the attitude and the
importance of the outcome of the behavior. When people do act in ways that are
inconsistent with their attitudes, a state of tension known as cognitive dissonance
occurs. This tension can be resolved by either altering the behavior or the attitude.
These attitude shifts often occur without our conscious awareness.

I Bet That Chocolate Tastes Terrible—Cognitive Dissonance in Film


In the 1971 classic film Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, Charlie wants
desperately to find a golden ticket to be able to enter the chocolate factory, but
all of his attempts have failed. To see an example of cognitive dissonance, watch
this short clip from the movie. In it, Charlie reasons that the golden ticket
probably makes the chocolate taste terrible, so why would he want one.
SOCIAL INFLUENCE

The Power of Others

Most of us come into contact with other people nearly every day of our lives both in
intimate and superficial ways. The way we are affected by others as evidenced in our
behaviors, emotions, and cognition is known as social influence. One example of social
influence is seen in the impact that others’ expectations has on us. The expectations that
parents, teachers, friends, and spouses have for us often influence the ways in which we
behave.

Persuasion and Compliance


Persuasion is more direct than expectations in that behavior change is a byproduct of
another person’s expectation. Persuasion is intentionally trying to make people change
their attitudes and beliefs, which may lead to a change in their behaviors. Persuasion
does not give someone control over another because it allows people to make their own
choices about their behaviors. Persuasion is more likely to affect behaviors when the
source is perceived as credible and attractive. The message is more persuasive when it is
logical and to the point, providing as much information as possible about potential
negative outcomes if the message is not followed, rather than emphasizing fear. Certain
people are more likely to be persuaded than others; age, emotional state, and mental
focus are all factors that influence one’s ability to be persuaded.

The elaboration likelihood model proposes that persuasion hinges on the way people
think about an argument, occurring via one of two pathways. In the central route to
persuasion, a person thinks critically about the content of the message. With the
peripheral route, the focus is on something outside of the content of the message, such
as the credibility or attractiveness of the source. To be most persuasive, both routes
should be employed, delivering a logical argument from a credible and attractive source.

The alteration of one’s behaviors due to persuasion is internal and related to a change in
attitude. Compliance, however, refers to changes in behavior at the request or direction
of another person or group who do not have any true authority. This often occurs
outside of our awareness when we absentmindedly respond to the requests of others.
Compliance is more likely when the request is accompanied by a reason, no matter what
that reason is.

There are several methods for gaining others’ compliance. One example is the foot-in-
the-door technique, which involves making a small request first, followed by a larger
request. After agreeing to a small request, a person is more likely to agree to a larger
one. Another example is the door-in-the-face technique, which is the opposite, making
a large request first, followed by a smaller one. The idea is that once you have refused a
large request, you will be more likely to comply with a smaller one. Compliance usually
involves a specific request, but social influence is not always so explicit.

Video/ Selling Ice to Eskimos—The Science of Persuasion (1:41)


Note: The “f-word” is said at the end of this clip, so use at your own discretion.
The movie The Wolf of Wall Street tells the story of Jordan Belfort, a former
stockbroker, multimillionaire, and convicted felon. In this scene, Belfort is shown
making a sale to a client. As practice- try to identify the important elements of
persuasion (e.g., expertise, logical, to the point, etc.) Belfort utilizes to make the
sale.

Conformity

Conformity refers to the urge to modify one’s behaviors, attitudes, beliefs, and opinions
to match those of others. This might mean conforming to the norms, or standards, of
the social environment, like those of a group to which one is connected. Conformity
does not generally occur in response to a direct request but rather as a part of a desire
to fit in and belong. This is not necessarily a bad thing, and in fact we often rely on
conformity to ensure that day-to-day activities involving groups of people run smoothly.

Social psychologists have conducted extensive research on the subject of conformity.


One of the most famous of these studies was conducted by Solomon Asch in 1950 and
involved having participants sit with researchers’ confederates. All of them were asked
to judge the length of lines on a card. When the confederates gave obviously incorrect
answers, the participants went along with them roughly 37% of the time, although in
trials with no others present the participants answered correctly 99% of the time.

Why do we conform? One reason is normative social influence, the desire for approval
and to be accepted and liked. Another is informational social influence, the desire to
behave correctly. We may also conform to match others because they belong to a
reference group we respect, admire, or desire to be a part of.

You can watch this video of the classic Asch experiment on conformity.

Obedience

The result of social influence can also be obedience, which occurs when we change our
behavior because we have been ordered to do so by an authority figure. Obedience is
the result of an imbalance of power and is often done in fear, out of respect, or out of
concern. Obedience can be critical, as in the case of parents relying on a child’s
obedience to keep him or her safe, but it can also be used to manipulate and control
those less powerful.

In the 1960s, Stanley Milgram conducted a classic experiment on obedience. He told


participants to “punish” confederates posing as other participants for memorization
mistakes by pushing a button to give them electric shocks of increasing strength.
Although they seemed uncomfortable doing so, most participants continued to
administer the shocks at the insistence of the researchers. They obeyed the researchers’
requests even when the person receiving the shocks complained of pain or pleaded for
them to stop. (No one was actually being shocked; they were part of the experiment.)
Further research showed the same results and also showed that participants were more
likely to obey if:

 the authority figure seemed legitimate and was in close proximity;


 the person being shocked was NOT close; and
 there were obedient confederates present.

However, Milgram also found that if confederates were present who refused to obey,
other participants were also likely to refuse.

GROUPS AND RELATIONSHIPS

We have looked at how individuals think about and react to different others, but what
about group dynamics? Coming together in a group can help people to accomplish goals
not possible alone. In fact an individual’s abilities can be boosted because other people
are present. This is known as social facilitation, the tendency for the presence of others
to improve personal performance when the task or event is fairly uncomplicated and a
person is adequately prepared.

When Two Heads Are Not Better Than One

While coming together in groups can often help us to accomplish a goal, there are times
when the opposite is true. Social loafing refers to the tendency for people to give less-
than-their-best effort when individual contributions are too complicated to measure.
Some members of a group may rely on the work of the others rather than making their
full contribution. Social loafing can be the result of the diffusion of responsibility,
sharing duties and responsibilities among all group members that can lead to feelings of
decreased accountability and motivation. To avoid social loafing, it is better to assign
discrete tasks to each member of a group. Social loafing is more likely to occur in
individualist societies such as that of the United States than in collectivist cultures like
those in East Asia.

When group members are not treated as individuals, they may feel a diminished sense
of personal responsibility, inhibition, or adherence to social norms, known as
deindividuation. The research of Ed Diener demonstrates that children are especially
vulnerable to deindividuation; children were brought into a room with a bowl of candy
and told to take only one piece. If a parent were present the children most often did as
they were told; alone they more often took more than allowed; and in a group of other
children nearly all of them took more candy than they were instructed. Deindividuation
can also be seen in adults: consider the bad behavior of a post-game crowd of either
elated or angry and disappointed sports fans. It seems that people are also more
inclined to risky or uncertain options when in a group, referred to as risky shift.

People also tend to take a more extreme stance when in a group than they would
individually after deliberation and discussion, a phenomenon known as group
polarization. In fact, as a group becomes more unified, groupthink—the tendency for
members to maintain cohesiveness and agreement in their decision-making, failing to
consider all possible alternatives and related viewpoints—can occur. Groupthink can
have disastrous effects for people trying to work through life-or-death problems.

The bystander effect—the tendency for people to avoid getting involved in an


emergency they witness because they assume someone else will help—can also have
dire consequences. This was seen in the infamous case of Kitty Genovese who was
brutally attacked outside her Queens’ apartment building in 1964. Despite many
neighbors hearing her cries for help or witnessing the attack, no one called the police,
and she was killed. More recently, also in Queens, a homeless man was stabbed helping
a woman who was being attacked. He lay on the sidewalk until he died as people walked
by. While in some cases people are less likely to help, thinking someone else will, in
extremely, and more obviously, dangerous situations people are actually more likely to
help if there is at least one other person around.

Video/ Don’t Mind Me—Social Loafing (1:03)


For a lighthearted way to introduce the idea of social loafing, as well as a
demonstration of the door-in-the-face technique, you can watch this clip from
the television show South Park. In the clip, Cartman talks on the phone while his
friends shovel a neighbor’s driveway. Think about your own examples of social
loafing. Why is it that when being in a group sometimes we see social facilitation
but in others we social loafing. What strategies could the kids in the video have
used to decrease the likelihood of Cartman engaging in social loafing?

Video/Discussion Topic: Filter Bubbles and Group Polarization (9:04)


During the infancy of the Internet, it was widely believed that it would bring the
world together. It may be possible that it has had the opposite effect. In this TED
talk, Eli Pariser discusses the potential problems of Internet “filter bubbles.” Over
the past several years, Web companies and Internet sites have become more
efficient at tailoring user experiences on their Web sites to fit the interests of the
person conducting the searches or reading the information presented. One of the
side effects of this approach is that users are no longer exposed to information
that may conflict with their views or be presented information on topics that are
novel to them. In turn, this has created increasing amounts of groupthink and
group polarization. After viewing the video, think about examples of groupthink
and group polarization that you have seen on the Internet. Are you concerned
about this happening in your own lives, what could you do to limit it?

What Would You Do?—The Bystander Effect (9:00)


If you were being attacked, a child was being abducted, or a person needed
emergency medical treatment, would you want to have more people around or
fewer? In contrast to what you may think, the bystander effect suggests we may
be better off in these situations when there are few people observing the
situation. Watch the following videos clips.

In the first video, a woman is in a hospital’s psychiatric waiting room when she
collapses to the floor. Despite the presence of other people in the waiting room,
and even medical staff walking by, nobody provides assistance to her for 45
minutes. Tragically, due to this lack of action, the woman died.

The second video is a clip of a staged child abduction. Television producers were
interested to see how the public would react to witnessing a child abduction in
the middle of a busy sidewalk. Unfortunately, had the abduction been real, the
girl would likely have been taken without much difficulty.

After viewing these videos, what factors do you think are involved in producing
the bystander effect. Why does it occur in some situations, but not in others?

AGGRESSION

We have seen that social interactions are not always positive. This is especially evident in
the case of aggression, intimidating or threatening behavior or attitudes intended to
hurt someone. There is research to suggest that aggressive tendencies have biological
roots, including studies showing identical twins are more likely than fraternal twins to
share aggressive traits. But environment is also influential. According to the frustration-
aggression hypothesis, aggression may occur in response to frustration. We all show
aggression sometimes, although there are gender differences. Men tend to show direct
aggression (physical displays), while women show more relational aggression (gossip,
exclusion, ignoring).

Stereotypes and Discrimination

We often associate aggression with behaviors, but it can also be shown in our attitudes,
as evidenced by stereotyping. Stereotypes are conclusions or inferences we make about
people who are different from us based on their group membership, such as race,
religion, age, or gender. Stereotypes can be dangerous because they make assumptions
about people based on negative perceived characteristics of a group to which they
belong.
While belonging to a group can be a very good thing, believing that group to be superior
can lead to incorrect assumptions about outsiders. We tend to see the world in terms of
the in-group (the group to which we belong) and the out-group (people outside of this
group). Belonging to an in-group helps us from a young age to form our social identity,
the way we view ourselves within our social group. While social identity is important,
the view that your in-group is superior can lead to negative views about others. Seeing
the world only from the perspective of our own group is known as ethnocentrism and
can lead to discrimination, showing favoritism or hostility to others because of their
affiliation with a group. Those in the out-group are also vulnerable to receiving blame for
upsetting social situations by being used as scapegoats, the targets of negative
emotions, beliefs, and behaviors.

Those who believe in stereotypes and blame scapegoats are also likely to feel prejudice,
hostile or negative attitudes toward an individual or group. While the United States has
made great strides in ending overt prejudice, these negative attitudes still exist, and
their causes are complex. Cognitively, the just-world hypothesis may be an explanation
for negative thoughts about outsiders. Prejudice may come from a desire to conform to
a group with similar views. But research has shown that forcing people to come together
to work toward a common goal can reduce prejudice.

Stereotypes, discrimination, and prejudice can lead to stereotype threat. Stereotype


threat is a “situational threat” in which individuals are aware of others’ negative
expectations, leading them to fear that they will be judged and/or treated as inferior.
The person need not believe in the stereotype for this to occur; it is the fear of how they
will be treated because someone else believes it. People react to stereotype threat in
many different ways: sometimes negative (becoming discouraged and giving up), and
sometimes positive (working hard to dispel the false belief).

One of the most controversial psychology studies ever conducted was led by Philip
Zimbardo at Stanford University in 1971. In the experiment, a “prison” was set up at the
university. Some student participants were chosen to be guards and others to be
prisoners. Soon after the study began, the guards became abusive toward the prisoners,
with behavior so disturbing that the study was ended early. Some prisoners accepted
the abuse, and others were so distraught that they were allowed to leave the
experiment. In this instance it seems that both the guards and prisoners took their social
roles—positions held in social groups, and the responsibilities and expectations
associated with those roles—in the experiment too far. Since this experiment was
conducted, the ethical guidelines have been changed such that it would no longer meet
them.

Video/ I Have a Dream—Prejudice and In-group Bias in Third Graders (46:00)


In a famous episode of PBS’s Frontline history, “A Class Divided” discusses the
famous classroom demonstration of in-group bias in third grade students based
on their eye color. Following the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., an Iowa
school teacher named Jane Elliot provided her students with a personal
experience of what it meant to be discriminated against. Jane encouraged her
students to form stereotypes based on eye color and discriminate against others
in the classroom according to those stereotypes. Students who were in the
superior group on one day were then changed to the inferior group the next. It is
a long video (46:00) so you can watch if you wish. After watching the video, what
would it feel like to be discriminated against, how do you feel about the ethics of
what Jane did, and are you surprised by how easy it is to form in-group biases.

Prosocial Behavior

We’ve talked about many negative aspects of human social interaction, but there are
positive aspects as well. Prosocial behavior is aimed at benefiting others, and there is
plenty of evidence of such behaviors in human interactions—from the love shared by a
happily married couple to the love shown to orphans by the families who adopt them.
Prosocial behavior can be evident in everyday acts and larger acts of great charity.

On the Up Side

Doing good for others can feel good, even if you get nothing in return. The desire or
motivation to help others with no expectation of anything in return is called altruism. A
major component of altruism is empathy, the ability to understand and recognize
another’s point of view. Children as young as 18 months have been observed showing
helping behaviors, so it seems altruism begins early in life, although researchers do not
know if it is innate or heritable. Research has shown that altruistic and prosocial
behaviors tend to reduce stress and increase happiness, so perhaps there is some
personal benefit after all.

ATTRACTION AND LOVE

Interpersonal Attraction

The factors that lead us to form friendships or romantic relationships with other people
are known as interpersonal attraction. But what exactly are these factors? This text
focuses on three: proximity, similarity, and physical attractiveness.
In order to be attracted to someone, you must somehow come into contact with him or
her, therefore proximity, or nearness, is an important factor in interpersonal attraction.
Of course, the Internet has changed how important physical proximity is in forming
relationships, allowing us to “meet” people who may be thousands of miles away. In
fact, research has shown that in addition to bringing people together despite physical
distance, social media can also reinforce friendships made offline. This would back up
the mere-exposure effect, which is the idea that the more we are exposed to someone
or something, the more positive a reaction we have toward it. While this may be true,
repeated negative exposures to a person or object may also reinforce dislike.

Another contributing factor to interpersonal attraction is similarity. We tend to be


attracted to people who share our interests, viewpoints, ethnicity, values, and other
characteristics. Of course, a person’s physical appearance is important as well. While
there is some degree of consistency in what people around the world find attractive, it
also varies quite a bit from person to person. Why is physical beauty important in whom
we find attractive? From an evolutionary perspective, beauty is a sign of health and
wealth, things that are important in choosing a partner with whom to raise a family. Yes,
beauty might convey some important information about a prospective partner, and
sometimes it may seem that attractive people have it all. But remember that while
beauty may initiate attraction, other qualities become more important over time.

Video/Discussion Topic: If Looks Could Kill Sing—Attractiveness Stereotypes


(5:49)
As a final reminder to not allow the physical beauty of individuals to influence
our judgment of them, watch the video of Susan Boyle trying out on the
television show Britain’s Got Talent. Watch the reaction of the crowd prior to her
singing and then once she begins to sing. While physical beauty may lead to the
halo effect and other benefits, we should do our best to not judge others on
looks alone!

What Is Love?

In many ways, the idea of love varies from culture to culture. In America we tend to
believe that love should be the start of a relationship, where other cultures feel that love
should blossom after a marriage has taken place. Robert Sternberg studied love and
believed that there were elements at work in many combinations in a loving
relationship: passion (feelings leading to romance and physical attraction); intimacy
(feeling close); and commitment (the recognition of love). Sternberg defined these
elements as comprising different types of love:

 Romantic love—love that is a combination of connection, concern, care, and


intimacy.
 Passionate love—love that is based on zealous emotion, leading to intense
longing and sexual attraction.
 Companionate love—love that consists of profound fondness, camaraderie,
understanding, and emotional closeness.

According to Sternberg, the combination of these three is consummate love, which is


the ultimate goal. While romance or passion may begin a relationship, things inevitably
change over time, but because romance or passion wanes, it does mean that it is gone,
and rekindling those feelings can be important to retaining a happy intimacy. Just what is
it that keeps people together? Caryl Rusbult proposed that it is the investment model of
commitment. In this model couples make decisions to stay together based on how happy
they are, what they feel like apart, and the investment they have already made to the
relationship (including finances, time, possessions, and children).

Making This Chapter Work for You

I Urge you to use the material in this chapter in everyday life. All of us can strive to be
conscious of our behaviors when interacting with others and also of how others behave
when interacting with them.

Potrebbero piacerti anche