- From an evolutionary psychology perspective, differences in mate selection preferences between sexes are often attributed to parental investment theory. Which of the following statements most accurately applies this theory to explain why, on average, females may prioritize a partner's resources and males may prioritize a partner's youth and health?
Answer: Because female investment in offspring (e.g., gestation, lactation) is biologically higher, they have evolved to seek partners who can provide resources to ensure offspring survival.
Parental investment theory posits that the sex that invests more in producing and raising offspring will be more selective in choosing a mate. In humans, the minimum biological investment for females is substantially higher than for males. The theory argues that this has led to an evolved preference among females for mates who demonstrate an ability and willingness to provide resources and protection for them and their offspring.
- On their fourth date, Maria tells her new partner, Chris, about a deeply personal and difficult childhood experience. Chris listens quietly and then responds, 'Wow, that's tough. It reminds me of this really funny thing that happened at work today.' According to social penetration theory, this response is likely to have what effect on the development of intimacy?
Answer: It will hinder intimacy, because Chris failed to reciprocate with a disclosure of similar depth.
Social penetration theory emphasizes that intimacy develops through a gradual process of reciprocal self-disclosure, which increases in both breadth and depth. A key element is reciprocity. When one person discloses something deep and personal, the other is expected to respond with understanding and, often, a disclosure of similar intimacy. By changing the subject, Chris breaks this norm of reciprocity, which is likely to make Maria feel vulnerable and hesitant to disclose further, thus stalling the development of intimacy.
- The mere exposure effect, where familiarity leads to liking, is a powerful and robust phenomenon. However, subsequent research has demonstrated that this effect has important limitations. Under which of the following conditions is repeated exposure LEAST likely to increase liking and may even lead to increased disliking?
Answer: When the initial reaction to the stimulus is strongly negative.
While mere exposure to a neutral or mildly positive stimulus increases liking, exposure to a stimulus that is initially disliked can amplify the disliking. If a person has a strong negative initial reaction to something or someone, repeated encounters are more likely to serve as irritants that reinforce the negative opinion rather than fostering familiarity and warmth. This is a critical boundary condition for the effect.
- Lena's partner, Tom, is often late and somewhat disorganized. However, when a friend comments on Tom's tardiness, Lena replies, 'He's not late, he's just very relaxed about time. It's part of his charm, and he's the most dependable person I know when it really counts.' Lena's reframing of Tom's negative trait as a positive one is a classic example of which relationship maintenance mechanism?
Answer: Positive illusions
Positive illusions involve perceiving one's partner and relationship in a more positive light than is objectively warranted. This includes seeing virtues in a partner's faults or downplaying their weaknesses. Lena is not just tolerating Tom's flaw (accommodation); she is actively reinterpreting it as a positive quality, which helps maintain her overall satisfaction with the relationship.
- Research on the 'what is beautiful is good' stereotype (or halo effect) indicates that physical attractiveness influences perceptions of a person's other qualities. Which of the following findings represents a key nuance or boundary condition of this effect?
Answer: Physically attractive people are often perceived as more sociable and extroverted, but also as more vain and egotistical.
The halo effect is not uniformly positive. While attractive individuals are stereotyped as having many positive social traits (like being sociable, popular, and likable), the stereotype also includes some negative traits. Specifically, they are often perceived as more vain, egotistical, or even less likely to be good parents. This finding demonstrates that the stereotype is complex and not a simple 'good across the board' bias.
- After several years of marriage, a couple finds their relationship has become routine and less exciting. They decide to start taking weekly salsa dancing lessons, an activity that is new and challenging for both of them. According to the self-expansion model of relationships, why would this shared activity likely increase their marital satisfaction?
Answer: Engaging in novel and arousing activities together integrates new experiences into each partner's self-concept, which counteracts boredom.
The self-expansion model, proposed by Aron and Aron, suggests that a primary human motivation is to expand the self. In relationships, partners can achieve this by incorporating aspects of each other into their own self-concepts. Novel and challenging activities are a key way to foster self-expansion. This process is inherently pleasurable and can combat the boredom that often arises in long-term relationships, thus boosting satisfaction.
- Refer to the graph, which illustrates a common trajectory for two components of love over the course of a long-term relationship. Based on the graph shown:
Answer: The eventual stability of many long-term relationships is likely sustained by high levels of companionate love, despite a normative decline in passionate love.
The graph shows a typical pattern identified in relationship research: passionate love (labeled Line A) is often intense at the beginning but decreases over time, while companionate love (labeled Line B) starts lower but grows and remains at a high, stable level. This pattern suggests that while passion is key for initiating a relationship, the deep affection, intimacy, and commitment of companionate love are crucial for its long-term stability and satisfaction.
- When Marco's partner plans a surprise romantic dinner, Marco thinks, 'She is such a wonderfully thoughtful person; she's always doing sweet things for me.' When his partner forgets to pick up milk from the store, Marco thinks, 'She must have had a stressful, busy day.' This pattern of thinking is an example of what?
Answer: A relationship-enhancing attributional style.
This pattern is characteristic of a relationship-enhancing attributional style, common in happy couples. Positive behaviors (the dinner) are attributed to internal, stable, and global causes ('She is a thoughtful person'). Negative behaviors (forgetting milk) are attributed to external, unstable, and specific causes ('She had a stressful day'). This pattern maximizes the impact of good events and minimizes the impact of bad ones, thus maintaining relationship satisfaction.
- A person has been in a relationship for eight years. They feel little satisfaction, as their partner is not very supportive or affectionate. However, they have two children together, share a mortgage, and have a deeply intertwined social network. They also believe that being single would be difficult and that their other romantic prospects are poor. According to Rusbult's investment model, this person's commitment to the relationship is likely high primarily because of:
Answer: a high investment size and low quality of alternatives.
Rusbult's investment model posits that commitment is determined by three factors: satisfaction, investment size, and quality of alternatives. In this scenario, satisfaction is explicitly low. However, the children, mortgage, and social network represent a large investment size (resources that would be lost or decline in value if the relationship ended). The belief that prospects are poor indicates a low quality of alternatives. The combination of high investment and low alternatives predicts a high level of commitment, compelling the person to stay despite low satisfaction.
- The principle of reciprocal liking holds that knowing someone likes us is a powerful determinant of our liking them in return. However, research suggests that this effect is moderated by a person's self-concept. Specifically, in individuals with very low self-esteem, an expression of liking from another person can sometimes fail to increase attraction. Why is this the case?
Answer: Their negative self-concept leads them to question the sincerity or judgment of anyone who would express admiration for them.
This phenomenon connects to self-verification theory. People are motivated to have their self-concepts confirmed by others. For someone with a chronically negative self-concept, praise and admiration can create cognitive dissonance. They may resolve this by thinking, 'This person must not really know me,' or 'They must have poor judgment if they like someone like me,' thus discounting the expression of liking and failing to reciprocate.
- In a romantic relationship, Leah exhibits an anxious-preoccupied attachment style, while her partner, Ben, exhibits a dismissive-avoidant style. When the relationship faces stress, a predictable, cyclical pattern of behavior often emerges. Which of the following best describes this 'anxious-avoidant trap'?
Answer: Leah's demands for reassurance and closeness trigger Ben's tendency to withdraw, which in turn heightens Leah's anxiety and pursuit of Ben.
This describes the classic dysfunctional cycle between anxious and avoidant partners. The anxious partner's strategy for dealing with distress (seeking proximity) directly activates the avoidant partner's strategy (seeking distance and deactivating the attachment system). This creates a self-reinforcing loop of pursuit and withdrawal.
- A couple has been married for 30 years. In their early years, their relationship was marked by intense longing, physical passion, and deep emotional connection. As the years have passed, the fiery intensity has subsided, but they now share a deep affectionate bond, mutual respect, and a steadfast commitment to one another. According to Sternberg's triangular theory of love, their relationship has likely transitioned from:
Answer: Romantic Love to Companionate Love.
The initial state, characterized by passion (physical longing) and intimacy (emotional connection), is defined by Sternberg as Romantic Love. The later state, where passion has faded but intimacy and commitment remain strong, is defined as Companionate Love. This is a common trajectory for successful long-term relationships.
- Pat and Jordan are in a long-term relationship. Pat contributes significantly more to the household finances and chores. However, Jordan provides a great deal of emotional support, social planning, and affection, which Pat values immensely. According to equity theory, the relationship is most likely to be stable and satisfying if:
Answer: Pat and Jordan perceive that their own ratio of contributions to benefits is roughly equal to their partner's ratio.
Equity theory posits that relationship satisfaction is determined by the perception of fairness in the exchange. The key is not objective equality of inputs and outputs, but whether each partner's perceived ratio of inputs to outputs is proportional to the other's. If both believe the balance is fair for what they put in and get out, equity exists.
- A couple goes on a first date to a high-intensity, thrilling haunted house attraction. Social psychologists might predict this date format could amplify initial attraction compared to a quiet coffee shop date. Which mechanism best explains this potential effect?
Answer: The physiological arousal (e.g., racing heart, rapid breathing) from the scary experience may be misattributed as passionate attraction to the partner.
This scenario is a classic application of Schachter and Singer's two-factor theory of emotion, specifically the concept of misattribution of arousal. The theory posits that physiological arousal from one source (the haunted house) can be re-labeled as an emotion (attraction) caused by another source (the date partner), especially in an ambiguous situation.
- In a classic study of friendships in an apartment complex, researchers found that residents were more likely to become friends with people living in the same building. More specifically, residents living in apartments near the stairwells and mailboxes formed significantly more friendships than residents in other locations, even with people on different floors. This latter finding best illustrates the importance of which concept in attraction?
Answer: Functional distance, as architectural layout influences the frequency of chance encounters.
This finding highlights the concept of functional distance, which is a key component of the propinquity effect. It's not just about physical distance (i.e., being next-door neighbors), but how the physical environment encourages or discourages social contact. Locations that increase the probability of unplanned encounters, like stairwells and mailboxes, increase functional distance and thus the likelihood of friendship formation.
- While the principle of similarity ('birds of a feather flock together') is a robust predictor of attraction, some researchers argue for the 'opposites attract' principle of complementarity. Complementarity is most likely to contribute positively to a relationship when the partners' differences are in which domain?
Answer: Personality traits related to dominance and submission, where different roles can minimize conflict.
Research indicates that similarity in core attitudes, values, and many personality traits is crucial for long-term success. However, complementarity can be beneficial in specific domains where partners can fulfill each other's needs or take on different roles. The classic example is dominance/submission, where one partner's preference for leading and the other's for following can create a harmonious dynamic. Differences in core values or social habits (A, C, D) are more often sources of chronic conflict.
- Alex is in a relationship that is highly rewarding and far exceeds their expectations for what a relationship should be. However, Alex works in a field with many single, attractive, and successful colleagues, and frequently feels that a better partner might be available. According to the social exchange theory, which of the following best predicts the status of Alex's relationship?
Answer: It is satisfying but unstable, because the comparison level for alternatives (CLalt) is high.
Social exchange theory distinguishes between satisfaction and stability. Satisfaction is determined by comparing outcomes to the comparison level (CL); here, the relationship is satisfying. Stability is determined by the comparison level for alternatives (CLalt). Because Alex perceives many high-quality alternatives, the CLalt is high, making the relationship unstable despite its satisfaction.
- The matching hypothesis proposes that people tend to form romantic relationships with partners who are at a similar level of physical attractiveness. Which of the following provides the most widely accepted cognitive explanation for this phenomenon?
Answer: Individuals temper their desire for the most attractive partner possible with a pragmatic assessment of their own value and the probability of being accepted.
When you encounter questions about relationship formation theories, focus on distinguishing between evolutionary explanations, social pressures, and cognitive decision-making processes. The matching hypothesis specifically concerns how people cognitively evaluate potential partners.
The most widely accepted cognitive explanation centers on realistic partner selection. People don't simply pursue the most attractive individuals available; instead, they engage in a cost-benefit analysis that weighs their desires against practical considerations. You want an attractive partner, but you also assess your own "market value" and the likelihood of reciprocal interest. This creates a self-regulating mechanism where individuals gravitate toward partners of similar attractiveness levels to maximize their chances of successful relationship formation while minimizing rejection.
Option A represents an evolutionary/biological explanation rather than a cognitive one, focusing on genetic predispositions rather than conscious decision-making. Option B describes social consequences that might reinforce the matching hypothesis but doesn't explain the underlying cognitive process that initially drives partner selection. Option C incorrectly applies social penetration theory, which deals with relationship deepening through self-disclosure, not initial attraction patterns based on physical appearance.
The key distinction here is that cognitive explanations focus on mental processes and decision-making strategies. While social pressures and evolutionary factors may contribute to the matching hypothesis, the cognitive explanation emphasizes how individuals consciously or unconsciously calculate their romantic "market value" and adjust their partner preferences accordingly.
Remember: When studying relationship theories, always identify whether explanations are cognitive (thinking processes), social (group influences), or evolutionary (biological predispositions).
- According to Aronson's gain-loss theory of attraction, our liking for another person is most strongly influenced by changes in their expressed esteem for us. The theory predicts that we will feel the most attraction toward a person who:
Answer: initially expressed negative or neutral feelings for us, but has gradually changed to expressing very positive feelings.
When you encounter questions about interpersonal attraction theories, focus on the specific mechanisms each theory proposes rather than intuitive assumptions about relationships.
Aronson's gain-loss theory centers on the psychological impact of changes in how others evaluate us, not the absolute level of their regard. The theory suggests we experience stronger emotional reactions to shifts in someone's opinion than to consistent treatment. Specifically, we feel most attracted to people whose esteem for us increases over time because this progression feels rewarding and suggests we've "earned" their positive regard.
Answer D correctly captures this principle: someone moving from negative/neutral feelings to very positive feelings creates the most powerful attraction according to the theory. This upward trajectory maximizes the psychological "gain" effect that drives attraction.
Answer A represents consistently high regard, which feels pleasant but lacks the dynamic change that creates strong attraction under this theory. Answer B describes a loss pattern (positive to negative), which the theory predicts would generate strong negative feelings rather than attraction. Answer C suggests neutral consistency, which provides neither gains nor losses and therefore produces weaker emotional impact than dramatic positive change.
The key trap in gain-loss questions is assuming that consistent positive treatment creates the strongest attraction. While this might seem logical in real relationships, Aronson's theory specifically emphasizes that improvement in someone's regard creates more powerful psychological effects than maintenance of positive feelings.
Remember: gain-loss theory is about the emotional impact of change in esteem, with gains producing stronger attraction than consistency.
- Dr. Chen is investigating how adult attachment styles might intersect with the principles of social exchange theory in relationships. Based on the defining characteristics of the attachment styles, which of the following hypotheses is most theoretically sound?
Answer: Individuals with an anxious-preoccupied style may tolerate relationships with poor outcomes because their fear of being alone gives them a low CLalt.
An anxious-preoccupied attachment style is characterized by a strong fear of abandonment and a negative model of self ('I am not worthy of love'). This psychological state would likely lead to a low comparison level for alternatives (CLalt), as the individual may believe they cannot do better or that being alone is the worst possible outcome. This would explain why they might remain committed to relationships that are not satisfying (i.e., that fall below their comparison level, CL).
