Chapter 9: Interpersonal Attraction
• Situational Factors & Liking
1. Proximity
• Festinger, Schachter, & Back (1950)
– Massachusetts Institute of Technology Study
– Physical proximity was the most important determinant of friendship
Other Areas
• Urban housing projects for the elderly
• Office work environments
• Classroom settings
• Priest & Sawyer (1967)
• Lions and Lambs
• What if we move enemies next door to one another?
• Ebbesen, Kjos, & Konecni (1976)
• They also developed most of their enemies close by as well. Why?
2. Familiarity
• We like stimuli we have had more exposure
– Occurs in the absence of information about the person or object
• Saegert, Swapp, & Zajonc (1973)
3. Anxiety:Does Misery Love Company?
• Schachter (1959)
– Dr. Gregor Zilstein study
• Misery loves miserable company
Are anxious people motivated to seek out similar others in order to talk about the impending misery?
Same study, but women could not talk
• Motivating Factor
• Social Comparison
– Compare emotional reactions
• Two little wrinkles
• Sarnoff & Zimbardo (1961) “Baby Study”
• Chose to wait with dissimilar others
• Outcome dependence vs. Emotional dependence operating
– Outcome dependence refers to dependence on others for positive outcomes
• Social Comparison Process
• Kulik & Mahler (1989) “Heart Surgery Study”
– Social comparison fueled by desire to affiliate with similar others AND a need to appraise the situation itself
Characteristics of Others

• Physical Attractiveness
• Feingold (1992)
Sociable
Dominant
Less Modest
Mentally Healthy
Intelligent Socially Skilled
• Frieze, Olson, & Russell (1991)
• Facial attractiveness led to $2,200 more in starting salary
– Influenced later salaries for women
• Attractive women average $4,200 more
• 20% overweight reduced a man’s starting salary by $2,000
Are Attractive People Better?
• Feingold (1992) analyzed 90 studies
• Found no differences
• Attractive people:
Not More Not Perceived to Be
Intelligent
Dominant
Trustworthy
Honest
Self-Esteem
Judgments of Attractiveness
• Value Transfer or “rub off” effect
– viewed simultaneously
• Contrast Effect
– viewed sequentially
Sensitive
Evaluations of our own appearance
• Brown, Novick, Lord, & Richards (1992)
• Universal Beauty Standard
• Ford and Beach (1951)
• Studied 190 tribal societies
• No Universal Standards of Beauty
• WHY?
Similarity and Liking
• Kandel (1978) found best friends in H.S. were similar in sex, race, age, and year in school
• Why does similarity increase liking?
Theories of Similarity & Liking
• Byrne (1971)
• Aronson (1974)
• Davis (1981)
Evaluation and Liking
• Aronson & Linder (1965)

• 4 patterns were:
– Positive from start to finish
– Negative at first, then positive
– Positive at first, then negative
– Negative from start to finish
Competence and Liking
• Competent people are liked more
– “Best idea guy” is not the best liked member
• Aronson, Willerman, & Floyd (1966) “Spilled Coffee” study