Formation of Personal Relationships: Sociocultural Theories of Attraction (DP IB Psychology)
Revision Note
Proximity
Proximity is based on the idea of distance as a key factor in the formation of relationships (romantic or platonic)
Proximity theory assumes that people find their become or romantic partners from those they live or work close to, for example:
Someone who lives in your neighbourhood, town, street
Someone who your office
Someone who attends the same gym classes as you
One explanation of proximity is that it is simply less effortful and more convenient to form a relationship with someone who lives or works nearby than to go to the trouble of finding friends and partners who are some distance away
Proximity may well be linked to another sociocultural theory – familiarity:
What is well known to an individual may appear to be more attractive than what is unknown
Seeing someone around your neighbourhood or at work means that they become familiar
Familiarity
The concept of familiarity as a sociocultural factor in relationship formation is based on the idea that the more familiar a person become, the more attractive they appear to be
Familiarity uses the premise of the mere exposure effect, a psychological phenomenon by which people develop a preference for what is well-known and encountered often, for example:
‘I see that guy every morning at the coffee shop; he’s quite dishy’
‘I know that JimBob is my friend but I’m starting to think he’s rather attractive’
‘Esmerelda has been coming to my bell-ringing class for a few weeks now and I’m starting to feel attracted to her’
Zajonc (1968) stated that it is sufficient for an individual simply to see a person several times in a short period of time in order to begin to feel attracted to them
The overlap with proximity theory is clear – we are bound to see more of those to whom we live closest
Culture
Collectivist cultures are not as well represented in psychological research as are individualistic cultures yet it is usually assumed that theories of relationship formation apply universally
Taking a universalist approach to research is ethnocentric as it ignore the perspectives of cultures which are not Westernised or individualistic
One of the main ideological differences between individualist and some collectivist cultures is that of arranged marriages versus ‘love’ marriages
Arranged marriages are part of the cultural norm in some countries, for example:
India
South Korea
Indonesia
Bangladesh
The idea of having a marriage arranged by a third party (often family) is in direct opposition to the idea of a ‘love-match’ in which emotion, passion and personal choice are valued
Individualist cultures tend to have high divorce rates which may highlight some flaws in the romantic model
Evaluation of sociocultural theories of attraction
Strengths
These theories offer a more holistic view of relationship formation as they each consider a range of factors which affect and influence attraction
Real-world evidence shows the validity of sociocultural theories, for example:
Many people do end up marrying someone they went to college with or who they work with
People may feel a sense of loyalty to those they are familiar with, perhaps because they view them as part of their ingroup
Limitations
The theories cannot be tested using objective, scientific methods which means that they lack reliability
The theories are overly deterministic and do not consider alternative outcomes, for example:
Living or working close to someone does not meant that liking/loving will follow
Long-distance relationships do work for some people
Familiarity does not always result in attraction, in fact it may result in dislike for the other person
Research which investigates sociocultural theories of attraction
Festinger et al. (1950) proximity explained via occupation of student accommodation blocks
Moreland & Beach (1992) familiarity explained via regular sightings of a student during lectures
Gupta & Singh (1982) arranged marriages versus love marriages
Festinger et al. (1950), Moreland & Beach (1992) and Gupta & Singh (1982) are available as ‘Three Key Studies of Sociocultural Theories of Attraction’ – just navigate the Formation of Personal Relationships section to find them.
You've read 0 of your 10 free revision notes
Unlock more, it's free!
Did this page help you?