Two Key Studies of Cognitive Theories of Attraction (DP IB Psychology)

60 heterosexual male and 60 heterosexual female profiles from an online dating site 

The profiles were chosen at random

These 120 participants were identified as ‘initiators’, meaning that they initiated contact with other users of the site.

The researchers used the real-life online activity of the participants who used the dating site

Records were kept to show who responded (‘reciprocating contacts’) and did not respond (‘non-reciprocating contacts’) to other people’s profile on the site

A maximum of six of the initiators’ profile photographs as well as the reciprocating and non-reciprocating profile photographs were collected by the researchers

A total of 966 photographs (527 female and 439 male) were collected

The researchers used ‘blind’ researchers to rate the photos they had collected 

The ratings were based on a 7-point scale of attractiveness (-3 to +3)

Calculations were based on:

• the mean attractiveness rating given to each initiator

• the mean rating given to each of the initiator’s contacts

• separate attractiveness ratings for each initiator’s reciprocating and non-reciprocating contacts

The results did not support the matching hypothesis:

• the initiator’s physical attractiveness showed no correlation with the mean physical attractiveness of all the people they contacted on the site

• the initiators tended to contact people on the site who were rated as more attractive than they themselves were

The use of real online dating activity means that the results of this study are high in ecological validity:

• the participants could not possibly have been influenced by demand characteristics due to the nature of the procedure

The use of correlational analysis means that it is easy to compare quantitative data and to look for associations between variables:

• this use of quantitative analysis means that the study should show reliability

• reliability could be tested by running the study again with another sample to check for consistency

The sample only included heterosexual people so it cannot be generalised homosexuals:

• Different standards or criteria may apply to people who are not heterosexual

People tend to present themselves in a somewhat edited way on dating sites:

• they may make aspirational dating choices or present the best version of themselves online in a way that is not possible in real-life

• this ‘tweaking’ of reality means that the study may lack validity

169 US undergraduate students (103 female and 66 male) US 

The sample was obtained via self-selection (an advertisement asking for single people who were looking for a romantic partner)

The participants filled in a series of questionnaires covering the following:

• Personality: each participant rated their own personality using a list of 64 predetermined adjectives e.g. sociable, shy, confident, warm, cold etc.

• Filler questionnaires: these were used to disguise the actual purpose of the research and included questions that were not relevant to the topic being investigated

• Personality of their ideal romantic partner: this questionnaire was similar to the personality questionnaire but it focused on what the participant was looking for in a partner

The participants consistently chose their ideal romantic partner as being someone with a personality very similar to their own

The traits they listed to describe themselves were also seen in the traits they chose to describe their ideal romantic partner

‘Warm’ individuals were hoping to meet others who were warm; people who were dominant were attracted to others who were dominant too

The nature of the standardised questions means that this study can be replicated easily:

• quantitative data can be compared and analysed easily

• Being able to replicate the research means it can be tested for reliability

The findings support the similarity-attraction hypothesis:

• this means that the study has face validity

The participants may have succumbed to social desirability bias:

• They may have presented an idealised version of themselves and their potential partner when filling in the questionnaire

• Social desirability bias is a way to preserve self-esteem

• Social desirability (and any form of bias) lowers the validity of the findings

Quantitative data does not provide detail as to why certain choices are made on a questionnaire which means that the study lacks explanatory power