You may be wondering why we chose to include Joe and Susanne Maggio in the same chapter as Julius Achon. What do these people have in common, and why are they featured together in a chapter on social psychology? We selected these individuals because their stories send a positive message, illuminating what is best about human relationships, like the capacity to love and feel empathy. They epitomize the positive side of social psychology.

LO 11 Compare prosocial behavior and altruism.

We like to believe that all human beings are capable of prosocial behavior, or behavior aimed at benefiting others. An exemplar of this ability is Julius Achon. After meeting the orphans in 2003, Julius kept his promise to assist them, wiring his family $150 a month to cover the cost of food, clothing, school uniforms, tuition, and other necessities—even when he and his wife were struggling to stay afloat. For 3 years, Julius was the children’s sole source of financial support. Then in 2006, when Julius was living in Portland and working for Nike, a friend helped him gather additional support from others. The following year, Julius formalized his efforts by creating 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. AUCF’s latest project is the construction and operation of a medical clinic in Julius’ home county of Otuke. The Kristina Acuma Achon Health Center is named after Julius’ mother, who was shot by the LRA in 2004 and died from her wounds because she lacked access to proper medical care. Julius recently moved back to Uganda, where he is overseeing the work of AUCF. (For more information about the organization, please see http://achonugandachildren.org.)

As for the 11 orphans, all of them are flourishing. The teenage girl in tattered clothing—the first to emerge from under the bus that morning in 2003—is now a nurse at the Kristina Acuma Achon Health Center. Many of the older children attend a boarding school in Kampala, and one of them—a young man named Samuel—has become a competitive runner like Julius. The other children attend school and remain in the care of Julius and his family.

586

It feels good to give to others, even when you receive nothing in return. The satisfaction derived from knowing you made someone feel happier, more secure, or appreciated is enough of a reward. The desire or motivation to help others with no expectations of payback is called altruism. Empathy, or the ability to understand and recognize another’s emotional point of view, is a major component of altruism.

ALTRUISM AND TODDLERS The seeds of altruism appear to be planted very early in life. Children as young as 18 months have been observed demonstrating helping behavior. One study found that the vast majority of 18-month-olds would help a researcher obtain an out-of-reach object, assist him in a book-stacking exercise, and open a door for him when his hands were full. It is important to note the babies did not lend a hand when the researcher intentionally put the object out of reach, or if he appeared satisfied with the stack of books. They only helped when it appeared assistance was needed (Warneken & Tomasello, 2006). What was happening in the brains of these young children? Research demonstrates that particular areas of the brain (such as the medial prefrontal cortex) show increased activity in association with feelings of empathy and helping behaviors (Rameson, Morelli, & Lieberman, 2012). Given that altruism shows up so early in life, perhaps you are wondering if it is innate. Researchers are trying to determine if this characteristic has a genetic component, and the findings from twin studies identify “considerable heritability” of altruistic tendencies and other prosocial behaviors (Jiang, Chew, & Ebstein, 2013). But as always, we must consider the biopsychosocial perspective, recognizing the interaction of genetics, environment, and culture (Knafo & Israel, 2010).

REDUCING STRESS AND INCREASING HAPPINESS Research suggests that helping others reduces stress and increases happiness (Schwartz, Keyl, Marcum, & Bode, 2009; Schwartz, Meisenhelder, Yunsheng, & Reed, 2003). The gestures don’t have to be grand in order to be altruistic or prosocial. Consider the last time you bought coffee for a colleague without being asked, or gave a stranger a quarter to fill his parking meter. Do you recycle, conserve electricity, and take public transportation? These behaviors indicate an awareness of the need to conserve resources for the benefit of all. Promoting sustainability is an indirect, yet very impactful, prosocial endeavor. Perhaps you haven’t opened your home to 11 orphaned children, but you may perform acts of kindness more regularly than you realize.

587

Even if you’re not the type to reach out to strangers, you probably demonstrate prosocial behavior toward your family and close friends. This giving of yourself allows you to experience the most magical element of human existence: love.

LO 12 Identify the three major factors contributing to interpersonal attraction.

It seems Joe and Susanne have made a very happy life for themselves. Things can get hectic with triplet toddlers and a teen, but they seem content and able to cope with whatever challenges may arise. Joe and Susanne make a great team. How do you explain their compatibility? We suspect it has something to do with interpersonal attraction, the factors that lead us to form friendships or romantic relationships with others. What are these mysterious attraction factors? Let’s focus our attention on the three most important: proximity, similarity, and physical attractiveness.

WE’RE CLOSE: PROXIMITY We would guess that the majority of people in your social circle live nearby. Proximity, or nearness, plays a significant role in the formation of our relationships. The closer two people live geographically, the greater the odds that they will meet and spend time together, and the more likely they are to establish a bond (Festinger, Schachter, & Back, 1950; Nahemow & Lawton, 1975). One study looking at the development of friendships in a college classroom setting concluded that sitting in nearby seats and being assigned to the same work groups correlated with the development of friendships (Back, Schmukle, & Egloff, 2008). In other words, sitting next to someone in class, or even in the same row, increases the chances that you will become friends. Would you agree?

Notions of proximity have changed since the introduction of the Internet. Thanks to applications like Skype and Google Hangouts, we can now have face-to-face conversations with people who are thousands of miles away. Dating sites and mobile apps offer similar capabilities through chats, instant messaging, and photo sharing. They also provide the option of geographic filtering, allowing users to narrow their searches to people who live in a certain zip code or city. But do all these new tools really improve the way people relate to one another? For Joe and Susanne, the answer seems to be “yes.” If it weren’t for Match.com, their paths probably would not have crossed. As for the rest of humanity, the answer is not so straightforward.

588

MERE-EXPOSURE EFFECT These repeated contacts with friends serve a purpose; the mere-exposure effect suggests that the more we are exposed to people, food, jingles, songs, politics, or music, the more positive a reaction we have toward them. More time spent online with friends can strengthen relationships, merely through exposure.

The mere-exposure effect may, to a certain extent, explain why Joe and Susanne are more in love today than they were 8 years ago. After years of positive exposure to one another (living under the same roof, raising children together, and sharing new experiences), their connection has deepened.

But here’s the flip side. Repeated negative exposures may lead to stronger distaste. If a person you frequently encounter has annoying habits or uncouth behavior, negative feelings might develop, even if your initial impression was positive (Cunningham, Shamblen, Barbee, & Ault, 2005). This can be problematic for romantic partners. All those minor irritations you overlooked early in the relationship can evolve into major headaches.

SIMILARITY Perhaps you have heard the saying “birds of a feather flock together.” This statement alludes to the concept of similarity, another factor that contributes to interpersonal attraction (Moreland & Zajonc, 1982; Morry, Kito, & Ortiz, 2011). We tend to prefer those who share our interests, viewpoints, ethnicity, values, and other characteristics. Even age, education, and occupation tend to be similar among those who are close (Lott & Lott, 1965).

PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS We probably don’t need to tell you that physical attractiveness plays a major role in interpersonal attraction (Eastwick, Eagly, Finkel, & Johnson, 2011; Lou & Zhang, 2009). But here is the question: Is beauty really in the eye of the beholder? In other words, do people from different cultures and historical periods have different concepts of beauty? There is some degree of consistency in the way people rate facial attractiveness (Langlois et al., 2000), with facial symmetry generally considered an attractive trait (Grammer & Thornhill, 1994). But certain aspects of beauty do appear to be culturally distinct (Gangestad & Scheyd, 2005). In some parts of the world, people go to great lengths to elongate their necks, increase height, pierce their bodies, augment their breasts, enlarge or reduce the size of their waists, and paint themselves—just so others within their culture will find them attractive. In America, the ideal body shape for women has changed over the years (think of Marilyn Monroe versus Gisele Bündchen), suggesting that cultural concepts of beauty can morph over time.

589

LOOKING GOOD IN THOSE GENES: THE EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE Why is physical attractiveness so important? Beauty is a sign of health, and healthy people have greater potential for longevity and successful breeding (Gangestad & Scheyd, 2005). Consider this evidence: Women are more likely to seek out men with healthy-looking physical characteristics when they are experiencing peak fertility and therefore likely to conceive. Ovulating women tend to look for masculine characteristics that suggest a genetic advantage, such as facial symmetry and social dominance, in order to provide the greatest benefit to offspring. In fact, research indicates that ovulating women perceive “sexy cads” as more devoted fathers and partners than average-looking men—even when provided with information suggesting the opposite (Durante, Griskevicius, Simpson, Cantú, & Li, 2012).

Clearly, women can be swayed by the good looks of potential mates. But which gender places greater value on beauty? And what other characteristics do men and women seek in long-term sexual partners?

CONTROVERSIES

590

BEAUTY PERKS We have discussed beauty in the context of romantic relationships, but how does physical appearance affect other aspects of social existence? Generally speaking, physically attractive people seem to have more opportunities. Beauty is correlated with how much money someone makes, the type of job she holds, and overall success (Pfeifer, 2012). Good-looking children and adults are viewed as more intelligent and popular, and are treated better in general (Langlois et al., 2000). Why would this be? From the perspective of evolutionary psychology, these characteristics would be good indicators of reproductive potential. And many people fall prey to the halo effect, or the tendency to assign excessive weight to one dimension of a person. This concept was originally described by Thorndike in 1920 as it related to the evaluation of others. People tend to form these general impressions early on and then cling to them, even in the absence of supporting evidence, or the presence of contradictory evidence (Aronson, 2012). The way we respond to beautiful people is one example of the halo effect; our initial impression of their beauty may lead us to assume they have other positive characteristics like superior intelligence, popularity, and desirability.

Beauty may captivate you in the beginning stages of a relationship, but other characteristics and qualities gain importance as time goes along. Think about the type of person you want for a life partner. Whom would you want to hold your hand when you’re sick in the hospital—the underwear model or the person you most respect and trust?

In America, we are taught to believe that love is the foundation of marriage. People in Western cultures do tend to marry for love, but this is not the case everywhere. In Harare, Zimbabwe, for example, people might also marry for reasons associated with the needs of the family, such as maintaining alliances and social status (Wojcicki, van der Straten, & Padian, 2010). Similarly, many marriages in India and other parts of South Asia are arranged by family members. Love may not be present in the beginning stages of such unions, but it can blossom.

STERNBERG’S THEORY OF LOVE In a pivotal study published in 1986, Robert Sternberg proposed that love is made up of three elements: passion (feelings leading to romance and physical attraction); intimacy (feeling close); and commitment (the recognition of love). He conceptualized these elements in terms of the corners of a triangle (Figure 14.4). Love takes many forms according to Sternberg, and can include any combination of the three elements.

Many relationships begin with exhilaration and intense physical attraction, and then evolve into more intimate connections. This is the type of love we often see portrayed in the movies. The combination of connection, concern, care, and intimacy is what Sternberg called romantic love. Romantic love is similar to what some psychologists refer to as passionate love (also known as “love at first sight”), which is based on zealous emotion, leading to intense longing and sexual attraction (Hatfield, Bensman, & Rapson, 2012). As a relationship grows, intimacy and commitment develop into companionate love, or love that consists of profound fondness, camaraderie, understanding, and emotional closeness. Companionate love is typical of a couple that has been together for many years. They become comfortable with each other, routines set in, and passion often fizzles (Aronson, 2012). Although the passion may wane, the friendship is strong. Consummate love (kän(t)-sə-mət) is evident when intimacy and commitment are accompanied by passion. The ultimate goal is to maintain all three components of the triangle.

Research and life experiences tell us that relationships inevitably change. Romantic love is generally what drives people to commit to one another (Berscheid, 2010). But the passion associated with this stage generally decreases over time. That does not mean it cannot reemerge, however. Can you think of ways this passion might be rekindled—a romantic night out, some sexy new underwear, a trip to fantasyland? Companionate love, in contrast, tends to grow over time. As we experience life with a partner, it is companionate love that seems to endear us to one another (Berscheid, 2010).

591

What type of love do you think online dating sites tend to select for? Is it companionate love (SF loves to garden, looking for someone who . . .)? Or is it passionate love (SM looking for a good time with no strings attached . . .)? As Joe can attest, passionate love was present from the beginning of his relationship with Susanne (he jokes about taking a few cold showers before anything happened). Although their passion is still strong and steady, the love and respect they have for one another have grown much deeper.

Have you ever wondered about the long-term stability of your relationships? Couples stay together for many reasons, some better than others. Caryl Rusbult’s investment model of commitment focuses on the resources at stake in relationships, including finances, possessions, time spent together, and perhaps even children (Rusbult, 1983). According to this model, decisions to stay together or separate are based on how happy people are in their relationship, their notion of what life would be like without it, and their investment. According to the investment model of commitment people may stay in unsatisfying or unhealthy relationships if they feel there are no better alternatives or believe they have too much to lose (Rusbult & Martz, 1995). This model helps us understand why people remain in destructive relationships.

MAKING THIS CHAPTER WORK IN YOUR LIFE At last, we reach the end of our journey through social psychology. We hope that what you have learned in this chapter will come in handy in your everyday social exchanges. Be conscious of the attributions you use to explain the behavior of others—are you being objective or falling prey to self-serving bias? Be mindful of your attitudes—how are they influencing your behavior? Know that your behaviors are constantly being shaped by your social interactions—both as an individual and as a member of groups. Understand the dangers of stereotyping, and know the human suffering caused by aggression. But perhaps most of all, be kind and helpful to others, and allow yourself to experience love.

Question 1

1. the just-world hypothesis.

2. deindividuation.

3. individualistic behavior.

4. prosocial behavior.

Question 2

1. social influence; obedience; physical attractiveness

2. proximity; similarity; physical attractiveness

3. obedience; proximity; social influence

4. proximity; love; social influence

Question 3