slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
1 2 3 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
1 2 3

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 48

1 2 3 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 111 Views
  • Uploaded on

1 2 3 Because of Because of how Because of how the person's the person makes the person attributes you feel makes you feel

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about '1 2 3' - adolph


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

1 2 3

Because of Because of howBecause of how

the person's the person makes the person

attributes you feel makes you feel

(your mood) (your self-esteem)

slide2

Examples of Liking Others Because They Enhance Our Self-Esteem

Evidence for reciprocity of liking – “you like me, I

like you.”

slide3

Examples of Liking Others Because They Enhance Our Self-Esteem

Evidence for reciprocity of liking – “you like me, I

like you.”

Early research in interpersonal attraction on similarity of attitudes and liking.

slide5

The anatomy of relationships

And the rules and skills needed to manage them successfully

Michael Argyle and Monika Henderson

(1984)

slide6

Goodwin (1987)

This study examined the relation between being in a relationship and physical well-being by comparing currently married or currently unmarried patients who had cancer.

The information was contained in the hospital records of over 27,000 patients

slide7

Results

  • Stage of cancer at diagnosis:

earlier for married sample

slide8

Results

  • Stage of cancer at diagnosis:

earlier for married sample

  • Treatment:
  • more likely for married sample
slide9

Results

  • Stage of cancer at diagnosis:

earlier for married sample

  • Treatment:
  • more likely for married sample
  • Survival:

longer for married sample

slide10

Types of Social Support

Emotional

2. Appraisal

3. Informational

4. Instrumental

slide11

Social Support as a Direct Predictor of

Psychological and Physical Distress

Social Support Negatively Related to Psychological

Distress and to Physical Distress

slide12

Social Support as a Buffer between Life Stressors and Psychological and Physical Distress

Social Support

!

!

Stressors --------------------------- Psychological and

physical distress

This is an illustration of social support as a moderating variable.

slide13

Antonovsky(1987)

Unraveling the mystery of health

Central Concept: Sense of Coherence

Components:

1. Comprehensibility: the surrounding

world makes sense, is predictable.

slide14

Antonovsky(1987)

Unraveling the mystery of health

Central Concept: Sense of Coherence

Components:

1. Comprehensibility: the surrounding

world makes sense, is predictable.

  • Manageability: ability or perception that

one can cope, meet challenges.

slide15

Antonovsky(1987)

Unraveling the mystery of health

Central Concept: Sense of Coherence

Components:

1. Comprehensibility: the surrounding

world makes sense, is predictable.

  • Manageability: ability or perception that

one can cope, meet challenges.

  • Meaningfulness: life is worthy of

commitment and engagement.

slide16

Studies have found a negative relation between sense of coherence and psychological and physical distress, that is, the greater the sense of coherence, the lower the distress levels.

  • In addition, consistent with the moderating role of social
  • support, sense of coherence has been found to moderate the influence of stressors on psychological and physical distress.
slide17

Sense of coherence

!

!

Stressors ---------------------- Psychological

and physical

distress

This is an illustration of sense of coherence as a moderating variable.

slide18

Read (2005)

In Finland, found a relation between marital status and sense of coherence, but for males only.

slide19

Some other results are consistent with the relationship-sense of coherence hypothesis

Olsson (2006)

  • In Swedish samples, group of parents not in therapy had higher sense of coherence compared to couples in therapy.
  • 2. With parents, closeness in the family predicted sense of coherence beyond depression.
slide20

The Role of Attributions Regarding Positive and Negative Behaviour of Your Partner in Happy and Unhappy Relationships

slide21

Happy in Your Relationship

!

Expect Positive Behaviour

Positive Behaviour Negative Behaviour

(consistent) (inconsistent)

! !

Causal AttributionsCausal Attributions

Internal External

Stable Unstable

Global Specific

ResponsibilityResponsibility

AttributionsAttributions

Intentional Unintentional

Unselfish Unselfish

Praise No blame

slide22

Unhappy in Your Relationship

!

Expect Negative Behaviour

Positive Behaviour Negative Behaviour

(inconsistent) (consistent)

! !

Causal AttributionsCausal Attributions

External Internal

Unstable Stable

Specific Global

ResponsibilityResponsibility

AttributionsAttributions

Unintentional Intentional

Selfish Selfish

No praise Blame

slide23

Longitudinal study

Participants were married females

Time 1 (12 month interval) Time 2

VariablesVariables

Level of positive Level of positive attribution attribution

  • activity activity

Satisfaction Satisfaction

in marriage in marriage

slide24

Time 1 (12 month interval) Time 2

VariablesVariables

Level of positive Level of positive attribution attribution

  • activity activity

Satisfaction Satisfaction

in marriage in marriage

  • What was relation between attribution activity, Time 1 and satisfaction, Time 2?
  • What was the relation between satisfaction, Time 1
  • and attribution activity, Time 2?
slide25

Results

  • What was relation between attribution activity, Time 1 and satisfaction, Time 2?
  • positive association
  • What was the relation between satisfaction, Time 1
  • and attribution activity, Time 2?
  • no association
slide26

Results

  • What was relation between attribution activity, Time 1 and satisfaction, Time 2?
  • positive association
  • What was the relation between satisfaction, Time 1
  • and attribution activity, Time 2?
  • no association
  • These results suggest what:
  • Attribution activity drives satisfaction ?
  • b) Or satisfaction drives attribution activity?
slide27

Another Bias in Interpersonal Relationships

Murray (1996)

Married couples and dating couples independently completed three versions of a questionnaire containing 20 trait-adjectives

slide28

Male PartnerFemale Partner

Ratings of partner Ratings of partner

Ratings of self Ratings of self

Ratings of "ideal" Ratings of "ideal"

partner partner

slide29

Results

  • Ratings of partner using self-rating as criterion.

Correlation coefficients around +.35

Therefore, there was considerable discrepancy, or

error, in how judges rated their partners.

slide30

Rating of actual partner was positively associated with

  • rating of ideal partner,
  • but, there was no association between rating of ideal partner and the partner’s self-rating.

In other words, we tend to view our actual

partner to be similar to our ideal partner,

even though this is not necessarily the case.

slide31

3. This bias was found to be more typical of people

  • who reported higher levels of satisfaction in their
  • relationship.
  • In other words, people who are more satisfied in
  • their relationship are the ones more likely to view
  • their partners like their ideal, even though this may
  • not be accurate.
slide32

The possible role of companionate activities in psychological and physical well-being (in contrast to social support)

Rook (1987)

Data available from 1050 respondents to a prior survey concerning

slide33

The possible role of companionate activities in psychological and physical well-being (in contrast to social support)

The variables were:

1. Psychological ill-being (e.g., ratings on emotions such as anxious, sad)

2. Major life stressors

3. Minor life stressors (daily hassles)

  • Social support: instrumental, emotional, informational, and appraisal
  • Companionate activities: frequency of occurrence and number of
  • different people

(e.g., going out to diner with someone ,meeting someone in a park).

slide34

The possible role of companionate activities in psychological and physical well-being (in contrast to social support)

Multiple regression analyses predicting psychological ill-being.

Predictors variables were: major or minor stressors, social support, and companionate activities (frequency or number).

slide35

Analysis with major life stressors

  • Major life stressors positively associated with
  • psychological ill-being
  • Companionate activities negatively associated with
  • psychological ill-being
  • Social support unrelated to psychological ill-being in
  • terms of main effect,
  • But, interaction, such that, at high levels of major life
  • stressors, social support now negatively related to psychological ill-being
slide36

Analysis with minor life stressors

  • Minor life stressors positively

associated with psychological ill-being

  • 2. minor life stressors interacted with companionate
  • activities such that :
  • companionate activities were more highly negatively
  • related to psychological ill-being when minor life
  • stressors were higher.
slide37

Elliot (2006)

Approach and avoidance motivation in interpersonal relationships

Research primarily in the achievement area

  • predisposition to succeed
  • or predisposition to avoid failure
slide38

This idea has recently been applied to interpersonal relationships.

Begins with two dispositional constructs:

i) Hope for affiliation

ii) or Fear of rejection.

slide39

And two corresponding lower level concepts:

i) Approach social goals (e.g., trying to deepen one's

relationships)

ii) or avoidance social goals (e.g., trying to avoid

conflict in one's relationships)

slide40

DePaulo(1998)

Telling lies in relationships

Students kept a diary for seven days which included a social interaction record and a deception record.

A lie was defined as any time you intentionally try to mislead someone.

Later asked, among other things, was this lie ever discovered,

and if you could relive this social interaction, would you tell the lie again.

slide41

Two major categories of lies:

self-centered,

and other-oriented.

slide42

Results

  • Participants told fewer lies per social interaction to those they were closer to and felt more uncomfortable in this regard
slide43

Results

  • Participants told fewer lies per social interaction to those they were closer to and felt more uncomfortable in this regard
  • Other-oriented lies more frequent that
  • self-oriented lies to best friends and friends; the reverse to acquaintances and strangers.
slide44

Results

  • Participants told fewer lies per social interaction to those they were closer to and felt more uncomfortable in this regard
  • Other-oriented lies more frequent that
  • self-oriented lies to best friends and friends; the reverse to acquaintances and strangers.
  • Lies told to close partners were more often
  • discovered.
slide45

Adult Attachment Style

Secure: I find it relatively easy to get close to others and am comfortable depending on them and having them depend on me. I do not often worry about being abandoned or about someone getting too close to me.

slide46

Adult Attachment Style

Secure: I find it relatively easy to get close to others and am comfortable depending on them and having them depend on me. I do not often worry about being abandoned or about someone getting too close to me.

Avoidant: I am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others; I find it difficult to trust them, difficult to allow myself to depend on them. I am nervous when anyone gets too close, and often love partners want me to be more intimate than I feel comfortable being.

slide47

Adult Attachment Style

Secure: I find it relatively easy to get close to others and am comfortable depending on them and having them depend on me. I do not often worry about being abandoned or about someone getting too close to me.

Avoidant: I am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others; I find it difficult to trust them, difficult to allow myself to depend on them. I am nervous when anyone gets too close, and often love partners want me to be more intimate than I feel comfortable being.

Anxious/ambivalent: I find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I often worry that my partner does not really love me or will not want to stay with me. I want to merge completely with another person, and this desire sometimes scares people away.

slide48

Attachment Styles

!

Jealousy

!

Violence in Intimate Relationships