The Pull Toward Others: How Attraction Works and What It Measures

UPI Study › Courses › Advanced Social Psychology › Free lessons › Lesson 7.2 Free with a free account

The Pull Toward Others: How Attraction Works and What It Measures

Advanced Social Psychology · Chapter 7: Belonging, Attraction, and Interpersonal RelationshipsSection 7.2 · lesson 41 of 8510 min · free with a free account

← Wired to Connect: The Fundamental Human Need to BelongNext lesson: Why We Like Who We Like: Similarity, Reciprocal Liking, and Ingratiation →

Earn 3 college credits for Advanced Social PsychologyRecommended for credit by NCCRS · Psychology 310 · self-paced · one payment, lifetime access
Enroll in Advanced Social Psychology · $250 →Download the syllabus (PDF)

In this lesson

What attraction is made of, what produces it, and how it gets measured.

  • Define attraction and separate its 3 components
  • Explain the reward account and its 3 predictions
  • Weigh proximity and mere exposure as antecedents of liking
  • Compare the 4 families of attraction measurement

Free study notes

Get this lesson's notes by email

The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.

One email. Unsubscribe in one click.

Transcript

Everything said in the video, section by section (1,314 words). Read along, or search it.

Belonging, Attraction, and Interpersonal Relationships

The Pull Toward Others

Attraction sounds like the least scientific topic in the course. It is, in fact, one of the most heavily measured. This section does three jobs. First, it defines attraction precisely, and splits it into components. Second, it gives you the two engines that produce it. Reward, and proximity. Third, it looks at how researchers actually measure the thing. That last part matters more than it sounds. The measurement you choose shapes the conclusion you can draw. And in this literature, the four options disagree in interesting ways.

The Definition

A Continuum, Not a Switch

Start with the definition, because it is more careful than the everyday word. Interpersonal attraction is an evaluation one person makes of another. And it runs along a continuum, from strong dislike to strong liking. Not a switch, and not a category. It is sometimes treated as one single dimension. But more sophisticated treatments pull out three components. Liking is the first, and it is general positive evaluation. Respect is the second, and it is narrower. Admiration based on perceived qualities, such as competence. The third is the desire to associate, the motivational pull toward proximity. So one is a judgment of warmth, one of quality, and one is a motive.

When They Diverge

Correlated, But Separable

Those three usually correlate, which is why one scale often works. But they can come apart, and the exceptions tell you something. You can respect a colleague you do not particularly like. Respect is high, liking is low, and both readings are honest. Or you can feel drawn to someone you know almost nothing about. There the pull is high and the evaluation barely exists yet. So a complete theory has to say when the components converge, and when they diverge. This became a rigorous empirical topic through one research program. Berscheid and Hatfield, from the nineteen sixties onward. Their work was attacked at the time, and the objection is telling. Critics thought love and liking should not be objects of scientific study at all. They built the toolkit anyway: lab manipulations, field studies, longitudinal designs.

Reward Theory

We Like What Rewards Us

Now the first engine, and it is almost insultingly simple. People are attracted to others who reward them. That is the whole theory. Rewards can arrive directly, through pleasant interaction. Or indirectly, through association with rewarding outcomes. Two papers state it canonically, both from nineteen seventy-four. Lott and Lott is one, Clore and Byrne is the other. A theory this parsimonious ought to break quickly against data. This one does not, and the indirect clause is why. Reward can be transferred purely by association. No causal responsibility required, which is where it gets uncomfortable.

Three Predictions

What the Reward Account Commits To

Three predictions follow, and the last two are the surprising ones. First, we like people who provide positive experiences. Kindness, humor, validation. Nobody argues with that. Second, we like people we encounter in pleasant settings. Even when those people did not cause the pleasantness. That is a form of evaluative conditioning. The good feeling attaches to whoever happens to be standing there. Third, the same thing runs in reverse. We dislike people who are merely present when negative events occur. Again, irrespective of causal responsibility. It is not fair, and it is not rational, but it is what the data show.

Explanatory Reach

Three Puzzles the Account Absorbs

Watch how much territory that simple account covers. Three puzzles fall out of it, with no extra machinery. Why do we like people who agree with us? Because validation is rewarding. That is the entire explanation. Why do we like attractive others? Their company is rewarding directly, and through social signaling. And why are first encounters in good moods so consequential later? Because the mood transfers to the person, by prediction two. That third one has a practical edge worth noticing. When you meet someone carries weight that has nothing to do with who they are.

Westgate Housing

The Best Predictor Was the Floor Plan

Now the second engine, and it starts with a housing complex. Festinger, Schachter, and Back published the study in nineteen fifty. The site was Westgate, a married-students' apartment complex at M I T. The question was simple: which residents became friends? Nominate a predictor before you hear the answer. It was not personality. Not background. Not shared interests. It was functional distance, the proximity created by the layout of the buildings. People whose doors sat near stairwells or mailboxes formed more friendships. Those were the places everyone had to pass. Residents tucked at the ends of corridors formed fewer. Note the word functional, because it is doing real work. This is proximity as shaped by architecture and routine, not by meters.

The Mechanism

From Layout to Liking

So how does a floor plan become a friendship? The chain is short, and each link can be tested on its own. Proximity comes first, and you do not choose it. The layout hands it to you. Proximity then raises the opportunity for interaction. Shared paths generate incidental contact, at almost no effort. Frequent interaction follows, and frequent interaction tends to produce liking. By the end, the friendship feels entirely chosen. This has direct consequences for how we build things. Coffee stations, mailrooms, and building entrances are incidental contact generators. Delete them in pursuit of efficiency, and something else goes with them. Designers often remove the social fabric they assumed would simply form.

Mere Exposure

Familiarity Alone Is Enough

Underneath proximity sits a mechanism, and Zajonc named it in nineteen sixty-eight. The mere exposure effect. Repeated, unreinforced exposure to a stimulus increases positive evaluation of it. Unreinforced is the load-bearing word in that sentence. Nothing good has to happen during the exposure. No reward, no pairing, no learning episode at all. Repetition on its own moves the evaluation. It has been replicated across a striking range of stimuli. Chinese characters, nonsense syllables, abstract images, photographs of strangers. It works best for moderately complex, initially neutral stimuli. Processing fluency is the leading explanation, though the mechanism is still debated. The existence of the effect, by contrast, is settled.

Boundary Conditions

Exposure Does Not Always Breed Liking

Exposure does not always breed liking, and three limits say when it fails. First, and most importantly, the starting point matters. If the initial evaluation is negative, more exposure can deepen the dislike. It does not moderate it. It sharpens it. So exposure is not a repair strategy. Showing someone more of a thing they already dislike makes it worse. Second, awareness cuts the effect. Mere exposure is stronger when the perceiver does not consciously recognize the familiarity. Which suggests the effect operates partly outside awareness. Third, past a certain frequency you get satiation, and even reactance. Advertising research finds an inverted-U pattern, rising and then falling. So the principle is robust, but it is not unconditional.

Measurement

Four Families, Four Trade-Offs

Now measurement, which quietly decides what a study can conclude. There are four families, and each buys something at a price. Self-report rating scales are the first family. Byrne's Interpersonal Judgment Scale, from nineteen seventy-one, is the classic instrument. Cheap and informative, but vulnerable to social desirability bias. Behavioral measures are the second. Seating distance, eye contact, conversation duration, willingness to make plans. Less reactive than self-report, but more ambiguous to interpret. Physiological measures are third: skin conductance, pupil dilation, heart-rate reactivity. They detect arousal well, but arousal does not tell you the valence. Fourth are field and longitudinal designs, tracking who becomes a friend over time. High ecological validity, and expensive and slow to run. Increasingly researchers combine measures inside one study. Convergence gives the most defensible inference, and divergence is itself diagnostic.

Consolidate

Two Principles, Endless Specifications

Step back, because the field compresses further than it first appears. Most attraction phenomena reduce to a small set of principles. Rewards produce liking. And proximity creates the conditions under which rewarding interaction can happen. Two engines, running in sequence. The richness of the field comes from the specifications, not the principles. For any given setting, what actually counts as rewarding? Who has the chance to encounter whom? And which features of perceivers and targets moderate the basic pattern? The next two sections take those questions up in turn. Similarity and reciprocity first, and then appearance.

About Advanced Social Psychology at UPI Study

Advanced Social Psychology (Psychology 310) is a self-paced online course of 85 video lessons in 12 chapters, from attitudes, persuasion and the self to prejudice, attraction and relationships, conformity and obedience, helping, aggression and social life online. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.

Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Psychology and social science courses Every course with PRO →

Compare: Social Psychology vs Sociology

Why take it here

Why students take Advanced Social Psychology with UPI Study

How other people shape what we think and doAdvanced Social Psychology explains how people think about, influence and relate to one another: attitudes and persuasion, the self, prejudice and intergroup conflict, attraction and close relationships, conformity and obedience, helping and aggression. It is a common upper-level course in psychology and sociology degrees.
Credit at a fraction of the priceThe same 3 credits can cost $750 or more at a US college. Here it is one payment, self-paced, with lifetime access.
Finish your degree soonerTransfer credits reduce the courses you still owe, so you can graduate earlier or lighten a heavy semester.
Strengthen an applicationA completed college-level course on an official transcript shows admissions and scholarship committees you can do the work.
Study on your own scheduleNo start dates, no deadlines. Watch the lessons, practice, and take the final when you are ready.
130,000+students helped with college creditsACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Where the credit goes

Universities that work with NCCRS

Advanced Social Psychology carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Thomas Edison State UniversityThomas Edison State UniversitySigned partnerUniversity of the PeopleUniversity of the PeopleSigned partnerCharter Oak State CollegeCharter Oak State CollegeSigned partnerStrayer UniversityStrayer UniversitySigned partnerColumbia Southern UniversityColumbia Southern UniversitySigned partnerIndiana TechIndiana TechSigned partnerPenn StatePenn StateWorks with NCCRSSouthern New Hampshire UniversitySouthern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRSSUNYSUNYWorks with NCCRS +many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →

Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.

FAQ

Questions students ask us

About The Pull Toward Others: How Attraction Works and What It Measures

What is interpersonal attraction in psychology?
Interpersonal attraction is one person's evaluation of another along a continuum from strong dislike to strong liking. More detailed accounts separate three components: liking, a general positive evaluation; respect, admiration for qualities such as competence; and the desire to associate, a motivational pull toward being near the person. These usually go together, but they can diverge, as when someone respects a colleague without particularly liking them.
What is the reward theory of attraction?
The reward theory of attraction says people like others who are associated with rewarding experiences. Lott and Lott, and Clore and Byrne, gave classic statements in 1974. Rewards can be direct, such as kindness, humor, or validation, or indirect, through association. People tend to like someone they meet in a pleasant setting even if that person did not cause the pleasantness, and dislike someone merely present during unpleasant events, a form of evaluative conditioning.
What did the Westgate study show about proximity and friendship?
The Westgate study showed that functional proximity strongly predicts who becomes friends. Leon Festinger, Stanley Schachter, and Kurt Back studied a housing complex for married students at MIT and published their findings in 1950. Residents whose apartments were near stairwells or mailboxes, places others had to pass, formed more friendships, while those at the ends of corridors formed fewer. The building layout created incidental contact, which led to interaction and liking.
How do psychologists measure interpersonal attraction?
Researchers use several families of measures. Self-report scales, such as Donn Byrne's 1971 Interpersonal Judgment Scale, are cheap but open to social desirability bias. Behavioral measures, such as seating distance, eye contact, or conversation length, are less reactive but harder to interpret. Physiological measures like skin conductance or pupil dilation detect arousal but not whether it is positive. Field and longitudinal studies add realism at higher cost, so many studies combine methods.

About the Advanced Social Psychology course

How many college credits is Advanced Social Psychology?
Advanced Social Psychology (Psychology 310) carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
How much does Advanced Social Psychology cost and what is included?
$250, paid once, with lifetime access: all 85 video lessons, a practice quiz after each, the graded work and final exam, and an official transcript when you finish. Students who want several courses choose UPI Study PRO instead.
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
UPI Study has signed partner agreements with universities such as Thomas Edison State University, University of the People and Charter Oak State College, and works with universities such as Penn State, SNHU and SUNY. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities. Use "Find my college" on this page to check yours.
How long does Advanced Social Psychology take?
It is self-paced with no deadlines. The 85 lessons total about 15 hours of video; most students add reading and practice time and finish in a few weeks to a few months, on their own schedule.
How are the exams done?
Quizzes and assignments are online in the course. The final exam is taken online with proctoring; a person on the UPI Study team checks assignments, usually within two days.
How do my credits reach my college?
When the course shows 100% complete, request the official transcript from your dashboard. It is sent to the college you name, and you can send it to more than one. Check your college first with "Find my college" on this page, or ask Athena.

Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Advanced Social Psychology.

85 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.

Enroll in Advanced Social Psychology →Download the syllabusEvery course with PRO →
Advanced Social Psychology
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →