Interpersonal Attraction and Relationships
Prosocial behavior includes the ways people help, connect with, and support each other. This section focuses on one key piece of that puzzle: what draws people together in the first place, and what keeps relationships going. Understanding attraction and relationship dynamics is central to social psychology because our bonds with others shape nearly every aspect of our social lives.
Factors Influencing Attraction
Several well-studied factors predict who we're drawn to. These aren't random; they follow consistent psychological patterns.
Proximity is one of the strongest predictors of relationship formation. You're far more likely to become friends (or more) with someone you see regularly. This works partly through the mere exposure effect: repeated exposure to a person (or anything, really) tends to increase your liking for them, even without meaningful interaction.
Similarity matters more than the old saying "opposites attract" would suggest. People are drawn to others who share their attitudes, values, and interests. This also shows up in assortative mating, the tendency to choose romantic partners who are similar to ourselves in traits like education, religion, or personality.
Physical attractiveness plays a role too, but not just in the obvious way. Attractive people tend to be perceived as smarter, kinder, and more competent, a bias called the halo effect. That said, people generally form relationships with others at a similar level of attractiveness. This is known as the matching hypothesis.
Reciprocity rounds out the picture. When someone likes you and shows it, you're more likely to like them back. Mutual self-disclosure (sharing personal information) builds trust and deepens attraction over time.
Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love
Robert Sternberg proposed that love is made up of three components:
- Intimacy: feelings of closeness, connectedness, and bonding
- Passion: physical attraction, romance, and sexual desire
- Commitment: the decision to love someone (short-term) and the plan to maintain that love (long-term)
Different combinations of these three components produce different types of love:
| Type | Intimacy | Passion | Commitment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nonlove | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ |
| Liking | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ |
| Infatuation | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ |
| Empty love | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ |
| Romantic love | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ |
| Companionate love | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ |
| Fatuous love | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Consummate love | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Consummate love, with all three components present, is what many people consider the ideal. But it's also the hardest to maintain. Many long-term relationships shift toward companionate love (strong intimacy and commitment, less passion), and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Fatuous love (passion plus commitment without real intimacy) can look intense but tends to be unstable because the partners don't truly know each other.
Social Exchange Theory
Social exchange theory treats relationships a bit like an economic transaction: people weigh the rewards (companionship, emotional support, fun) against the costs (time, effort, conflict, stress). You stay in a relationship when the rewards outweigh the costs.
Two key concepts refine this idea:
- Comparison level (CL): your personal standard for what a good relationship looks like, shaped by past experiences and expectations. If your current relationship exceeds your CL, you feel satisfied. If it falls below, you don't.
- Comparison level for alternatives (CLalt): how your current relationship stacks up against your best available alternative. Even if you're somewhat dissatisfied, you might stay if no better option seems available. Commitment tends to be higher when your CLalt is low.
Equity theory adds another layer. It's not just about total rewards; it's about fairness. Both partners need to feel that the balance of give-and-take is roughly equal. When one person feels they're putting in far more than they're getting back (or vice versa), dissatisfaction builds and both partners become motivated to restore balance.