Beck's Social Psychology Page

Reference List

2007-10-28T03:14:00.000-07:00

References

Barber, N. (1998). Secular changes in standards of bodily attractiveness in American women: Different masculine and feminine ideals. The Journal of Psychology, 132, 87-94.

Baron, R.A., Byrne, D., & Branscombe, N.R. (2006). Social Psychology (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Baumeister, R.F., & Bushman, B.J. (2008). Social Psychology and Human Nature. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Breckler, S.J., Olson, J.M., & Wiggins, E.C. (2006). Social Psychology Alive. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Byrne, D. (1997). An overview of research and theory within the attraction paradigm. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 417-431.

Byrne, D., & Clore, G.L. (1970). A reinforcement-affect model of evaluative responses. Personality: An International Journal, 1, 103-128.

Cunningham, M.R., Barbee, A.P., & Pike, C.L. (1990). What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male and female facial physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 61-72.

Dittes, J.E., & Kelley, H.H. (1956). Effects of different conditions of acceptance upon conformity to group norms. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53, 100-107.

Festinger, L., Schachter, S., & Back, K. (1950). Social pressures in informal groups: A study of human factors in housing. New York: Harper.

Fraley, B., & Aron, A. (2004). The effect of a shared humorous experience on closeness in initial encounters. Personal Relationships, 11, 61-78.

Gangestad, S.W., & Scheyd, G. (2005). The evolution of human physical attractiveness. Annual Review of Anthropology, 34, 523-548.

Grammer, K., & Thornhill, R. (1994). Human (Homo Sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: The role of symmetry and averageness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 233-242.

Johnson, S. (2003). Laughter. Discover, 62-68.

Joiner, T.E. Jr. (1994). The interplay of similarity and self-verification in relationship formation. Social Behavior and Personality, 22, 195-200.

Kalick, S.M., & Hamilton III, T.E. (1986). The matching hypothesis reexamined. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 673-682.

Klohnen, E.C., & Luo, S. (2003). Interpersonal attraction and personality: What is attractive- Self similarity, ideal similarity, complementarity, or attachment security. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 709-722.

Langlois, J.H., & Roggman, L.A. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science, 1, 115-121.

Lehr, A.T., & Geher, G. (2006). Differential effects of reciprocity and attitude similarity across long versus short term mating contexts. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146, 423-439.

Mealey, L., Bridgstock, R., & Townsend, G.C. (1999). Symmetry and perceived facial attractiveness: A monozygotic co-twin comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 151-158.

Michener, H.A., & DeLamater, J.D. (1999). Social Psychology (4th ed.). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Saegert, S., Swap, W., & Zajonc, R.B. (1973). Exposure, context and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 234-242.

Singh, D. (1993). Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Role of waist-hip ratio. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 293-307.

South, S. J. (1991). Socio-demographic differentials in mate selection preferences. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 928-940.

Swami, V., Caprario, C., Tovee, M.J., & Furnham, A. (2006). Female physical attractiveness in Britain and Japan: A cross cultural study. European Journal of Personality, 20, 69-81.

Swami, V., et al. (2007). Male physical attractiveness in Britain and Greece: A cross cultural study. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147, 15-26.

Vaughan, G.M., & Hogg, M.A. (2005). Introduction to Social Psychology (4th ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia.

Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottmann, L. (1966). Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 508-516.

Hot or Not: A Social-Psychological Inquiry into Interpersonal Attraction and Attractiveness Perception.

2007-10-28T02:03:00.000-07:00

Question- Why are some people attractive? Discuss in relation to social psychological theories and research

Abstract.
A multitude of variables influence the perception of attractiveness in romantic and sexual relationships. Propinquity, similarity, personality and affect, reciprocity, reinforcement and physical attractiveness have been discussed as influencing factors of interpersonal attraction. Further, this blog asserts that attraction is influenced by cultural and societal context, by history, time and generational influences and by innate evolutionary drives. An integrational model is proposed, whereby the author theorises that interpersonal attraction depends on many interacting models, theories and research reports. Concept maps, examples and numerous models complete the analysis.

Introduction.
Attractiveness and interpersonal attraction are defined as the allure, magnetism or liking between two or more people (Breckler, Olsen, & Wiggins, 2006). This blog will analyse why some people are considered attractive, specifically within a romantic and sexual context. It will discuss the concepts of propinquity, similarity and the interaction between personality/affect and attraction. Next, reciprocity, reinforcement and physical attractiveness will be assessed. Factors influencing the perception of attractiveness will be analysed including: cross cultural, trans-generational and evolutionary variables. Finally, this blog will propose an ‘Integrational Model’ of attractiveness, theorising that many interacting theories and research findings can provide a comprehensive explanation of why some people are considered attractive.

Propinquity.
Propinquity is a potent catalyst of attraction. It is defined the nearness or proximity in physical or psychological space which creates the opportunity to meet another person (Vaughan & Hogg, 2005). Propinquity facilitates initial relationships and attraction creating familiarity and repeated exposure (Breckler et al., 2006).

Proximity Theory.
Close proximity to another includes a small functional distance and opportunity for continued interaction, which can significantly increase the likelihood of attraction (Sprecher, 1998). Housing research by Festinger, Schacter and Back (1950) found that people rated attraction, magnetism and friendship highest with those living on the same residential floor; rather than those living on other floors or distant buildings (Appendix A); this research evidence the potent effects of proximity on interpersonal attraction.

The Mere Exposure Effect.
The mere exposure effect is a theory explaining the tendency for people to come to like things simply because they see or encounter them repeatedly (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). Research highlights that repeated exposure to an individual increases attraction and favourabilty. One study by Saegert, Swap, and Zajonk (1973) determined that mere exposure in both positive and negative contexts increased interpersonal attraction. Saegert et al. found that an increased frequency of stimuli enhanced liking and interpersonal attraction. Repeated exposure to another increases the perception of attractiveness (Vaughan & Hogg, 2005).

Similarity.
Similarity of attitudes, values, personality or physical attractiveness is one of the most important determinants of attraction (Sprecher, 1998).

Attitude Similarity Effect.
The attitude-similarity effect is the idea that people find others more attractive and likable the more similar they are in attitudes, beliefs and preferences; including opinions and cognitions about current events, social and political issues, religion, morality, music, literature and similar personalities (Breckler et al., 2006). Research by Lehr and Geher (2006) found that participants presented with potential mates with similar attitudes, judged them as more likable and attractive than dissimilar mates (Lehr & Geher). The attitude similarity effect is prime example of similarity and attractiveness.

Matching Hypothesis.
People who are evenly matched in physical appearance, social background, personality, socioeconomic status, interests and leisure activities are significantly more likely to be considered attractive by their similar counterpart (Joiner, 1994). Matching hypothesis specifically elucidates that people are attracted to others who are similar in physical attractiveness (Kalick & Hamilton III, 1986) (Appendix-B).

Similarity is important in attraction because it produces cognitive consistency, reinforcement through positive outcomes, reinforcement through attitude validation and the high probability of reciprocity because of the perceived similarities (Michener & DeLamater, 1999). Correspondingly, personality and affect are also important determinants of attraction.

Personality & Affect.
Numerous theories and research studies suggest that personality and affect are the most important determinants attraction (Sprecher, 1998). As the attitude similarity effect suggests, similar or complementary personalities are most attractive (Klohnen & Lou, 2003). Research by Sprecher displayed that a desirable personality and friendly, warm and kind disposition were the most important determinants of attraction.

Affect, a person’s emotional state, is a further psychosocial variable of attractiveness perception. Related to personality, a positive affect and cheerful disposition have a direct effect on interpersonal attraction (Byrne, 1997). Byrne and Clore’s (1970) Affect-Attraction model highlights the relationship between positive and negative affect and interpersonal attraction (Appendix-C). Humor is a further powerful predictor of attraction, helping to strengthen social bonds and increase liking (Johnson, 2003). The Laughter-Attraction model highlights the relationship between humor and attractiveness (Fraley & Aron, 2004) (Appendix-D).

Reciprocity.

Reciprocity Theory.
The reciprocity principle is the tendency in people to become more attracted to those whom they believe are attracted to them (Lehr & Geher, 2006); we like those who like us and dislike those who dislike us (Vaughan & Hogg, 2005).
Reciprocation of liking has a powerful effect on attraction in romantic relationships and friendships; and is an important factor in finding a mate attractive (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008).

A classic study by Dittes and Kelley (1956) researched student’s attraction levels when given written evaluations that were either positive or negative; results showed that students who believed they were liked were more attracted to the evaluator than those who believed they were disliked (Dittes & Kelley). Reciprocity is also influenced by the Gain-Loss Hypothesis (Appendix-E). Reciprocity is an important psychosocial factor in the perception of attractiveness. A further factor is reinforcement.

Reinforcement.
Reinforcement theory asserts that people tend to be attracted to those who reward or praise them; or are present when one receives rewards (Michener & DeLamater, 1999).

Reinforcement Affect Model.
Reinforcement affect model is a model of attraction which postulates that we like people who are around when we experience a positive feeling. Byrne and Clore’s (1970) reinforcement affect model (Appendix-F) draws on classical conditioning, with paired positive stimuli and responses increasing and reinforcing liking and attraction.

Social Exchange Theory.
An extension of the reinforcement model is the social exchange theory, which analyses the costs and benefits of interacting with another, especially within a sexual attraction realm (South, 1991). Research has highlighted that such reinforcement rewards include sex, money, attention, respect, praise, love and enjoyment (Sprecher, 1998). Reinforcement is a strong predictor of attraction as it is pleasing to receive praise, rewards and positive feedback (Sprecher).

Physical Attractiveness.
Physical attractiveness is the combination of tangible characteristics that are evaluated as beautiful or handsome (Baron, Byrne, & Branscombe, 2006). Good looks have been found to outweigh many other factors of attraction (Walster, Aronson, Abrahams, & Rottman, 1966). Physical attractiveness is a far more crucial attractiveness variable for women than men; as it denotes youth, fertility and health (Walster at al.). Physical attractiveness includes facial and bodily features.

Facial Features.
The structure of the face, facialmetrics, involves the measurement of a large number of facial features to determine the proportions and measurements of an attractive face. Research by Cunningham, Barbee, and Pike (1990) found that men prefer women with large eyes, a small nose and chin, prominent cheekbones, high eyebrows, large pupils and a large smile. Research has also shown that women with pout lips and an even skin tone are considered more attractive (Barber, 1998). Cunningham et al. found that females preferred men with prominent cheekbones, a large chin, a wide smile and eyes that did not deviate from the average (Appendix-G).

Averageness theory holds that people who look different from the norm are generally regarded as less attractive (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008) (Appendix-H). Langlois and Roggman (1990) assert that evolutionary pressures and natural selection generally favour average rather than extreme population features; and the influence of prototypes and cognitive schemas bias people toward average, prototypical faces. Facial averageness is influenced by biological, cognitive, and mere exposure psychosocial factors in the perception of attractiveness (Langlois & Roggman).

Facial symmetry is the equilibrium or mirrored proportion of the human face, which is a strong determinant of physical attractiveness (Mealey, Bridgstock, & Townsend, 1999). Facial symmetry has been found to be important in conveying information about gender, sexual maturity, immune quality and genotypic quality (Mealey et al.). Computer-generated symmetry research conducted by Grammer and Thornhill (1994) found significant positive effects for facial symmetry and attractiveness in both males and females. (Appendix-I).

Bodily Features.
Male and female body shape and weight are asserted as important in the judgement of why some people are considered attractive.
Body shape is an important component of physical attractiveness and sex appeal. Typically, men prefer the classic hourglass figure in a women (waist hip ratio of .70) as it signifies youthfulness, good health and fertility (Singh, 1993). The typically desired body shape for men is the ‘triangle’ consisting of a waist hip ratio of 1.0 and larger shoulders (Singh) (Appendix-J). The judgement of attractiveness and weight is, however, largely determined by cultural context, time period and innate factors.

Factors Influencing Attraction.
Attraction, specifically physical attraction, is significantly influenced by the context of culture, time period and innate evolutionary factors. Research on female physical attractiveness was conducted by Swami, Caprario, Tovee, and Furnham (2006), which found that Japanese men preferred images of women with significantly lower Body-Mass-Indexes and were significantly more reliant on body shape than British participants. Additionally, research on male physical attractiveness across British and Greek participants asserts that Greek women show a significantly greater preference for a low waist-to-chest ratio and a smaller overall body weight than did British women (Swami et al. 2007). Cross cultural variances in attraction are explained through historical, societal, gender-role and socioeconomic contexts. The perception of why people are attractive is a complex and uncertain concept that is influenced by culture and time (Carr, 2003).

Attractiveness perception of females has also evolved through generations (Barber, 1998). Appendix-K provides a trans-generational analysis of attractiveness. The perception of attractiveness is also influenced by innate biological and evolutionary drives. Men are attracted to women who have biological markers of fertility, health, youth, high estrogen levels and good child bearing ability. Women are attracted to men who show signs of power, virility, aggression and wealth to supply resources (Gangestad & Scheyd, 2005).

Integrational Model.
A multitude of factors determine why some people are considered attractive. This blog hypothesises an ‘integrational model’ illustrating propinquity, similarity, personality and affect, reciprocity, reinforcement and physical attractiveness are important psychosocial variables in the perception of attractiveness. Integrational model suggests that attraction relies on the combination and interaction of psychosocial variables and asserts that these variables are influenced by factors such as culture, time and innate evolutionary drives (Appendix-L).

Conclusion.
In conclusion, many psychosocial variables determine the perception of interpersonal attraction (Concept Map-A) yet due to space restrictions, I have included what I believe are the most formative and integral components in attraction including: propinquity, similarity, personality and affect, reciprocity, reinforcement, physical attractiveness and factors influencing attractiveness perception (Concept Map-B). This blog has highlighted and discussed these variables through analysis of theories, models and research evidence. Interpersonal attraction and the perception of attractiveness is a complex construct, with myriad psychosocial determinants.

1547 words excluding references, headings, citations and appendices.

For information on theory, research, written expression and online engagement please see: Self Assessment.

For Reference List : Please Visit Reference List

Self Assessment

2007-10-28T01:54:00.000-07:00

Theory

* I have attempted to incorporate a breadth and depth of theories and models.

* I have analysed theories and models and included many of the models in the appendix. I have also formulated my own ‘Integrational Model’.

* I have included many theories and models of ‘attractiveness’ including Proximity theory, mere exposure effect, attitude similarity effect, matching hypothesis, reciprocity theory, reinforcement affect model, social exchange theory, and averageness theory.

Research

* I have attempted to incorporate a breadth and depth of research studies.

* I have integrated theory and research- detailing information about theories and evidencing them with appropriate research and references.

* I have an extensive reference list of 26 main references- evidencing a multitude of research reports and academic journals

* I researched the topic extensively- this can be seen with my clear evolution of thinking, extensive reference list and concept map A- showing a great understanding of the entire field of attractiveness.

Written Expression

* It is my belief that my blog has fluently expressed and analysed the ‘Attractiveness’ question.

* I believe that I have answered the question. Providing information on why some people are considered attractive and factual analysis of theories, models, and research studies.

* I have attempted to publish a smooth, easy to follow blog. I have an abstract, introduction which clearly highlights the direction of my blog, and headings throughout the blog. I have also given a definitive conclusion to my blog.

* Readability Analysis- I Received a Gunning Fog Index of: 17.21 I Received a Flesch Reading Ease of: 17.51

I understand that this is not as ‘desirable’ as hoped- yet I believe that my writing is academic yet simple and comprehensible. I have also formatted my blog to be highly readable.

Other Markers of Readability-
* I have included a meaningful, descriptive essay title
* I have included an abstract
* I have included subheadings
* I have included many figures to give a greater breadth of knowledge to my blog.
* I have included images and multimedia
* I have included appendices.
* Use of Examples- I have used copious amounts of examples- I have used pictures of well known celebrities that typify aspects of my blog. I have used models and diagrams to evidence and example many of the theories and research findings.
* I have included many Appendices to further explain, clarify or illustrate my findings.
* APA style- I have conformed to the APA standards throughout my blog- In text citations and referencing have been strictly adhered to.

Online Engagement

* It is my belief that I have had a high online engagement for blog 2.

* I chose my topic very early in the term, showing enthusiasm and preparedness.
* I have published many blogs throughout the term.
* I Have sought and gathered meaningful comments throughout the term. I have commented on the following peoples blogs:
-Beck’s Blog
-Bec’s Blog
-Bethany’s Blog
-Emma’s Blog
-Emily’s Blog
-Erin’s Blog
-Graham’s Blog
-Josie’s Blog
-Kim’s Blog
-Luke’s Blog
-Mike’s Blog
-Mrs Freud’s Blog

* In turn, I have received over 36 comments on my blog from other students and James. Which has assisted in the depth of my knowledge

* I have meaningfully replied to several of my comments- clarifying points, discussing ideas and assisting other students with blogging issues.

* I have published 16 bloggings- each time I have posted my essay have evolved and grown in depth and breadth. I have written meaningful insights, academic findings and published a draft introduction to get feedback on the progress and direction of my blog.

* I have read and noted many of my comments- and adapted my blog accordingly.

* I have certainly made effective use of multimedia- images, embedded video- I have posted a series of attractiveness videos, have posted the dove evolution of beauty campaign and have provided many photo’s to evidence the research that I have detailed.

* I Have received 3 * (Stars) on my blog which highlights that my blog has been active, regular and that I have had a clear evolution of thinking in weeks 8-15.

* I believe my online engagement to be extremely high. I have made MANY comments, suggested academic journals to other students, collaborated with students who are doing similar questions. I have made MANY blog postings and have effectively utilised the entire blog format- using video, pictures, polls etc.

I believe that I deserve at least a distinction + for my online engagement. I have been very active, enthusiastic and open throughout the semester.

Overall I believe that I have produced a meaningful, insightful and deep blog. I have detailed and discussed many theories, models and research studies. I have done a great deal of research on the topic and consider myself to be very knowledgeable on the entire ‘attractiveness’ topic. I am disappointed that I could not have written 3000 words, because I found so much valuable research and theory to include.

I have written a clear, concise, readable blog and have engaged, evolved and been enriched throughout the term. I believe that I deserve to do well, as I have put an enormous amount of effort into my blog.

Concept Map A

2007-10-27T23:20:00.000-07:00

Concept Map A indentities all psychosocial variables related to attractiveness perception.

It is included to evidence a depth and breadth of research and insight into the attractiveness topic.

Concept Map B

2007-10-27T23:03:00.001-07:00

Concept Map B identifies all psychosocial variables in the Attractiveness

Appendix A: Propinquity

2007-10-27T22:54:00.000-07:00

Some people are considered as attractive because they are easy to access, are exposed to the other frequently and have high probability of continued interaction.

Festinger, Schacter, & Back (1950) studied propinquity in apartments and determined that those closest were more likely to be attracted or liked.

Propinquity permits attraction because of familiarity, availability and expectation of continued interaction (Vaughan & Hogg, 2005).

The Festinger physical proximity experiment found those in apartments 1 and 6 interacted frequently; 5 and 10; and those next door to eachother.

References

Festinger, L., Schachter, S., & Back, K. (1950). Social pressures in informal groups: A study of human factors in housing. New York: Harper.

Vaughan, G.M., & Hogg, M.A. (2005). Introduction to Social Psychology (4th ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia.

Appendix B: Matching Hypothesis

2007-10-27T22:48:00.000-07:00

We tend to like those similar to ourselves: in physical appearance, social background, personality, socioeconomic status, interests and leisure activities.

We are more likely to be attracted to, and stay attracted to, those who match us in many domains (Joiner, 1994).

An example of a matched couple and mismatched couple follow.

Matched Steffi Graf and Andre Agassi- Similar age, physical appearance, race, interests (tennis).

Mismatched- Heidi Klum and Seal- Very different attractiveness levels (Heidi is a Victoria Secret Model), different race, 10 years age difference.

Joiner, T.E. Jr. (1994). The interplay of similarity and self-verification in relationship formation. Social Behavior and Personality, 22, 195-200.

Appendix C: Attraction-Affect Model

2007-10-27T22:39:00.001-07:00

Some people are considered attractive because they elicit a positive affect.

When any stimulus arouses an individuals positive affect, the stimulus is liked- positive arousal increases attraction.

The Affect-Attraction Model depicts the stimulus, emotional response and attraction response to positive and negative emotions.

Byrne, D., & Clore, G.L. (1970). A reinforcement-affect model of evaluative responses. Personality: An International Journal, 1, 103-128.

Appendix D: Laughter-Attraction Model

2007-10-27T22:21:00.000-07:00

Some people are considered attractive because they are humorous, make others feel at ease and make others happy.

Humor is not only pleasant but it also provides a nonthreatening way for people to interact. Laughter helps strengthen social bonds and serves as a social 'lubricant' that makes interpersonal behaviour function more smoothly (Baron, Bryne, & Branscombe, 2006).

The Laughter Attraction model by Frayley & Aron, 2004.

Fraley, B., & Aron, A. (2004). The effect of a shared humorous experience on closeness in initial encounters. Personal Relationships, 11, 61-78.

Appendix E: Reciprocity- The Gain Loss Hypothesis

2007-10-27T22:10:00.000-07:00

Some people are attracted to others who initially dislike them but then come to like them: This is referred to as the Gain-Loss Hypothesis.

We like those who are at first cold, but then warm to us.

Aronson & Linder (1965) proposed two explanations

* Anxiety Reduction- When experiencing rejection anxiety rises- when rejection changes to acceptance the anxiety is reduced so we experience the pleasure of being liked.

* We may describe those who like us from the start as undiscriminating and not discerning- those who we have to fight for are more of an acheivement.

Please refer to Gain Loss Hypothesis Figure

Aronson, E., & Linder, D. (1965). Gain and loss of esteem as determinants of interpersonal attractiveness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 156-171.

Appendix F: Reinforcement Affect Model

2007-10-27T21:57:00.000-07:00

Why are some people attractive-
Some people are attractive because they supply us with rewards, praise or benefits- which makes us associate them with pleasurable experiences (Michener & DeLameter, 1999).

A variation of reinforcement theory derived from learning is the reinforcement affect model (Byrne & Clore, 1970); drawn from Classical Conditioning, which asserts:

* People identify stimuli as rewarding or punishing and seek out the former while avoiding the latter.

* Positive feelings are associated with rewarding stimuli

* People can be liked or disliked depending on whether they are associated with positive or negative stimuli. (Vaughan & Hogg, 2005)

Byrne, D., & Clore, G.L. (1970). A reinforcement-affect model of evaluative responses. Personality: An International Journal, 1, 103-128.

Michener, H.A., & DeLamater, J.D. (1999). Social Psychology (4th ed.). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Vaughan, G.M., & Hogg, M.A. (2005). Introduction to Social Psychology (4th ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia.

Appendix G: Facial Features/Facialmetrics

2007-10-27T21:13:00.000-07:00

The structure and composition of the face is highly important for determining whether someone is attractive.

Facialmetrics is the mathematical and scientific calculation of an attractive face. The following images are examples of the way the face is divided into sections and assessed component by component.

Facial Features:

Women: Large Eyes, small nose and chin, prominent cheekbones, high eyebrows, large pupils, large smile, pout lips and even skin tone.

Celebrity Example: Carmen Electra typifies an attractive woman from the previous list.

Men: Prominent Cheekbones, large chin, wide smile, eyes that do not deviate from the average. Evolutionary theory also favours men who have bushy dark eyebrows and facial hair- as a sign of testosterone and verility.

Celebrity Example: Patrick Dempsey typifies each component of male facial attractiveness.

References:

Barber, N. (1998). Secular changes in standards of bodily attractiveness in American women: Different masculine and feminine ideals. The Journal of Psychology, 132, 87-94.

Breckler, S.J., Olson, J.M., & Wiggins, E.C. (2006). Social Psychology Alive. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Cunningham, M.R., Barbee, A.P., & Pike, C.L. (1990). What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male and female facial physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 61-72.

Appendix H: Facial Averageness

2007-10-27T20:49:00.000-07:00

Why are some people considered attractive?

People with average, typical faces are considered as highly attractive.

Many experiments have shown that composite faces are considered more attractive than real faces because they are average.

Consider the below example:

The images on the left are the Winner and Runner up of Miss Germany- The Right side is a composite of the top 10 place getters in Miss Germany 2005.

The Composite was considered to be significantly more attractive than any of the actual contestants. Because of her average, plain and typical features.

Facial averageness is influenced by biological, cognitive and learning factors.

Again, a composite of the Miss Universe 2005 contestants proved to be more attractive than the actual winner- survey's report.

References

Langlois, J.H., & Roggman, L.A. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science, 1, 115-121.

http://www.uni-regensburg.de/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_II/Psychologie/Psy_II/beautycheck/english/symmetrie/symmetrie.htm

Appendix I: Facial Symmetry

2007-10-27T20:33:00.000-07:00

Why are Some People Attractive:

Those people with symmetrical faces are considered highly physically attractive: from a fashion and evolutionary viewpoint.

Left Not Symmetrical; Right Symmetrical

Please View http://www.symmeter.com/ for a personal facial symmetry analusis of an uploaded picture of yourself.

Baumeister, R.F., & Bushman, B.J. (2008). Social Psychology and Human Nature. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Mealey, L., Bridgstock, R., & Townsend, G.C. (1999). Symmetry and perceived facial attractiveness: A monozygotic co-twin comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 151-158.

Appendix J: Bodily Features

2007-10-27T20:15:00.000-07:00

Why some people are considered as attractive is influenced by body shape and size- and the proportions of their body.

Women- Western women are considered attractive with a Small Waist, Large Hips and a Large Bust- A Waist Hip Ratio of approx .70. (Singh, 1993).

Left To Right: Ratio 0.70; 0.80; 0.90; 1.0.

Celebrity Jessica Alba has a .70 WHR- with measurements 34-24-34. She is considered an 'attractive ideal' in Western Society in 2007.

Men- are typically considered as attractive with a 'triangle' physique consisting of a waist hip ratio of 1.0 with large shoulders and chest.

Men: Ratio Left to Right: .70; .80; .90; 1.0.

1.0 is considered most attractive.

Celebrity Brad Pitt is considered to have an ideal male physique in Western Society in 2007.

Breckler, S.J., Olson, J.M., & Wiggins, E.C. (2006). Social Psychology Alive. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Appendix K- Trans-Generational Analysis.

2007-10-27T19:53:00.000-07:00

What are some poeple Attractive?

Some people are attractive because their generation, society or time period dictates who and what is attractive. Advertising, media, magazines, art, sculpture, celebrity- all dictate why some people are attractive.

Why and how some people are considered attractive has evolved throughout the generations (Barber, 1998).

The idealized Venus of Willendorf from 24000-22000 BCE was the epitome of fertility with large breasts, exposed reproductive organs and a swollen stomach, and by today’s standards would be considered obese- acting as the ideal for women of her era.

Botticelli’s ‘the birth of Venus’ from 1486 stands as a statuesque woman of large proportions with creamy skin and a soft, plump body. For centuries she was considered to have the ideal female figure.

Renoir’s ‘The Bathers’ from 1887 continued the ideal of large breasts, hips and significant fat deposits around the stomach and thigh areas.

Throughout the 1920’s and 30’s the thin, flapper look was the ideal, with short dark hair and masculine qualities: dictated by the depression, war etc.

Marilyn Monroe from the 1950’s reinstated the ideal of voluptuous, curvaceous bodies with her size 14 physique, curly flowing hair, which was considered as ‘sexy’ and ‘feminine’ by many.

Twiggy is the epitome of the 1960’s female physique landscape, with a thin frame, long legs, geometric clothing and hair and sullen face.

This thin is in ideal has carried throughout the 1970’s, 80’s, 90’s and today with models such as Kate Moss and Giselle Bundchen considered as attractive with very young faces, extremely thin physiques but still keeping the ‘hourglass’ shape.

References:

Information Sourced from:

http://www.diet-blog.com/archives/2007/04/15/female_body_shape_in_the_20th_century.php

http://www.healthbolt.net/2006/12/27/a-short-history-of-the-ideal-female-body/

Barber, N. (1998). Secular changes in standards of bodily attractiveness in American women: Different masculine and feminine ideals. The Journal of Psychology, 132, 87-94.

Appendix L: Integrational Model

2007-10-27T19:47:00.001-07:00

Integrational Model is the authors hypothesis of why some people are considered attractive. It asserts that an intgration and interaction of some or all variables results in interpersonal attraction.

Reference: Powell, R.C. (2007). Integrational Model- Social Psychology.

Matching Hypothesis and Celebrity Couples

2007-10-25T19:01:00.000-07:00

........................................................................................

...........................................................................................................................................................

Matching hypothesis asserts that people who are evenly matched in physical appearance, social background, personality, race, socioeconomic status, interests and leisure activities are significantly more likely to be considered attractive by their similar counterpart (Joiner, 1994;Sprecher, 1998). Matching hypothesis specifically elucidates that people are attracted to others who are similar in physical attractiveness.

I am going to include an appendix of some examples of matching hypothesis-

Let me know if there are any celebrities that you think are really matched or not matched at all.

Stefi Graf and Andre Agassi- Well matched- Similar looks, similar age, similar race (although different ethnicities), similar interests (tennis).

Seal and Heidi Klum- Not as well matched (on the surface at least)- A fairly large attractiveness discrepancy, 10 years age difference, different race.

Matching hypothesis is an interesting idea- Obviously seal and Heidi Klum have stayed together- perhaps it was reciprocity, reinforcement, or propinquity that initiated their attraction?

Let me know your thoughts.

Introduction- Attractiveness

2007-10-22T03:37:00.000-07:00

This is hopefully my introduction- just to give an idea of where my blog will go.

Let me know if there is anything else that should be included.

Attractiveness and interpersonal attraction are defined as the allure, magnetism or liking between two or more people (Breckler, Olsen, & Wiggins, 2006). Interpersonal attraction utilises a multitude of social psychological theories and research. This blog will analyse why some people are considered attractive. It will discuss the concept of propinquity including proximity, the mere exposure effect and balance theory. Next this blog will analyse similarity and attraction including the attitude similarity effect and matching hypothesis. Reinforcement and attraction will also be highlighted, discussing the reinforcement-affect model, social exchange theory and equity theory. The concept of reciprocity will be addressed, analysing reciprocity theory and the gain loss hypothesis. Further, this blog will discuss the relationship between physical attractiveness and attraction including theories of facial features and bodily features. Attractiveness perception will be discussed in a cross cultural and trans-generational context. Finally, this blog will propose an ‘Integrational Model’ of attractiveness theorising that many interacting theories and research findings can provide a comprehensive explanation of why some people are considered attractive.

Cross Cultural Perception of Attractiveness

2007-10-15T03:38:00.000-07:00

One issue that I have found particularly interesting is the differences and similarities in the perception of attractiveness across cultures.

Different studies have highlighted that across cultures and ethnic groups- attractiveness ratings differs.
* Cunningham, Roberts, Wu, Barbee, & Druen (1995) found a correlation Hispanics and Whites perception of facial attractiveness, but found that Asians were less influenced by sexual maturity and expressive features. (Exposure to Western media did not influence attractiveness ratings). It was also found that facial attractiveness was highly correlated between Whites and Blacks--- but a major difference in the perception of attractive bodies. The 'Blacks' (as the study calls African American & African participants) found a larger woman more attractive than the 'whites' (Caucasian participants).

* Swami et al (2007)- Male physical attractiveness in Britain and Greece- found that Greek women showed a stronger preference for a lower Waist to Chest Ratio and a smaller overall body weight. It is argued that gender roles are different in each country and that an attractive body for Greek women is a man with a muscular frame and V shaped torso. This is reflected in many ancient Greek art works and Greek culture- that masculinity and an athletic V shaped body is ideal.

* Swami et al (2006) Female physical attractiveness in Britain and Japan- found many cross cultural differences occur between British and Japanese perception of an attractive female body. Results showed that Japanese participants prefered images of women with significantly lower Body Mass Indexes than Britons. Results also showed that Japanese participants were more reliant on body shape than Britons when judging physical attractiveness. This journal discusses that Japanese people endorse an extremely thin body Ideal- Sociocultural Theory. They also argue western society may have influenced japanese perception of attractiveness.
Again, this study asserts that gender roles may be important in the perception of attractiveness cross culturally- One example from another example is:

2 distinct cultures Denmark (rich, less sex role stereotyped) and Portugal (poorer, more sex role stereotyped)- Finding Portugese subjects display a much stronger preference for traditional thin and hourglass females and V shaped males- perhaps this could apply for the Japanese predominance for a thinner female- and the importance of attractiveness in Japanese Culture.

Attractiveness not only changes from culture to culture.... but has also changed over time.

* Barber- documented the female bodily attractiveness standard for Miss america and Playboy over time... and also juxtaposed the body types of Women in Playboy (mens attraction magazine) and Vogue (womens fashion magazine) and showed that women in Playboy were far more buxom and curvaceous- which men found significantly more appealing.

Just a few of the interesting things that I have found...

Attractiveness perception appears to be fluid in some respects and stagnant is others.

Physical Attractiveness especially appears to be very very fickle....

Attractiveness- A rough draft. Why are some people attractive?

2007-10-06T20:34:00.000-07:00

Ok.. I thought i might give myself some direction and port a rough draft of what I am thinking of writing for my blog 2--- and some issues that have arisen.

ISSUE 1) What sort of attraction am I talking about. Is it just 'sexual' attraction, 'interpersonal' attraction, 'relationship' attraction, 'friendship' attraction...

I am thinking of stating that it will be 'interpersonal' attraction with a predominance towards intimate relationship attraction (as that is what most of the research is about).

THE BLOG

Abstract
Introduction- Introduce what attractiveness is, give direction for the essay.

PROPINQUITY
* Nearness or proximity in physical or psychological space which creates the opportunity to meet another person'.
* The likelihood of meeting, spatial ecology and functional distance. 'Westgate and Westgate West experiment- where it was found that proximity and physical closeness somewhat predicted relationships and friendships.
* Familiarity/Mere Exposure- Proximity generally leards to increased exposure and greater familiarity.
* Availability- People who live close by are accessible- and interaction requires little effort and rewards of interacting are low cost.
* Expectation of continued interaction- (Balance Theory)- It would be an uncomfortable experience not to get along with neighbours- greater interaction is anticipated. Berscheid experiment (1976) where university students rated higher attraction to someone who they perceived as a greater accessibility and continued interaction.

SIMILARITY-
Attitude similarity effect- the idea that peope find others more attractive and likeable the more similar they are in attitudes, beliefs and preferences.
* Compatible attitudes
* Self disclosure
* Matching Hypothesis
* Birds of a feather flock together v opposites attract
* Similar beliefs, morals, SES, status, edication, intelligence, personality- (Research)

RECEPROCITY-
* Liking begets reciprocal liking.
* If someone likes you, it is hard to resist liking that person in return.
* Mimicking (Confederate research study Chartrant & Bargh, 1999)
* Unrequited love

REINFORCEMENT-
The are attracted to someone who brings about favourable rewards for us.
* Reinforcement-affect model
*Social Exchange Theory
* Exchange or rewards including: goods, information, love, money, services, status.
* Equity Theory

BEAUTY
* Facial Symmetry
* Facial Features (eyes, nose, cheekbones, jawline, facial fat)
* Bodily features (Waist hip ratio; Body mass index; height)
* Body Odour (Pheremones, perfumes, foul odour)

CROSS CULTURAL AND TRANS-GENERATIONAL ATTRACTIVENESS
* Hopefully I will be able to incorperate some cross cultural and 'over generations or centuries' theories and research to highlight that 'why some people are considered attractive; is a plastic concept- a malleable construct that is ever evolving and being influenced by a multitude of variables.

At present I have some Britain v Greece male attractiveness study and Britain v Japan female sttractiveness study. I will also try to touch on the attractiveness of various ethnicities.
I also hope to incoperate an evolutionary social psychology flavour- indicating that many of the 'attractiveness' facets are believed to have an evolutionary heritage.

Thats all for now... Let me know if there is anything else that anyone thinks or wants me to discuss, please let me know. xxxx

Facial Symmetry- Piercings and Beauty Spots

2007-10-04T00:08:00.000-07:00

As we have all learned in social psych and cognitive psychology- our brains prefer a symmetrical face. Whether we agree with it or not, there seems to be a wealth of literature stating that facial symmetry is a sign of beauty.

There are two issues that i am perplexed by...

BEAUTY SPOTS (MOLES)- If facial symmetry is so important, then why do some of the most beautisul women in the world have beauty spots.. these are clearly not adding to the symmetry of the face.

Many 'beautiful' celebrities have beauty spots-- sarah jessica parker, angelina jolie, cindy crawford etc etc...

See the pictures below and decide whether you think the beauty spot makes a difference-

PIERCINGS- This time, a voluntary way to make your face non-symmetrical- Think fergie, Pink, Kelly Clarkson- Do you think it adds to their facial attractiveness or detracts from it?

What do you think about symmetry?

Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia about facial symmetry and evolutionary theory

Edler cited research supporting the claim that bilateral symmetry is an important indicator of freedom from disease, and worthiness for mating. Facial asymmetries and minor physical anomalies begin to appear early in embryonic development, mainly the first trimester of pregnancy, and can be a sign of instability during this growth. Fluctuating asymmetry (random differences between two sides, as opposed to the deliberate natural asymmetry in some animals) develop throughout the lifespan of the individual and is a sign of the phenotype being subjected to some levels of stress.
The ability to cope with these pressures is partly reflected in the levels of symmetry. A higher degree of symmetry indicates a better coping system for environmental factors. While the visible signs of this may not be particularly apparent, it is thought that they have at least a subconscious effect on people's perception of their beauty. Zaidel et al. in an empirical study upholds the claim that facial symmetry may be critical for the appearance of health. Their study disputes, however, the beauty or attractiveness claim.
Facial symmetry is neither the only trait nor is it necessarily the most important trait of what a culture considers attractive. The competing aesthetic theory of wabi sabi posits the existence of beauty through imperfection.

Why are some people attractive? I want your thoughts

2007-10-02T23:10:00.000-07:00

Based on last weeks lecture, what does everyone think about attractiveness.

How do each of the following principles apply to someone who you have been attracted to?

Propinquity- Mere exposure, proximity- kinda like the song "Love the one your with"

Reciprocity- Liking someone who already likes you. Settling...

Similarity- Similar attitudes, values, interests, beliefs etc..

Beauty- Waist Hip ratio, facial features, symmetrical face, youthfulness, ethnicity etc..

Economic Benefits- 'Social Exchange Theory' maximising benefits by associating with someone of high status, power, looks etc...

I believe that all of this influences us..

In my case, I was initially attracted to my boyfriend (although I was 15 at the time) for several reasons

* Reciprocity- he liked me, showed interest in me and I was flattered
* Propinquity- Lived in my home town, mutual friends,
* Beauty- he had characteristics that I found attractive- and are typically attractive for men- darker skin, prominent lower jaw, large shoulders in comparison to waist and hips, etc

Obviously personality also.....

But I think the similarity may be what has sustained the relationship- I did not know a great deal about him upon first attraction- but liked him more as i began to know him more.

If anyone has any thoughts on attraction/attractiveness please drop me a line.... Thanks

BY THE WAY... JUST F.Y.I...... I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THAT REAL BEAUTY IS ON THE INSIDE

Why are some people attractive... some preliminary social-psychological theory

2007-09-25T05:21:00.000-07:00

Ok... well enough fun with researching the beautiful people. I thought I had better outline my topic, and to the best of my current understanding, the variables that comprise attractiveness.

WHY ARE SOME PEOPLE ATTRACTIVE
* Propinquity- Being near someone. Procimity, Familiarity, Availability, Mere Exposure, Expectation of continued interaction.

* Reciprocity- We tend to like those who like us, and dislike those who dislike us. Mimicking

* Similarity- Tend to like others who are similar to us (especially attitudes, values). Matching Hypothesis, Reinforcement Theory.

* Beauty- Symmetry, Typicality, Body Shape, Facial Features, Ethnicity, youth... etc etc

THEORIES OF ATTRACTION
* Balance Theory- people like others who are similar to them because agreement is an affirming
experience involving positive affect.
* Reinforcement Theories- Behaviours that are reinforced tend to be repeated. Tend to be attracted to those who are rewarding.
* Social Exchange Theory- People are motivated to maximise benefits and minimise costs in relationships with others. Rewards eg love, friendship, sex... Costs eg effort, conflice, sacrifice.

There are a lot of social psychological variables to be discussed.
These are some of the main points I will be discussing.

Reference Bushman and Baumeister (2008)
Vaughan and Hogg (2005).

the human face - beauty 1\6

2007-09-24T02:01:00.009-07:00

the human face - beauty 2\6

2007-09-24T02:01:00.007-07:00

the human face - beauty 3\6

2007-09-24T02:01:00.005-07:00

the human face - beauty 4\6

2007-09-24T02:01:00.003-07:00

the human face - beauty 5\6

2007-09-24T02:01:00.001-07:00

the human face - beauty 6\6

2007-09-24T02:00:00.001-07:00

★☆★ The Dove self-esteem Fund

2007-09-20T00:53:00.001-07:00

This is an absolutley awesome video of attractiveness and modeling... take the minute to watch it and let me know what you think.
Its true.... no wonder our perception of attractiveness is distorted in the modern world.

Some ideas on Attractiveness

2007-09-20T00:13:00.000-07:00

ATTRACTIVE FIGURE

There are many theories and research studies centred aroung attractiveness and the body.

It has been found that attractiveness ideals cange across time periods and cultures

Examples across time:

“Rubens women” (1505) are an extreme example which portrays women not only consistent with the social trend at that time, but most likely reflected the personal taste of the painter. A glance at the paintings and sculptures of the old masters clearly shows that for centuries feminine figures which were once considered to be appealing, would be regarded today as being too large. Researchers have stated that in former times the ideal of attractiveness, or being fat, was considered to be a status symbol. Only the well-to-do could afford to eat well, while the poor remained slender from lack of food. However today, the supply of food is abundant and fat has lost its value of information as a sign of prosperity

This can be compared to women of today, who are considered attractive if they are slim, slender and less 'fleshy'.

The Waist Hip Ratio
Ratio of 0.6

Waist Hip Ratio of 0.7- This is considered the ideal in many western cultures

A waist hip ratio of 0.8

Devendra Singh, researcher specializing in attractiveness, carried out numerous investigations in the waist-to-hip ratio in the nineties. She discovered that all winners of the "Miss America contests" from 1920 until the 1980`s had a WHR between 0.72 and 0.69. She also found that playboy's models WHR was between 0.71 and 0.68. For decades the ideal waist-to-hip ratio was consistently 0.7, despite the changing body weight of these models. Thus, in spite of their different weight classes the beauty icons Marilyn Monroe, Sophia Loren, Twiggy and Kate Moss all had at least one thing in common - a WHR of about 0.7.

Characteristics of Beautiful Faces

Females

Characteristic features of the female "sexy face":
Suntanned skin
Narrower facial shape
Less fat
Fuller lips
Slightly bigger distance of eyes
Darker, narrower eye brows
More, longer and darker lashes
Higher cheek bones
Narrower nose
No eye rings
Thinner lids

Attractive Face Unattractive

Prototype Prototype

Male Faces

Characteristics of the male "Sexy face"
Browner skin
Narrower facial shape
Less fat
Fuller and more symmetrical lips
Darker eye brows
More and darker lashes
Upper half of the face broader in relation to the lower
Higher cheek bones
Prominent lower jaw
More prominent chin
No receding brows
Thinner lids
No wrinkles between nose and corner of the mouth

Attractive Unattractive

Prototype Prototype

Research can be found enormously influencing attractiveness-stereotype: The more attractive the presented faces were, the more successful, content, friendly, intelligent, socialble, accessible, exciting, creative and busy the persons were estimated. The opposite applies to unattractive faces: The more unattractive the faces were the more negative characteristics were attributed to the person.

Some Beautiful People.... Just to get you thinking

2007-09-10T20:51:00.000-07:00

I have chosen to do the Attractiveness question for my blog 2.

The question is "[Attractiveness] Why are some people attractive? Discuss in relation to social psychological theories and research. "

I have chosen this question because attractiveness is always something that has fascinated the superficial part of me.... I constantly find myself asking "Do you think that girl is hot?" or "What would you rate that guy out of 10".... and it is a topic I think we are all driven by at some time or another.

Research has shown that attractive people are more likely to get a job, to be treated more fairly or to be given more money.

Below are some photos of people who were ranked in the 'people' magazine most beautiful people 2006/2007.... hopefully by the end of this semester I will be able to tell you all why these celeb's make that list. xx

Attitude Change and the National Drugs Campaign

2007-09-04T19:56:00.000-07:00

Attitude Change and the National Drugs Campaign:
An exploration of the theories, models and persuasive paradigms.

Abstract.
Many factors determine the success of attitude change programs. Areas of initial attitude disruption, the message, the individual and persuasive techniques are explored through differing theories, models and research reports. The new Australian Government ‘Don’t let ice destroy you’ campaign has been chosen as a vehicle to highlighting and analysing important factors in attitude change program success. An integrational model is proposed, whereby the author theorises that the success of attitude change programs depends on the interaction of many theories, models, techniques and research reports. A concept map and a multitude of models complete this analysis.

Introduction.
An attitude is an individual’s evaluation of an object, message, issue or behaviour (Breckler, Olson, & Wiggins, 2006). This blog will highlight attitude change theories, models and research through analysing the areas of initial attitude disruption, the message, the individual, and persuasive techniques. The new Australian Government ‘Don’t let ice destroy you (ICE)’ (See Appendix C) attitude change program will be used to evidence, highlight and critique differing theories, models and research studies. Finally, this blog will propose an ‘Integrational model’ theorising that many interacting theories, models and techniques can provide a comprehensive attitude change program.

Don’t Let Ice Destroy You- Attitude Change Program.
The ICE campaign was launched on the 16th August 2007 in response to the illicit drug epidemic in Australia. An Australian Government research report (2003) highlighted that young people desired drug campaigns that were “Factual, balanced, non judgmental and delivered by experts with ‘real world’ drug knowledge”. The ICE campaign utilises this information, and effectively incorporates many models, theories and paradigms into its attitude change techniques.

Initial Attitude Disruption.

Research has shown by disrupting and creating discomfort in an initial attitude, change and openness to persuasion are more likely (Van-Overwall & Jordens, 2002).

Cognitive Dissonance Theory.
Cognitive dissonance theory, proposed by Festinger (1957), states awareness of inconsistencies in cognitions makes humans feel uncomfortable and unpleasant (Wood, 2000). Aaronson’s (1992) self concept dissonance theory furthered Festinger by asserting dissonance arises from inconsistent cognitions that threaten the competence, moral goodness and self integrity of ones self concept. Dissonance either results in rationalisation or motivation to change dissonant attitudes (Wood). The ICE campaign effectively utilises cognitive dissonance through the inconsistent cognitions of ‘drugs ruin lives’ and ‘I take drugs’; therefore leading to an attitude change. It also utilises Aaronson’s self concept dissonance theory by highlighting the effects of talking ice- moral goodness (ice tears families apart); and self integrity (ice users dig at their own skin; psychotic episodes). Cognitive dissonance theory is a powerful, underlying factor promoting attitude change as inconsistencies lead to discomfort, and thus change (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008).

The Message.
The information, cognitions about the message and method of message delivery influence the effectiveness of attitude change programs (Petty, Wegener, & Fabrigar, 1997). Various models and theories have been utilised by the ICE campaign to promote attitude change about illicit drug use.

Cognitive Response Theory.
Cognitive response theory (See Appendix D) assumes the effectiveness of a message in causing attitude change is determined by thoughts the message evokes (Breckler et al, 2006). Research has shown that a message inducing intellectual thoughts about the source and issue are more likely adopted by the audience (Cacioppo & Petty, 1985). Cognitive response theory asserts that a message containing strong arguments (providing compelling reasons for adopting the advocated position) elicits positive thoughts about the communicator, issue and message (Breckler et al.). The ICE campaign effectively highlights cognitive response theory in action; through strong dialogue, authoritative language and source, and a compelling issue and message.

Elaboration Likelihood Model.
The Elaboration Likelihood Model (See Appendix E) explains the process by which messages produce attitude change; through either a central or peripheral route. The ICE campaign utilises both routes. The central route relies upon careful analysis of information, a strong informative message and logical arguments (Michener & DeLamater, 1999). Research by Hosman, Huebner, and Siltanen (2002) highlighted that power of speech style and argument strength significantly impacted upon cognitive response, persuasion and attitude change. The ICE campaign effectively utilises central persuasive cues through strong narration, images reflecting the spoken message and informative language about the consequences of drugs. The peripheral route utilises non-cognitive, superficial cues: emotion, source and speed of speech (Vaughn & Hogg, 2005). The ICE campaign uses emotion (sadness- family abuse, disgust- arm sores, fear- legal implications); uses a trustworthy, expert source; and has a fast, knowledgeable pace. The use of both the long lasting central route, and easily persuasive peripheral route contribute to the success of attitude change campaigns (Scott, 1996).

The Yale Model of Persuasion.
The Yale model of persuasion (Janis & Hovland, 1959) explains that various message, source and audience factors are found to affect the extent to which people can be persuaded (See Appendix F). The Yale model details that message, source, and audience; through the process of attention, comprehension and acceptance; create opinion, perception, affect and action change (Vaughn & Hogg, 2005). The Yale model is a thorough summary of many attitude change components. The ICE campaign effectively explores all facets of the Yale model- the message, source, audience, process and outcomes.

The Individual.
The individual, both source and audience, can have an immediate effect on the success of attitude change programs (Wood, 2000).

The Source.
The source, the individual who delivers a message, can significantly impact upon the credibility, memory and respectability of a campaign. A credible source must have expertise, trustworthiness, powerful speech and fast dialogue (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). Research by Hovland and Weiss (1951) detailed that highly credible sources produced more opinion change than did less credible sources. The ICE campaign uses a highly credible source (Director of Emergency Medicine) that is trustworthy and has a high level of expertise in the relevant subject area; indicating a greater likelihood of attitude change.

Research has also found that people who speak rapidly are more persuasive than people who speak slowly (Miller, Maruyama, Beaber, & Valone, 1976). In the ICE campaign, the narrator talks fluently, quickly and with conviction. This conveys the impression of knowledge and expertise.

The Audience.
Characteristics of the target audience are involved in the effectiveness of persuasion (Mirchener & Delamater, 1999). Research has found that women are persuaded more easily than men (Cooper, 1979; Eagly, 1978); and those with low self-esteem are more easily persuaded into attitude change (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). It has also been concluded that age factors influence the success of attitude change programs; research by Krosnick and Alwin (1989) suggests a U relationship (See Appendix G), whereby young and old people are influenced most. The cultural background of the audience also assists in determining the success of attitude change programs. Research has found that individualist cultures (USA) prefer programs influencing personal benefits or personal goals; whereas collectivist cultures (Korea) advocate group cohesiveness and greater societal good (Breckler et al. 2006). The ICE campaign effectively utilises this knowledge appealing on both a personal level (physical harm, psychosis) and collectivist level (work productivity, family cohesion).

Persuasive Techniques.
Techniques of persuasion assist in determining the success of attitude change programs. Persuasive techniques include fear appeals, and persuasive paradigms.

Fear Appeals.
Many health promotion strategies are typically designed to elicit fear, yet are often ineffective in achieving desired attitude change (Job, 1988). Fear appeals elicit a feeling of fright or danger in an audience by creating stark warnings, publicising fearful outcomes or detailing explicit results (Breckler et al., 2006). Research has suggested fear appeals and attitude change have an inverted U shaped relationship (See Appendix H); attitude change lowest for no fear or intense fear, with most attitude change occurring for moderate appeals (Janis, 1967). Further research has shown fear appeals are persuasive if they do not petrify the audience with fear, if the audience is susceptible to the danger and the audience it informed how to avoid the danger (Rogers, 1983). The ICE campaign effectively utilises moderate fear: through explicit images, scenes and outcomes (family abuse, skin abnormalities, criminal behaviour); yet contains an overriding sense of choice, and room for positive attitude formation and change.

Persuasive Paradigms.
Many techniques of influence exist (Appendix I). The National Campaign Against Drugs effectively uses the technique ‘repetition with variation’, pursuing the same outcome in varied formats. The use of different ads for different drugs- Ice, Ecstacy, Marijuana, conveys the same message through varied formats and targeting different audiences. Research into repetition with variation shows that the use of different advertising methods leads to more positive attitudes and repetition of message with variation combats resistance to attitude change (Haugtvedt, Schumann, Schneier, & Warren, 1994). The ICE campaign also utilised the technique of ‘emotionally loaded words and images’ whereby emotional or striking words and images are used to create strong reactions, emotions and memorable effects. Research has shown this increases program awareness, recognition, memory and attitude change (Makosky, 1985).

Integrational Model.
A multitude of factors determine the success of attitude change programs. This blog hypothesises an ‘integrational model’ illustrating that an incorporation of attitude formation, message, source and persuasion techniques can determine the success of an attitude change program (Appendix J). Integreational theory suggests that attitude change program success relies on combining a multitude of persuasive techniques, models, theories and message and source characteristics.

Conclusion.
In conclusion, many factors determine the success of attitude change programs (See Concept Map B) yet due to space restrictions, I have included what I believe are the most formative factors that determine program success including: attitude formation and disruption, the message, the source and persuasive paradigms (See Concept Map A). This blog has highlighted these factors through an analysis of theories, models and research evidence. It has also given a vast array of examples from the National Drugs Campaign to evidence each theory, model and paradigm. Attitude change is a complex construct, with a multitude of different socio-psychological factors.

Theory, Research, Written Expression and Online Engagement: See Self Assessment

1489 Words- Excluding References.

References

Aronson, E. (1992). The return of the repressed: Dissonance theory makes a comeback. Psychological Inquiry, 3, 303-311.

Baumeister, R.F., & Bushman, B.J. (2008). Social Psychology and Human Nature. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Breckler, S.J., Olson, J.M., & Wiggins, E.C. (2006). Social Psychology Alive. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Cacioppo, J.T., & Petty, R.E. (1985). Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: The role of message repetition. In L.F. Alwitt & A.A. Mitchell (Eds), Psychological processes and advertising effects (91-111). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cooper, H.M. (1979). Statistically combining independent studies: Meta-analysis of sex differences in conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 131-146.

Eagly, A.H. (1978). Sex differences in influencability. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 86-116.

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson.

Haugtvedt, C.P., Schumann, D.W., Schneier, W.L., & Warren, W.L. (1994). Advertising repetition and variation strategies: Implications for understanding attitude strength. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 176-189.

Hosman, L.A., Huebner, T.M., & Siltanen, S.A. (2002). The impact of power-of-speech style, argument strength, and need for cognition on impression formation, cognitive responses, and persuasion. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 21, 361-379.

Hovland, C.I., Janis, I.L., & Kelley, H.H. (1953). Communication and Persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Hovland, C.I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-650.

Janis, I.L. (1967). Effects of fear arousal on attitude change: Recent developments in theory and experimental research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 166-224.

Janis, I.L., & Hovland, C.I. (1959). An overview of persuasability research. In C.I. Hovland and I.L. Janis (Eds.), Personality and persuasability (1-26). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Job, R.F.S. (1988). Effective and ineffective use of fear in health promotion campaigns. American Journal of Public Health, 78, 163-167.

Krosnick, J.A., & Alwin, D.F. (1989). Aging and susceptibility to attitude change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 416-425.

Makosky, V.P. (1985). Identifying major techniques of persuasion. Teaching of Psychology, 12, 42-43.

Michener, H.A., & DeLamater, J.D. (1999). Social Psychology (4th ed.). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Miller, N., Maruyama, G., Beaber, R.J., & Valone, K. (1976). Speed of speech and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 615-625.

National Illicit Drug Research (2003). Formative research with young Australians to assist in the development of the national illicit drugs campaign. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Petty, R.E., Wegener, D.T., & Fabrigar, L.R. (1997). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 609- 647.

Rogers, E.M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.

Scott, C.G. (1996). Understanding attitude change in developing effective substance abuse prevention programs for adolescents. School Counselor, 43, 187-195.

Van Overwall, F., & Jordens, K. (2002). An adaptive connectionist model of cognitive dissonance. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 204-231.

Vaughan, G.M., & Hogg, M.A. (2005). Introduction to Social Psychology (4th ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia.

Wood, W. (2000). Attitude change: Persuasion and Social Influence. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 539-570.

Self Assessment

2007-09-04T19:43:00.000-07:00

Theory

* I have attempted to incorporate a breadth and depth of theories and models.
* I have analysed theories and models and included many of the models in the appendix.
* I also tried to explore theories that were not covered in other people’s blogs- to demonstrate independent thinking.
* I have included many theories and models of ‘attitude change’ including cognitive dissonance theory, cognitive response theory, elaboration likelihood model and Yale model of persuasion.

Research
* I have attempted to incorporate a breadth and depth of research studies.
* I have integrated theory and research- detailing information about theories and evidencing them with appropriate research and references.
* I have an extensive reference list- evidencing a multitude of research reports and academic journals.
* I researched the topic extensively- this can be seen with my clear evolution of thinking and extensive reference list.

Written Expression

* It is my belief that my blog has fluently expressed and analysed the ‘Attitude Change’ question.
* I believe that I have answered the question. Providing information on the factors determining the success of attitude change programs. I have offered an original and factual analysis of theories, models, techniques and research reports.
* I have attempted to publish a smooth, easy to follow blog. I have an abstract, introduction which clearly highlights the direction of my blog, and headings throughout the blog. I have also given a definitive conclusion to my blog.
* Readability Analysis-
I Received a Gunning Fog Index of:15.48
I Received a Flesch Reading Ease of: 28.68
I understand that this is not as ‘desirable’ as hoped- yet I believe that my writing is academic yet simple and comprehensible. I have also formatted my blog to be highly readable.

Other Markers of Readability-
- I have included a meaningful, descriptive essay title
- I have included an abstract
- I have included subheadings
- I have included many figures to give a greater breadth of knowledge to my blog.
- I have included images and multimedia
- I have included appendices.
- Use of Examples- I have used copious amounts of examples from the National Drugs Campaign- highlighting theories, models and principles of attitude change.
- APA style- I have conformed to the APA standards throughout my blog- In text citations and referencing have been strictly adhered to.

Online Engagement

* It is my belief that I have had a high online engagement for blog 1.
* I submitted my blog feed very early in the semester (#6 on list of blog submissions)
* I published a test blog very early in the semester ( Wed 18th July 2007)
* I have sought and gathered many meaningful comments. I have commented on such blogs as
- Kelg85
- Bec Blair
- Clare Bear
- Michelle
- Beck
- Kara
- Josie
- Fiona
* I have meaningfully replied to several of my comments- clarifying points, discussing ideas and assisting other students with blogging issues.
* I have made relevant links to useful information- including a wikipedia article I found useful getting my blog started, the National Drug Campaign website and the Children See Children Do website.
* I have published several blog postings- and my attitude change essay has evolved because of my postings. I posted a social self blog- after discovering the difficulties of writing about myself- - I then began to blog about attitude change campaigns.
- I have read and noted many of my comments- and adapted my blog accordingly.
- I have customized the look, feel and readability of my blog. I adapted the fonts, colours and layout of my blog. I have added social psychology pictures to assist with the mood of my blog.
- I have certainly made effective use of multimedia- images, embedded video (children see children do, speeding no one thinks big of you, ice- don’t let it destroy you); I have also included a poll on my blog. I pride myself on the multimedia capacities of my blog.
- I have added a great deal of extra information about myself. My interests, the books I like, movies, music etc. I also added a photo of myself to encourage people to discuss social psychology in a ‘real world’ setting also.
- I believe my online engagement to be extremely high. I believe that I have been one of the ‘front running’ bloggers throughout this exercise. I have used multimedia, my blog has evolved throughout the semester, I have posted drafts, concept maps, pictures and ideas.
* I believe that I deserve at least a distinction + for my online engagement. I have been very active, enthusiastic and open throughout the semester. My Blog received two lightbulbs, indicating a superior, clear evolution of thinking.

Overall, I believe that I have produced a meaningful, comprehensive and clear blog. I am proud of the amount of work I have put in throughout the semester and believe that I deserve to go well, considering my originality, clear evolution of thinking, and online engagement.

Appendix B: Concept Map (All Attitude Change Variables)

2007-09-04T19:37:00.001-07:00

Appendix C: Dont Let Ice Destroy You

2007-09-04T19:34:00.000-07:00

Appendix D: Cognitive Response Theory

2007-09-04T19:30:00.001-07:00

Breckler, S.J., Olson, J.M., & Wiggins, E.C. (2006). Social Psychology Alive. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.

Appendix E: Elaboration Likelihood Model

2007-09-04T19:26:00.002-07:00

Vaughan, G.M., & Hogg, M.A. (2005). Introduction to Social Psychology (4th ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia.

Appendix F: Yale Model of Persuasion

2007-09-04T19:22:00.000-07:00

Janis, I.L., & Hovland, C.I. (1959). An overview of persuasability research. In C.I. Hovland and I.L. Janis (Eds.), Personality and persuasability (1-26). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Appendix H: Inverted U Fear Appeal

2007-09-04T19:12:00.001-07:00

Janis, I.L. (1967). Effects of fear arousal on attitude change: Recent developments in theory and experimental research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 166-224.

Illness- My Draft

2007-09-02T06:10:00.000-07:00

I have been quite sick the last few weeks, so tonight I will be posting an outline of my blog.

I will have my blog ready in just a few days, but this will have to suffice for now.

I have unfortunately had to abandon Children See Children Do… there was just too much information to convey- and not enough words to do it in.

My Plan:

Introduction: Introduce what I will do, where my blog is going. Define attitudes.

Don’t Let Ice Destroy You- Attitude Change Campaign: Describe the attitude change campaign that I will be using as an example. Discuss findings from initial research reports about campaign.

Initial Attitude Disruption: Discuss cognitive dissonance theory and its importance in attitude change. Provide examples from the ICE program.

The Message: Discuss the next factor of attitude change- the message. Cognitive reponse theory, elaboration likelihood model and the yale model of persuasive communication.
Provide evidence with research studies and examples from Ice campaign

The Individual: Discuss the source- expertise, trustworthiness etc.
Discuss the audience- age, culture, gender, self-esteem etc.

The Techniques: Fear appeals and persuasive techniques including repetition with variation and emotionally loaded words and images.

Conclusion- Final conclusions.

Appendix- I will include the various models I have detailed in my blog.

I am nearlly finished my final draft.

Have all the other attitude changers found just an immense amount of information- and an inability to pack it all into the 1500 word limit??

I have just decided to include the models/theories/techniques that I believe best contribute to the success of attitude change programs.

Good luck to everyone on getting your blogs in on time.... I think there will be a fair amount of caffine consumed tonight by the looks of some blogs. he he......

xxxx

New Concept Map

2007-08-30T19:32:00.000-07:00

I thought I had better post a proper concept map- about all of the ideas behind attitude formation and attitude change. so here it is....

Once again click on it and it will appear in a new window much larger.

Let me knowif there is anything else I should be including. xx

My Draft Concept Map: Attitude Change

2007-08-28T20:41:00.000-07:00

I am still trying to perfect the posting of the concept map- if you click on the concept map it will open up in a new page and appear much more clearly.

Don't let ice destroy you

2007-08-27T02:25:00.001-07:00

An example of the new Drug Campaign. This ad is more authoritative, using a 'credible source', and a more central route to persuasion. It also uses pretty confrunting 'scare' tactics.

Just an example from the teenage booklet against drugs

2007-08-23T07:08:00.000-07:00

It is interesting to see the factual information: the dot points and concise drug info. It is also interesting to see the use of an advocate who is a DJ- someone who can easily appeal to the target audience....

New Drug Campaign- Released 16th August 2007

2007-08-23T06:46:00.000-07:00

After doing fair bit of research, looking for journals and evaluations- I am finding a great deal on drugs and attitude change.

If anyone has a spare minute to watch this commercial or you may have already seen it; it is very powerful... here is the URL: http://www.drugs.health.gov.au/internet/drugs/publishing.nsf/Content/resources-for-parents

The entire campaign launched by the Australian government is proving to be very comprehensive- with booklets for teenagers with very 'modern' graphics and urban design. It details the consequences of all drugs, socially, physically and neurologically.

There are also information booklets for parents detailing 'how to talk to your kids about drugs' which apparantley will be coming to every household in Australia. This appears to be a MASSIVE campaign by the Australian government.

I know my ideas are rapidly changing..... but I am considering a juxtaposition between this campaign and the children see children do campaign-
They have some definite similarities
* Looking at social problems (drugs/abuse) from a childs perspective
* Addressing both children and parents
* Placing an emphasis on effective parenting!

Yet, the two campaigns use different attitude change ideas, sources, persuasive techniques etc...

I am unsure how I might structure my blog.... perhaps detailing one campaign and the techniques it uses--- then the other campaign and its techniques for attitude change- and then finally evaluate the effectiveness of both- comparing and contrasting the techniques and differences.

I will also try to incorperate some research to evidence all of the techniques I will highlight.

If anyone has any input--- please dont hesitate to pop something down..... Im only 2nd year so I could do with some help. :)

My Blog--- Some ideas

2007-08-17T23:39:00.001-07:00

Ok, after a great deal of to-ing and fro-ing i think I may have come up with my idea for my essay/blog.

I will look at question 2- What factors determine the success of attitude change programs? Describe theoretical bases and research evidence about key elements underlying attitude change programs. Include examples from a current or recent social change program-

I will mainly discuss the various social change, attitude change and persuasion techniques highlighted in the textbook and from other academic sources; which will include:
Theories and Models including
* Cognitive Dissonance
* Elaboration Likelihood Model
* The Communication-Persuasion Paradigm

Techniques including
* legitimisation of paltry favours
* disrupt then re frame
* Repetition with variation
* Fear Appeals
* Cinematography/music

I will evidence each technique (hopefully) with some social psych research/journal articles that give insight into why/why they are not successful techniques.

I will use two examples throughout the blog to evidence and clarify the techniques and strategies used. One is a television/radio/poster campaign called "Children see children do" (see below blog for tv ad). The other is "Every Child is important" a government funded campaign to stop child abuse; which used campaign launches, booklets, websites, government publicity and radio/television ads.

I wanted to use two campaigns that were similar in content and subject areas, yet wanted two completely different approaches to child safety/parenting/child abuse, from different agencies and sources.....

Any thoughts/ideas/comments would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks! xxxxx

Test Blog

2007-07-18T01:04:00.000-07:00

This is a test blog posting