Cognitive- relationship formation

What does the matching hypothesis propose?

• People tend to choose romantic partners who are more attractive than themselves.

• People tend to choose romantic partners of a similar level of physical attractiveness.

• People are attracted to partners who are completely opposite to them in personality.

• People are more likely to be attracted to partners based on wealth rather than appearance.

According to the matching hypothesis, what is the likely effect of choosing a partner who is perceived to be “out of your league”?

• Increased risk of rejection.

• Guaranteed acceptance.

• Higher self-esteem.

• Greater compatibility.

What concept explains why people avoid mismatched relationships?

• Cognitive dissonance.

• Cognitive consistency.

• Self-actualization.

• Attachment theory.

According to Walster et al. (1966), what was the aim of their study?

• To test the similarity-attraction hypothesis.

• To investigate if people date those with similar levels of physical attractiveness.

• To determine whether relationships are based on personality compatibility.

• To explore the role of wealth in relationship formation.

Which of the following is a key idea of the similarity-attraction hypothesis?

• People are attracted to individuals with opposite interests.

• People seek relationships with those who are similar to themselves.

• Physical attractiveness is the sole determinant of attraction.

• Social norms discourage relationships between similar individuals.

What result from Walster et al.’s (1966) study contradicted the matching hypothesis?

• Participants sought to date more attractive partners regardless of their own attractiveness.

• Participants showed no interest in physical attractiveness.

• Attractive participants expressed higher satisfaction with their dates.

• Participants only desired dates of similar social status.

How did Berscheid et al. (1971) modify Walster et al.’s (1966) study?

• They added questionnaires to evaluate social status.

• They introduced conditions with varying probabilities of rejection.

• They focused solely on physical attractiveness.

• They included long-term relationship evaluations.

What is one strength of Walster et al. (1966)’s study?

• It focused on long-term relationship outcomes.

• It included participants from a broad demographic.

• It had a large, gender-balanced sample of participants.

• It showed that attractiveness is not a factor in relationships.

What was the major limitation of the procedure used in Walster et al. (1966)’s study?

• It was based entirely on self-report data.

• It focused only on attractiveness and ignored other factors.

• The procedure was artificial and lacked ecological validity.

• The sample size was too small.

Markey & Markey’s (2007) study supports which hypothesis?

• Matching hypothesis.

• Similarity-attraction hypothesis.

• Social learning theory.

• Cognitive dissonance theory.