Attraction—we know it when we feel it.  And it is not all about looks.  If you were to name the top five people you love to spend time with, it is highly unlikely your list would reflect merely the five most physically attractive people you know.  

We all have people in our lives that make us feel happy; people we love to be around.  On the flip side, there are people we try to avoid, because they make us feel stressed and emotionally drained.  What accounts for the difference?  Perhaps no surprise, it has nothing to do with the way they look.

Affection, Affiliation, and Affective Presence 

A major factor in our attraction to others is the way they make us feel. We are drawn to people who make us feel happy, hopeful, and optimistic, and when they are gone, we want to see them again.  Research reveals how this works.  

Noah Eisenkraft and Hillary Anger Elfenbein, in a piece entitled "The Way You Make Me Feel” (2010) examined the manner in which people affect the way others feel.[i]Examining data from 48 groups, they found evidence to suggest that there are consistent, individual differences in the emotions people feel, known as trait affect, as well as in the emotions people elicit in others, known as trait affective presence. 

After controlling for emotional contagion, they report that the different emotions people feel is due to trait affect and trait affective presence. They found positive affective presence to be linked with greater “network centrality”--reflected in the number of individuals who listed the participant as a “close friend,” and negative affective presence linked with greater extraversion, but lower agreeableness.  

Eisenkraft and Elfenbein note that their results illustrate “partner effects” within social interaction, described as “the behavior and feelings that one elicits in others and, consequently, the footprint that one leaves behind.” 

Finding that affective presence goes beyond emotional contagion, they recognize that emotion elicited is not just about catching the emotions others are experiencing.   They suggest mechanisms of transmission may include differences in expressive style—non-verbal cues for example, as well as patterns of interpersonal behavioral –such as acts of warmth or dominance.  

Eisenkraft and Elfenbein opined that their evidence for trait affective presence was especially strong because they examined how people felt when they were with close acquaintances in different settings, as opposed to how participants interacted with strangers. The impact of affective presence between strangers was tested by subsequent research.

Affective Presence Prompts Romantic Interest

Raul Berrios et al. in a study entitled “Why Do You Make Us Feel Good?” (2015) examined how affective presence affects romantic interest.[ii]  They had forty people participate in a speed-dating event where they “dated” six or seven partners of the opposite sex.  

Using a social relations model analysis, they confirmed that participants were more likely to want to see dates again when the dates had greater positive affective presence. Thus, creating positive emotions appears to promote romantic attraction. 

Among other conclusions, Berrios et al. found that regarding emotional disposition and skills, people who work to improve their own emotions and are tuned in to the emotions of others are more likely to elicit positive emotions in other people.  Interestingly,however, they found that people who create positive emotions in others do not necessarily experience positive emotions themselves.

Regarding personality traits, they found agreeableness and extraversion were the two traits linked with positive affective presence. They note that agreeable people are engaging and considerate, and thus would be expected to elicit positive emotional responses in others.  

The link between extraversion and positive affective presence, however, was unexpected, given that the previous research by Eisenkraft and Elfenbein (2010) found extraversion to be linked with negative affective presence.  Berrios et al. suggest that perhaps the difference has to do with the different types of interpersonal interactions in the two studies.  Their speed-dating event might have elicited positive emotion in the extraverts, which might have prompted reciprocal positive emotions from interaction partners.  

The Way You Make Me Feel

Thankfully, attraction is apparently more than skin deep.  It involves not only how we look, but the way we make others feel.  In attracting and bonding with others, agreeableness and emotional regulation prompt positive emotions, and predict relational success.  

 

Subtitle: 

Research reveals how attraction to others is really about us

Blog to Post to: 

Why Bad Looks Good

Teaser Text: 

There are some people you love to be around. They make you feel positive and happy. Research reveals that attraction to others is not all about the way they look.

Teaser Image: 

Mature Audiences Only: 

Images: 

Content Topics: 

Display on News: 

Approved for Facebook Instant Articles: 

0

Reference: 

[i]Eisenkraft, Noah, and Hillary Anger Elfenbein. "The Way You Make Me Feel: Evidence for Individual Differences in Affective Presence." Psychological Science 21, no. 4 (2010): 505-10.

[ii]Berrios, Raul, Peter Totterdell, and Karen Niven. “Why Do You Make Us Feel Good? Correlates and Interpersonal Consequences of Affective Presence in Speed‐dating.” European Journal of Personality 29, no. 1 (2015): 72–82. 

QScore Date: 

Secrets.  Everyone has them.  The personal issues people keep to themselves range from traumatic memories, to embarrassing gaffes, to personal proclivities.  Yet in many cases, even with the most sensitive information, people crave the opportunity to share their secrets, in order to relieve stress. 

In a prior column I discussed the demonstrated value of sharing secrets.   Confiding secrets can be cathartic, liberating, and reduce emotional distress by affording an opportunity to talk through painful issues, problems, or traumatic memories.  The challenge, is audience selection.  

Because secrets, by nature, are private, personal, and sometimes painful, you must choose your audience carefully, in order to have confidence in your confidants.  

Confiders Beware: Audience Selection

When you want to share a secret, seeking an audience that is both receptive and reliable, attentive and trustworthy, is often easier said than done depending on your social network. 

As a starting point, when sharing sensitive information, trusted friends, family, and spouses can be powerful sounding boards and sources of social support; casual acquaintances are probably not your first choice.  And long gone is the antiquated “strangers on a train” phenomenon, where 30 years ago, we might have shared private details with someone we met while traveling, whom we never expected to see again.  Nowadays, people you meet on a train (bus, plane, Uber pool, etc.) will probably be Facebook friends and LinkedIn connections by the end of the journey.  

And given the networked world in which we live, after you have unloaded your private baggage, you don´t want to worry about your choice of recipient sharing the information with others (God forbid on social media), or using it against you in some fashion.  

So when you need to share a secret, whom should you tell?

Choosing Confidants with Confidence

Consider the people on your contact list, with their respective range of personalities and dispositions.  If you had to choose one of them to confide in, whom would you pick? If you can envision one or more good candidates, congratulations on having an excellent support system.  But if no one in particular comes to mind, especially if you have a secret that is particularly delicate, traumatic, or otherwise troublesome to think about, in narrowing the field of potential confidants, what criteria would you use to separate the trusted from the distrusted? 

Interestingly, there appears to be some degree of consensus regarding what types of people we choose to confide in. 

Personality Traits of Trusted Confidants

Michael L. Slepian and James N. Kirby in a piece entitled "To Whom Do We Confide Our Secrets?"(2018) explored the question of what types of people we are most likely to confide in.[i] They focused their predictions on four areas: compassion, politeness, enthusiasm, assertiveness, recognizing that research notes that most variation with respect to interpersonal behavior and experience is reflected in what they describe as their two higher level domains: extraversion and agreeableness.

In their research, Slepian and Kirby asked participants about secrets others had confided in them. They included 14 categories: “(a) infidelity, (b) sexual orientation, (c) abortion, (d) victim of sexual assault, (e) engaged in physical abuse, (f) dealt with mental illness, (g) having a sexually transmitted disease (STD), (h) cheated at work, school, or finances, (i) lost a large sum of money, (j) having a drinking problem, (k) drug abuse, (l) addiction (other than alcohol or drugs), (m) committed a crime, and (n) religious beliefs.”

The traits that positively predicted how many secrets the study participants were told were compassion and assertiveness.  The traits that negatively predicted how many secrets they were told were enthusiasm and politeness.

Breaking down these personality traits, they note that both compassion and politeness are related to agreeableness.  But the traits have very different definitions.  They describe compassion as “empathy and desire to help,” and politeness as “concern with social norms and social rules.”  

They further note that both assertiveness and enthusiasm are related to extraversion, but these traits are defined very differently also. They describe assertiveness as “having the agency and drive to help,” whereas enthusiasm is “positive sociality.” Many people might be reluctant to share a secret with an extroverted friend or colleague who is the proverbial “life of the party,” and be more comfortable disclosing to someone who is more serious and less gregarious.

Slepian and Kirby note that unlike assertiveness, enthusiasm specifically involves experiencing positive emotions.  They suggest that future research should examine whether people prefer not to confide in enthusiastic people because they perceive them as less qualified to handle a serious, unpleasant issue, or to avoid “bringing them down.” 

Receptive, Reliable Receivers 

Although apparently many people feel most comfortable confiding in compassionate, assertive individuals, only you are able to personally judge the individuals within your support system.  If you decide to share a secret, make sure you exercise caution in choosing confidants, utilizing both discretion, and discernment.

Subtitle: 

Research reveals how to chose your audience carefully

Blog to Post to: 

Why Bad Looks Good

Teaser Text: 

Do you have a secret you would like to get off your chest? If so, whom should you tell? Research has some answers.

Teaser Image: 

Mature Audiences Only: 

Images: 

Content Topics: 

Display on News: 

Approved for Facebook Instant Articles: 

0

Reference: 

[i]Slepian, Michael L, and James N Kirby. "To Whom Do We Confide Our Secrets?" Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 44, no. 7 (2018): 1008-023.

QScore Date: 

Born to Bond 

We are instinctively drawn to others with whom we share similar traits, interests, or even life experiences.  Meeting someone from the same hometown, who shares the same hobbies, or even the same birthday or wristwatch has been shown to increase liking.  But what about meeting someone with whom we share an interest that is unusual or unique? 

A substantial body of research reveals we are attracted to people we perceive as similar to ourselves. Among shared traits, however, there are apparently some that attract us more than others.  Consequently, a more focused issue relates to the extent of interpersonal similarity—particularly when the similarity concerns a trait, attitude, or interest that is uncommon.  

Sure enough, research distinguishes between bonding over traits that are widely shared, versus those that we uniquely share with a select group of others.

Unusual Birds of a Feather: The Attraction of Shared Rarity  

Hans Alves, in a piece entitled “Sharing Rare Attitudes Attracts” (2018), examined the types of shared attitudes that cause individuals to bond more quickly.[i]  He begins by recognizing prior research establishing that people are attracted to each other when they share even incidental similarly—such as a name, birthday, or type of fingerprint.  He then goes on to discuss the impact of shared rarity, as prior research indicates it appears to be rare but not common incidental similarity that enhances interpersonal attraction and increases compliance.  

He cites the example of being told you share a fingerprint type with another person, and liking them when told sharing the type was rare, but not when told sharing the type was common.  In explaining this phenomenon, he cites the previously established concept of “unit relationship,” where people bond through sharing an attribute that is not shared by others. 

One example he cites from prior research is two Californians viewing themselves in a unit relationship if they meet in North Carolina, but not if they meet in Los Angeles.  Many travelers can relate to this phenomenon—particularly in meeting people from our hometown when we are far away from that location.  Perhaps the farther away we are, the stronger we feel a connection. 

Alves gives another practical example: sharing that you like The Beatles, a preference you likely share with many others of all age groups in an era of easily accessible music.  He contrasts this with meeting someone who shares your passion for a virtually unknown musical artist, a scenario that is much more likely to spark further conversation.  

These same principles apply to many different types of interests, which no doubt explains why we are drawn to others with whom we appear to share unique tastes.   But how exactly does this work?

Rarity Likes Company

Many people feel comfortable in the company of similar others—particularly when they share views or values.  Alves notes that the basic human need to affiliate may lead people to seek validation through others who share their attitudes.  Because individuals might fear being ostracized if they believe they are the only one who holds a certain view, meeting a kindred spirit can prompt a feeling of belongingness, particularly when meeting someone who shares an attitude that is not common, but rare.  

Alves´ research sought to explore the explanation for the dynamics of shared attitudes, both rare and common, across domains that are likely to come up in conversation when meeting strangers either on or offline.

Recognizing that dating websites and other social media platforms rely on users bonding through shared interests, Alves compared sharing common interest versus sharing rare interests.  He compared shared interests in hobbies, movies, and musicians, as well as recent “likes” of Facebook pages, and examples of common and rare interests related to movies, musicians, hobbies, travel, reading, and food/beverages.

Consistent with his hypothesis, across all experiments, he found that sharing rare interests has the potential to elicit stronger interpersonal attraction than common interests. He notes this finding might have important implications to using online dating services.  

Relationship Building: Rating Rarity

The allure of rarity is a double-edged sword.  As a prosecutor, I am well aware of deviant websites geared to the criminally minded who share dangerous views that are socially and legally unacceptable.  On the other hand, even websites dedicated to sports, faith, food, pets, and other wholesome interests, which are wildly popular because they bring people together through shared interests, demonstrate that more unique interests spark a more passionate band of followers.  Extreme sports, exotic travel, and specialty cooking are examples of non-deviant, unique interests that may energize and solidify the bond among group members.

Research, which indicates that shared rarity can increase interpersonal interest, liking, and bonding, should be considered within the broader context of relationship formation. The caveat in any scenario where we are meeting new people, is to verify the veracity of information shared. Someone who really does share your passion to visit Machu Piccu is more likely to be a frequent traveler than someone without a passport.  Trust but verify, and socialize with discernment. 

Subtitle: 

Research reveals the allure of uncommon traits

Blog to Post to: 

Why Bad Looks Good

Teaser Text: 

Do you bond easily with others who share your interests? Here is when sharing uncommon traits may be uniquely seductive.

Teaser Image: 

Mature Audiences Only: 

Images: 

Content Topics: 

Display on News: 

Approved for Facebook Instant Articles: 

0

Reference: 

[i]Alves, Hans. “Sharing Rare Attitudes Attracts.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 44, no. 8 (2018): 1270–83. 

The Seduction of Similarity

Have you ever met someone at a social event and realized you share an uncommon interest or trait? Maybe you both collect stamps from Romania, still play Monopoly, or share an uncommon food preference.  “You like Tabasco sauce on pizza, me too!” 

If this has ever happened to you, you may have felt a special bond immediately, based on the shared patch of common ground alone.  How does this happen?  And are some types of shared traits or interests more attractive than others? Research reveals some answers.

The Significance of Shared Tastes 

Jacques Launay and Robin I. M. Dunbar in “Playing with Strangers” (2015) investigated the impact of different types of similarity on interpersonal attraction when meeting strangers.[i]

They began by discussing the concept of homophily, defined as our human tendency to affiliate with similar others.  They sought to delve deeper into this concept, exploring the influence of different types of similarity, such as taste in music, age, or ethical viewpoints, on the way we feel about strangers who share our traits or views.

They conducting two online studies where participants were introduced to virtual partners with whom they shared traits.  They discovered that a greater numbers of shared traits led to increased liking of the virtual partner, as well as ratings on the “Inclusion of Other in Self scale.”  

The similarities Launay and Dunbar identified that were consistent predictors of these two measures were shared tastes in 1) music, 2) religion, and 3) ethical views.  They described the significance of their findings, explaining that these types of traits “are likely to be judged as correlates of personality or social group, and may therefore be used as proxies of more in-depth information about a person who might be socially more relevant.” 

Regarding the respective significance of different types of similarity, they note, for example, that shared occupation can be a starting point in terms of sparking conversation, but their research suggests people do not value this type of homophily as much as they value information on shared tastes.  They explain that when it comes to forming relationships, homophily provides a sense of shared character traits, not just a broad membership category to which both parties happen to belong.  

Shared Tastes Are Not Equally Alluring

Whether we are interested in marathon running, downhill skiing, or crime drama binge watching on the couch, we frequently meet others who share our passions.  Hobbies in general, however, do not provide the type of bonding as do other forms of more specific commonality.  

In finding taste in music, political views, ethical views, and religion to be the best predictors of affiliative behavior, Launay and Dunbar explain that these factors provide insight into our social group and viewpoints.  Hobbies do not.  They note that hobbies usually reflect personal interests as opposed to community loyalties.  They suggest that testing particular hobbies associated with different social groups, like sports associated with different types of classes, might be more significantly tied to positivity in affiliation. 

In addition, recognizing that their research focused on forming new relationships rather than established relationships, they reported that sharing hobbies or interests, and sharing a sense of humor, did not appear to be relevant in forming new relationships, although previous research showed that they were indeed predictors of emotional closeness within established relationships.  They explain this distinction might indicate that homophily based on these traits may be more important to relational maintenance than formation.

Musical Preference Promotes Relational Harmony 

Because one of the most positive areas of common ground was music, Launay and Dunbar sought to explain its significance.  They report that when meeting strangers who share our musical tastes, we are more inclined to like them and to feel close to them.  Why is this?  The authors explain that one view holds that music taste is related to other personality features as well as social identity.  

Consequently, people may assume they can interpret identity from musical taste, which can forecast the type of relationship we might form with a stranger.  They also cite one perspective regarding the evolutionary function of music and its role in forming social bonds, which could suggest that people who share musical tastes sense a stronger perception of solidarity.   

The takeaway?  Are concerts and music festivals the best way to meet kindred spirits? Research suggests that wherever you meet new people, on or offline, sparking conversation about traits proven to be the most promising indicators of affiliation may be a great way to test compatibility. 

Subtitle: 

Research reveals the types of common ground that build relationships

Blog to Post to: 

Why Bad Looks Good

Teaser Text: 

We love meeting people that remind us of ourselves. Research reveals what types of similarity attracts us the most.

Teaser Image: 

Mature Audiences Only: 

Images: 

Content Topics: 

Display on News: 

Approved for Facebook Instant Articles: 

0

Reference: 

[i]Launay, Jacques, and Robin I. M. Dunbar. “Playing with Strangers: Which Shared Traits Attract Us Most to New People?” PLoSONE 10 (6) (2015): 1-17.

Food and Mood

If you were asked to visualize your favorite meal, would you picture a perfect piece of steak, or the dark wooden columns in your favorite steakhouse?  Would you describe your favorite dessert as a slice of apple pie delivered to your brightly lit, red and white checkered table clothed booth at your neighborhood diner, or your Aunt Sally´s home made apple pie served warm at her kitchen counter?

As you might expect, creating an enjoyable meal involves much more than food selection.  It includes cultivating an appetizing environment.  Whether planning the perfect dinner party or surprising your spouse with a candlelight dinner for two, the perfect meal involves a combination of mood and food. 

Ambiance and Appetite

Have you ever noticed that food often tastes better in a restaurant than if you make the exact same dish at home?  (If you haven´t, you are already on your way to creating the perfect meal).  If not, before you knock your cooking skills, it turns out there might be a partially scientific explanation for this phenomenon.  One in which you can use to your advantage.

Stated plainly, ambiance impacts appetite. Dining in softly lit surroundings to the tune of pleasant music enhances the dining experience.  Eating under glaring fluorescent lights on a metallic table vibrating to the beat of loud music does not.  Research corroborates these observations.

A study by Brian Wansink and Koert Van Ittersum (2012) demonstrated how restaurant music and lighting may have a positive impact on customer satisfaction and satiation. In a piece entitled "Fast Food Restaurant Lighting and Music Can Reduce Calorie Intake and Increase Satisfaction," they demonstrated how altering the atmosphere of a fast food establishment affects patron food consumption.[i]  

Interestingly, in the study, notice how they switched it up. They did not blare rock music or install flashing lights.  Instead, they found that softening both the music and the lighting led to people eating less, rating their meal as more enjoyable, and (to the delight of the establishment no doubt) spending just as much money.  They note that their results suggest that satisfaction increases while consumption decreases in a restaurant that provides a more relaxed dining environment.  

Other research that demonstrates how music impacts dining focused on dessert.  Carvalho Reinoso et al. in a piece entitled “Smooth Operator” (2017) revealed that music played while eating chocolate impacts the perceived taste.[ii]

When participants were presented with identical chocolate samples, a “creamy” soundtrack enhanced the perception of both sweetness and creaminess of the chocolate, compared with a “rough” soundtrack.  Interestingly, these perceptions did not impact the overall enjoyment of the chocolates—which goes without saying for most chocolate lovers. 

So you plan to accent your prepared dinner and chocolate cake for dessert with soothing music and soft lighting.  The next question is, what beverages do you serve with each course? Sure enough, research reveals the impact on appetite of different food pairings.

Pairings to Please the Palate 

To showcase your perfect steak, do you open a bottle of red wine or crack open a beer?  The answer might be important, depending on what you are serving.  In choosing beverage selections to accompany your meal that are both appetizing and appealing, research confirms the power of pairings.  

Guilia Buodo et al. (2019) examined how food-drink pairings impact the appeal of food.[iii] Specifically, they studied how cultural conventions about food-beverage pairings impacted behavioral, subjective, and neural responses to meat, pizza, and dessert. They discovered that conventional pairings were more appetizing than unconventional appetizing for pizza and dessert, but not for meat.  

Overall, conventional pairings (red meat with red wine) elicited a higher degree of arousal, pleasantness, and appetite than unconventional pairings (red meat with beer).  Despite these findings, the motivational value of the food was unaffected.  

On a subjective level, Buodo et al. note that it was only pizza and dessert that were sensitive to the impact of cultural conventions. Meat was rated as equally appetizing, arousing, and pleasant in both pairing conditions.

Regarding attention, unconventional pairings prompted longer viewing times, which the authors note suggest that people pay more attention to unusual or unfamiliar combinations of food and drink.   

The takeaway?  If you want to create a memorable dining experience, the perfect meal enhances  appeal and appetite through ambiance, which involves scene selection and pairing strategy.  Bon appetit. 

Subtitle: 

Research reveals how a memorable meal involves much more than food

Blog to Post to: 

Why Bad Looks Good

Teaser Text: 

Want to create the perfect dining experience? Here are the ingredients to include—both edible and environmental.

Teaser Image: 

Mature Audiences Only: 

Images: 

Content Topics: 

Display on News: 

Approved for Facebook Instant Articles: 

0

Reference: 

[i]Wansink, Brian, and Koert Van Ittersum. "Fast Food Restaurant Lighting and Music Can Reduce Calorie Intake and Increase Satisfaction." Psychological Reports 111, no. 1 (2012): 228-32.

[ii]Reinoso Carvalho, Felipe, Qian (Janice) Wang, Raymond van Ee, Dominique Persoone, and Charles Spence. “‘Smooth Operator’: Music Modulates the Perceived Creaminess, Sweetness, and Bitterness of Chocolate.” Appetite 108 (2017): 383–90. 

[iii]Buodo, Giulia, Rino Rumiati, Lorella Lotto, and Michela Sarlo. “Does Food-Drink Pairings Affect Appetitive Processing of Food Cues with Different Rewarding Properties? Evidence from Subjective, Behavioral, and Neural Measures.” Food Quality and Preference 75 (2019): 124–32.