Specification: Factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships: physical attractiveness, including the matching hypothesis

Physical Attractiveness 

Psychologists have long noticed that physical attractiveness plays a major part in the formation of relationships and proposed various explanations of why this is the case. However, it is not just in the initial stages of a relationship that physical attraction is important. McNulty et al. (2008) point out that physical attraction remains an important feature of romantic partnerships for several years, including after marriage. 

The Matching Hypothesis 

In real life, people often use common sense to estimate whether a prospective partner will find them attractive or not. As a result, individuals seeking a partner will not automatically go for the most attractive person available, but rather opt to select a prospective partner who matches their own perceived level of physical attractiveness. This is referred to as the Matching Hypothesis. 

According to the Matching Hypothesis, a person’s choice of partner is a balance between a desire to have the most physically attractive partner possible and their wish to avoid being rejected by someone who is 'way out of their league'. As a result, people often choose a partner who has roughly the same level of physical attractiveness, such as facial beauty or handsomeness, as themselves. However, in order for the two partners to be matched, a realistic judgement must be placed on one’s own physical attractiveness in the first place. 

Although a person may desire the most attractive mate possible, a compromise must be struck in order to avoid rejection by someone who does not believe the partnership to be an equal match of physical attractiveness. Often, there is a discrepancy between what level of physical attractiveness a partner would like in a potential mate and what they have to settle for ultimately. If the Matching Hypothesis brings two partners of equal physical attractiveness together, it is proposed that both parties will feel more secure in their romantic union with one another, with less fear or jealousy that temptation from other, more physically attractive, prospective partners may bring about the end of the relationship. 

Research Examining Physical Attractiveness 

Another explanation for the importance of physical attractiveness is the halo effect. The notion of halo effect was shown by Palmer and Peterson (2012), who asked participants to rate attractive and unattractive people in terms of how politically competent and knowledgeable they believed them to be. It was found that attractive people were consistently rated higher on these characteristics compared to unattractive ones. Additionally, Dion et al. (1972) found that attractive people are consistently rated as successful, kind and sociable when compared with unattractive people. This means that we not only believe that good-looking people are more physically attractive, we expect them to have other desirable characteristics. Consequently, this also means that we tend to behave more positively towards attractive people. 

Walster at al. (1966) 

Aim: To examine the Matching Hypothesis. 

Methods: Researchers advertised a ‘computer dance’ for fresher students in the first week of college at the University of Minnesota. The first 376 male and 376 female volunteers (752 total) were let in for $1.00. Four independent judges secretly rated the students in terms of attractiveness whilst they were collecting their tickets. Participants were asked to fill in a questionnaire. They were told that the data would be used to determine the similarity between the males and female students, in order to find them the ideal partner for the dance. However, pairing of dates was done completely at random for the dance which was held two days later. During intervals at the dance party, and 4 to 6 months later, students were asked whether they found their partner attractive and whether they would like to go on a subsequent date with them. 

Results: Once the participants had been paired in a male and female partnership for the dance, partners responded more positively to others who had been rated as physically attractive by the independent judges, irrespective of their own level of attractiveness. This pattern was also echoed in willingness to ask out the paired partner on another date. Females who were rated as physically attractive were frequently asked out on a second date by males who were not rated as physically attractive. 

Conclusion: Contrary to the Matching Hypothesis, students expressed higher appreciation of their partner if the partner was attractive, regardless of their own level of attractiveness. 

Evaluation of the Matching Hypothesis

In addition to Walster et al.’s original study (see above) that failed to support the hypothesis, other research has also failed to provide conclusive evidence for the Matching Hypothesis. For example, Taylor et al. (2011) investigated the activity log on a dating website and found that website users were more likely to try and arrange a meeting with a potential partner who was more physically attractive than them. These findings contradict the Matching Hypothesis, as according to its predictions, website users should seek more dates with a person who is similar in terms of attractiveness because it provides them with a better chance of being accepted by a potential partner.  

There are significant individual differences in terms of the importance that people place on physical attractiveness in terms of relationships. Towhey (1979) gave participants photos of strangers and some biographical information about them; participants were asked to rate how much they liked the people on photographs. Towhey found that physical attractiveness was more important for participants who displayed sexist attitudes (measured by a specially designed questionnaire). This suggests that, depending on individual differences, physical appearance may or may not be a significant factor in attractiveness, while the Matching Hypothesis suggests it is always the main one.  

Another weakness of the Matching Hypothesis is that it mainly applies to short-term relationships. When choosing a partner for long-term relationships, people tend to focus more on the similarity of values, rather than physical attractiveness. This questions the validity of the Matching Hypothesis, as it will only describe a limited number of relationships. Furthermore, the Matching Hypothesis ignores the fact that people may compensate for the lack of physical attractiveness with other qualities, such as intellect or sociability. This compensation explains repeatedly occurring examples of older, less attractive men being married to attractive younger women; something that the Matching Hypothesis cannot account for. 

Extension Evaluation: Issues & Debates

Physical attractiveness seems to be an important factor in forming relationships across cultures. For example, Cunningham et al. (1995) found that White, Asian and Hispanic males, despite being from different cultures, rated females with prominent cheekbones, small noses and large eyes as highly attractive. This universality of findings suggests that using attractiveness as a decisive factor in choosing a partner might be a genetically reproduced mechanism, aiding sexual selection. This gives support to the nature side of the nature-nurture debate as it shows that human behaviour is mainly a result of biological, rather than environmental, influences.  

On the other hand, the Matching Hypothesis may be suffering from a beta-bias, as it assumes that men and women are very similar when it comes to the importance of physical attractiveness. Research, however, suggests that this may not be the case. For example, Meltzer et al. (2014) found that men rate their long-term relationships more satisfying if their partner is physically attractive, while for women their partner’s attractiveness did not have a significant impact on their relationship satisfaction. This shows that there are significant gender differences in how important appearance is for attraction. 

Possible Exam Questions 

1. Identify which of the statements below relates to the Matching Hypothesis. (1 mark) 

A. Complementarity of partners is most important in long-term relationships. 

B. One’s own level of physical attractiveness is taken into consideration when selecting a partner. 

C. A relationship will be seen as satisfying if the profits outweighs the costs. 

D. A partner will remain committed to their current relationship if a comparison with alternative suitors is not favourable. 

2. Explain what is meant by the term ‘Matching Hypothesis’. (2 marks)

3. Describe the Matching Hypothesis as an explanation of attraction in romantic relationships. (6 marks)

4. A psychologist decided to test the Matching Hypothesis using a laboratory experiment. 

a. Suggest a suitable hypothesis for this experiment. (3 marks) 

b. Outline one disadvantage of a laboratory experiment for studying romantic relationships. (2 marks) 

c. Explain why deception of participants may be necessary for this study and how the psychologist could overcome this issue. (4 marks) 

5. Elaine Waslter and colleagues conducted a study to investigate the Matching Hypothesis at a University in America during the 1960s. Males and females were randomly selected to participate when they attended a dance event on campus. They were asked to complete a questionnaire and were told that this would be used to allocate an ideal partner, when in fact this pairing was done randomly. 

a. In the study above, the couples at the dance were paired up randomly, and not according to attractiveness. Explain how the researchers could have randomly paired the participants. (3 marks) 

b. After completing the questionnaire, the participants were thanked for their time and were given a debrief by Walster and her colleagues. Suggest two comments which could be added to the debriefing in order to ensure that the researchers meet high ethical standards in their study. (4 marks) 

6. Mike finds Greta very attractive but hesitates to ask her out, because he thinks she is going to reject his invitation. ‘She is way out of my league!’ he says to a friend. ‘I’d better look for someone who doesn't look like a supermodel’. Using the Matching Hypothesis, explain Mike’s comments. (4 marks) 

7. Discuss the role physical attractiveness in adult romantic relationships. (8 marks) 

8. Evaluate physical attractiveness, including reference to the Matching Hypothesis, as an explanation of attraction. (10 marks) 

9. Outline and evaluate physical attractiveness as a factor affecting attraction in romantic relationships. Refer to research in your answer. (16 marks)