바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
 

logo

  • P-ISSN1229-0653
  • KCI

경제 수준에 따른 유사성 효과

Similarity matters more for relationship satisfaction of lower than upper class individuals

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격 / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2020, v.34 no.4, pp.1-18
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2020.34.4.001
신지은 (전남대학교)

초록

유사성은 대인 간 호감과 매력을 촉진한다. 상대의 유사성이 개인의 자아와 세계관을 확증해주는 수단이 되기 때문이다. 그렇다면 유사성은 언제, 누구의 관계적 삶에 더 중요한가? 본 연구는 사회 계층에 관한 선행 연구들을 토대로 유사성의 관계적 효용이 경제 수준이 낮은 사람에게서 더 두드러질 것으로 예측하였다. 총 3개의 연구를 실시한 결과, 예상대로 경제 수준이 낮은 사람일수록 상대와의 유사성이 높을수록 관계에 더 만족하는 모습을 보였으며, 이러한 현상은 다양한 영역(연구 1, 3: 연인 관계, 연구 2: 친구 관계)에서 일관적이었다. 인과성을 검토하기 위해 경제 수준을 점화시킨 연구 3에서도 동일한 결과가 나타났다. 사람들은 낮은 경제 수준이 점화되었을 때 유사성을 현재 관계의 판단 및 새로운 관계 예측의 더 중요한 잣대로 사용하는 모습을 보였다. 이상의 결과는 상대와 내가 유사하다는 지각이 경제적 자원이 부족할 때 더 중요한 관계적 요소로 기능함을 보여준다. 본 연구는 유사성 효과에 대한 새로운 개인차 요인을 밝혔다는 점에서 의의가 있다.

keywords
유사성, 대인 매력, 관계 만족도, 경제 수준, Similarity, interpersonal attraction, relationship satisfaction, social class

Abstract

Similarity attracts. One important reason for this is that perceived similarity functions to verify one’s pre-existing views of self and the world. For whom, then, does similarity matter more? This study examined whether the similarity premium varies according to one’s resource level. I predicted that relational benefits of perceived similarity would be more pronounced among members of the lower social class, which is associated with threat vigilance, low sense of control, and high communal orientation. This prediction was supported in three studies that employed different measurements of relationship satisfaction (romantic relationship satisfaction, Studies 1 and 3; friendship satisfaction, Study 2), and when social class was experimentally manipulated (Study 3). In short, individuals in lower economic class seem to benefit more from perceiving the partner as more similar to oneself. This research contributes to the similarity-attraction literature by shedding light on a new individual difference factor.

keywords
유사성, 대인 매력, 관계 만족도, 경제 수준, Similarity, interpersonal attraction, relationship satisfaction, social class

참고문헌

1.

주현덕, 장근영 (2006). 한국 대학생의 연인평가와 연애태도 연구: 유사성을 중심으로. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 20(1), 39-54.

2.

Anderson, C., Kraus, M. W., Galinsky, A. D., &Keltner, D. (2012). The local-ladder effect:Social status and subjective well-being. Psychological Science, 23, 764-771.

3.

Aron, A., Steele, J. L., Kashdan, T. B., & Perez, M. (2006). When similars do not attract: Tests of a prediction from the self‐expansion model. Personal Relationships, 13, 387-396.

4.

Boyce, C. J., Brown, G. D., & Moore, S. C. (2010). Money and happiness: Rank of income, not income, affects life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 21, 471-475.

5.

Byrne, D. E. (1971). The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.

6.

Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception–behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893-910.

7.

Chartrand, T. L., & Lakin, J. L. (2013). The antecedents and consequences of human behavioral mimicry. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 285-308.

8.

Collisson, B., & Howell, J. L. (2014). The liking-similarity effect: Perceptions of similarity as a function of liking. The Journal of Social Psychology, 154, 384-400.

9.

Dryer, D. C., & Horowitz, L. M. (1997). When do opposites attract? Interpersonal complementarity versus similarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 592-603.

10.

Echterhoff, G., Higgins, E. T., & Levine, J. M. (2009). Shared reality: Experiencing commonality with others’ inner states about the world. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 496-521.

11.

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.

12.

Frischlich, L., Rieger, D., Dratsch, T., & Bente, G. (2015). Meet Joe Black? The effects of mortality salience and similarity on the desire to date in-group versus out-group members online. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 32, 509-528.

13.

Furler, K., Gomez, V., & Grob, A. (2014). Personality perceptions and relationship satisfaction in couples. Journal of Research in Personality, 50, 33-41.

14.

Gonzaga, G. C., Campos, B., & Bradbury, T. (2007). Similarity, convergence, and relationship satisfaction in dating and married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 34-48.

15.

Hampton, A. J., Fisher Boyd, A. N., & Sprecher, S. (2019). You’re like me and I like you:Mediators of the similarity–liking link assessed before and after a getting-acquainted social interaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36, 2221-2244.

16.

Hudson, N. W., & Fraley, R. C. (2014). Partner similarity matters for the insecure: Attachment orientations moderate the association between similarity in partners’ personality traits and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 112-123.

17.

Kenny, D. A., & Acitelli, L. K. (2001). Accuracy and bias in the perception of the partner in a close relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 439-448.

18.

Kraus, M. W., Horberg, E. J., Goetz, J. L., &Keltner, D. (2011). Social class rank, threat vigilance, and hostile reactivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1376-1388.

19.

Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D. (2009). Social class, sense of control, and social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 992-1004.

20.

Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D. (2011). Social class as culture: The convergence of resources and rank in the social realm. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 246-250.

21.

Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., Mendoza-Denton, R., Rheinschmidt, M. L., & Keltner, D. (2012). Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: How the rich are different from the poor. Psychological Review, 119, 546-572.

22.

Kristof-Brown, A., Barrick, M. R., & Stevens, C. K. (2005). When opposites attract: A multisample demonstration of complementary person ‐team fit on extraversion. Journal of Personality, 73, 935-958.

23.

Lutz-Zois, C. J., Bradley, A. C., Mihalik, J. L., &Moorman-Eavers, E. R. (2006). Perceived similarity and relationship success among dating couples: An idiographic approach. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23, 865-880.

24.

Mackinnon, S. P., Jordan, C. H., & Wilson, A. E. (2011). Birds of a feather sit together: Physical similarity predicts seating choice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 879-892.

25.

Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (2000). Exploring individual differences in reactions to mortality salience: Does attachment style regulate terror management mechanisms? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 260-273.

26.

Montoya, R. M., & Horton, R. S. (2013). A meta-analytic investigation of the processes underlying the similarity-attraction effect. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 64-94.

27.

Montoya, R. M., Horton, R. S., & Kirchner, J. (2008). Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25, 889-922.

28.

Murray, D. R., & Schaller, M. (2012). Threat(s) and conformity deconstructed: Perceived threat of infectious disease and its implications for conformist attitudes and behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 180-188.

29.

Muscatell, K. A., Morelli, S. A., Falk, E. B., Way, B. M., Pfeifer, J. H., Galinsky, A. D., ... &Eisenberger, N. I. (2012). Social status modulates neural activity in the mentalizing network. Neuroimage, 60, 1771-1777.

30.

Na, J., McDonough, I. M., Chan, M. Y., & Park, D. C. (2016). Social-class differences in consumer choices: Working-class individuals are more sensitive to choices of others than middle-class individuals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 430-443.

31.

Pinel, E. C., & Long, A. E. (2012). When I’s meet:Sharing subjective experience with someone from the outgroup. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 296-307.

32.

Pinel, E. C., Long, A. E., Landau, M. J., Alexander, K., & Pyszczynski, T. (2006). Seeing I to I: A pathway to interpersonal connectedness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 243-257.

33.

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891.

34.

Renkema, L. J., Stapel, D. A., & Van Yperen, N. W. (2008). Go with the flow: Conforming to others in the face of existential threat. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 747-756.

35.

Rivera, M. T., Soderstrom, S. B., & Uzzi, B. (2010). Dynamics of dyads in social networks:Assortative, relational, and proximity mechanisms. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 91-115.

36.

Sawicki, V., & Wegener, D. T. (2018). Metacognitive reflection as a moderator of attitude strength versus attitude bolstering: Implications for attitude similarity and attraction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44, 638-652.

37.

Schimel, J., Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., O’Mahen, H., & Arndt, J. (2000). Running from the shadow: Psychological distancing from others to deny characteristics people fear in themselves. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 446-462.

38.

Shiota, M. N., & Levenson, R. W. (2007). Birds of a feather don’t always fly farthest: Similarity in Big Five personality predicts more negative marital satisfaction trajectories in long-term marriages. Psychology and Aging, 22, 666-675.

39.

Singh, R., Wegener, D. T., Sankaran, K., Bhullar, N., Ang, K. Q. P., Chia, P. J. L., . . . Chen, F. (2017). Attitude similarity and attraction:Validation, positive affect, and trust as sequential mediators. Personal Relationships, 24, 203-222.

40.

Singh, R., Wegener, D. T., Sankaran, K., Singh, S., Lin, P. K., Seow, M. X., ... & Shuli, S. (2015). On the importance of trust in interpersonal attraction from attitude similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 32, 829-850.

41.

Smith, R. E. (1972). Social anxiety as a moderator variable in the attitude similarity-attraction relationship. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 6, 22-28.

42.

Snyder, R. A., & Morris, J. H. (1978). Competence as a moderator of the similarity/attraction relationship: Development and application of a new index. The Journal of Psychology, 99, 235-244.

43.

Sprecher, S., Treger, S., Hilaire, N., Fisher, A., &Hatfield, E. (2013). You validate me, you like me, you’re fun, you expand me: “I’m yours!”. Current Research in Social Psychology, 22, 22-34.

44.

Stephens, N. M., Markus, H. R., & Townsend, S. S. (2007). Choice as an act of meaning: The case of social class. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 814-830.

45.

Sunnafrank, M., & Ramirez, A. (2004). At first sight:Persistent relational effects of get-acquainted conversations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 361–379.

46.

Swann Jr, W. B., & Read, S. J. (1981). Self-verification processes: How we sustain our self-conceptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 351-372.

47.

Tidwell, N. D., Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Perceived, not actual, similarity predicts initial attraction in a live romantic context:Evidence from the speed‐dating paradigm. Personal Relationships, 20, 199-215.

48.

Townsend, S. S., Kim, H. S., & Mesquita, B. (2014). Are you feeling what I’m feeling? Emotional similarity buffers stress. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 526-533.

49.

West, T. V., Magee, J. C., Gordon, S. H., &Gullett, L. (2014). A little similarity goes a long way: The effects of peripheral but self-revealing similarities on improving and sustaining interracial relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 81-100.

50.

Wilson, K. S., DeRue, D. S., Matta, F. K., Howe, M., & Conlon, D. E. (2016). Personality similarity in negotiations: Testing the dyadic effects of similarity in interpersonal traits and the use of emotional displays on negotiation outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 1405-1421.

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격