This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Neimeyer, R. A. Articles by Mitchell, K. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Similarity and Attraction: A Longitudinal Study

Memphis State University

Kelly A. Mitchell

Memphis State University

Although it is generally acknowledged that psychological similarity influences the development of same-sex friendship, empirical studies often fail to delineate the differential impact of attitude, personality, value, construct and structural similarity as predictors of attraction. The present naturalistic study examines the discriminability of these similarity subtypes, and notes the impact of each upon friendship formation over 8 weeks of assigned dyadic interaction. Factor analyses of the similarity subtypes reflected the emergent nature of relationship development, with greater subtype differentiation occurring over time. Regression analyses suggested that similarity subtypes may be hierarchically related, with some being more accessible than others for purposes of social comparison. More specifically, attitude similarity was a significant predictor of initial attraction across pairs, whereas only personality and cognitive-structural similarity predicted later attraction. With regard to overall relationship success, analyses of variance indicated that attitudinally similar dyads moved in the direction of greater attraction across time, whereas attitudinally dissimilar dyads tended to deteriorate in their level of mutual attraction. Results are broadly consistent with a filtering model of relationship development, which suggests a movement from relatively more superficial to relatively deeper levels of social comparison over the course of acquaintance.

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, Vol. 5, No. 2, 131-148 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/026540758800500201


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. M. Montoya, R. S. Horton, and J. Kirchner Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, December 1, 2008; 25(6): 889 - 922. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. J. Lutz-Zois, A. C. Bradley, J. L. Mihalik, and E. R. Moorman-Eavers Perceived similarity and relationship success among dating couples: An idiographic approach Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, December 1, 2006; 23(6): 865 - 880. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. A. O'Mahen, S. R. H. Beach, and A. Tesser Relationship Ecology and Negative Communication in Romantic Relationships: A Self-Evaluation Maintenance Perspective Pers Soc Psychol Bull, November 1, 2000; 26(11): 1343 - 1352. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. D. Morrow, E. M. Clark, and K. F. Brock Individual and Partner Love Styles: Implications for the Quality of Romantic Involvements Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, August 1, 1995; 12(3): 363 - 387. [Abstract]

				C. J. Pilkington, A. Tesser, and D. Stephens Complementarity in Romantic Relationships: A Self-Evaluation Maintenance Perspective Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, November 1, 1991; 8(4): 481 - 504. [Abstract]