This approach to relationship formation is determinist, as it takes the view that attraction is based on association with factors in the environment, such as the situation we are in when we meet a potential partner, rather than though free will.
An experiment carried out by Griffi and Guay (1969) shows broad support for the reward/need satisfaction theory, both in terms of operant and classical conditioning. They found that participants were more likely to positively evaluate an experimenter who had rewarded their performance on a task, rather than one who had acted as a neutral stimulus. This could be used as evidence for the link between attraction and direct reinforcement. Also, participants were found to rate an onlooker more highly when they had been positively evaluated for their performance of a task, which again shows support for the theory, through attraction by association.
Physiological support for the theory can be provided through the research of Aron et al (2005), which showed that intense romantic love was associated with activity in the reward regions of the brain. This indicates that love or attraction is rewarding, and this would provide support for the idea that attraction acts as a positive stimulus. Also, this research can be related to the nature/nurture debate, as it shows the role of brain activity in the way we feel. According to the learning theory, and, by extension, the reward/need satisfaction theory, people develop through social stimulus, and by their experiences. This is in favour of the nurture side of the debate. However, Aron et al’s research shows support for the nature side of the debate, as it suggests that the feelings of reward associated with attraction may have evolved to speed up the mating process.
The importance of rewards as a factor of determining attraction can be debated, as research has shown varying results. Cate et al (1982) used individual assessment to show that reward level was superior to all other factors in determining the satisfaction gained from a relationship. However, Hays et al (1985) found that people gain satisfaction from both giving and receiving rewards, and Lott et al (1994) found that cultural and gender differences also played a role, as women are more focused on giving than receiving in a relationship. These studies show that the reductionist nature of this theory prevents other factors, which could influence relationship satisfaction, from being taken into account, and the necessity of including both giving and receiving rewards as components of attraction.
The second theory to explore the formation of relationships is the similarity theory. This suggests that similarities between people promote liking, and is split into two stages. The first stage involves assessing potential partners for dissimilarity, as those who are least similar to our own personalities will quickly be dismissed as incompatible partners. The second stage involves choosing the most similar person from those remaining, as the person who is most like us in terms of attitudes and beliefs, is the one we are most likely to develop a successful relationship with.
Research evidence supports the idea that individuals look for those with similar personalities to themselves in a relationship, as shown by Berscheid and Reis (1998). Further evidence for similarity being the key to successful relationships can be found in the research of Caspi and Herbener (1990), who found that in long term marriages, couples with similar traits tended to be happier than those who were very different.
The theory also suggests that partners modify their own attitudes through ‘attitude alignment’, in order to become more similar and therefore develop their relationship. This has been supported by various studies showing that ‘attitude alignment’ leads to a higher chance of success in relationships. These studies were modelled on the dissimilarity repulsion hypothesis (Rosenbaum, 1986), which has been tested in various cultural settings by other researches ( for example, By Singh and Ran, 1992 in Singapore, and by Drgotas, 1993 in the USA). The hypothesis suggests that initial attraction is caused by similarities between individuals, by that further attraction is determined by the extent of dissimilarity found as the relationship develops. This research is high in ecological validity as it has been carried out across different cultures, making it more reliable and easier to generalise to the population.
However, as with the reward/need satisfaction theory, the similarity theory can be seen as reductionist, as it does not take into account other factors which determine attraction. For example, Yoshida (1972) found that factors such as self concept, physical condition and wealth, were as important as attitude similarity to the formation of relationships.
Condon and Crano (1988) suggested that similarity is important to the formation of relationships as it lessens the chance of rejection by a potential partner, and also because having a partner similar to us validates our own attitudes and beliefs. This validation is seen as rewarding and the similarity theory could therefore be linked with the reward/need satisfaction theory, as similarity would become a rewarding stimuli. Both theories could be considered reductionist in their view, as they only take into account certain factors which influence attraction. However, research evidence is largely in favour of the two theories, showing that the factors they deal with are indeed important to the formation of successful romantic relationships.
