Figure 1 - uploaded by Stephen Reysen
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
In two studies, we examined the effect of different degrees of attraction reciprocation on ratings of attraction toward a potential romantic partner. Undergraduate college student participants imagined a potential romantic partner who reciprocated a low (reciprocating attraction one day a week), moderate (reciprocating attraction three days a week)...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... investigations of the hard to get phenomenon suggest that people are attracted to potential partners who are selective in their dating choices (Matthews, Rosenfield, & Stephan, 1979; Walster, Walster, Piliavin, & Schmidt, 1973). First, one explanation for the hard to get phenomenon resides in the distinction between dyadic reciprocity (liking reciprocated between two individuals) versus generalized reciprocity (a non-specific liking for others in general) (Kenny, 1994). When examining speed-daters, individuals who express romantic desires toward a specific person receive more reciprocation than if they display romantic attraction to multiple potential partners (Eastwick, Finkel, Mochon, & Ariely, 2007). In other words, people are attracted to potential partners who are selective in their reciprocation of attraction. A second explanation suggests that uncertainty about the other’s attraction leads to increased thoughts about the other person, and subsequently greater attraction (Whitchurch et al., 2011). A third explanation of why people like potential partners who play hard to get follows from Brehm’s (1999) emotion intensity theory. Jack Brehm is famously remembered for his theoretical contributions to cognitive dissonance and his theory of psychological reactance. However, he also proposed a lesser known, but similarly impressive, theory of emotional and motivational intensity (Wright, 2011). Brehm’s (1999) emotion intensity theory posits that emotions, affect, and mood are motivational states that urge behavior or adaptation toward a goal, and one’s degree of emotional intensity is affected by the difficulty in obtaining one’s goal. When one’s goals are inhibited (termed deterrents), one’s degree of emotional intensity (and related motivation) interacts with the magnitude of the deterrent to the goal in a cubic function. When no deterrents are present (i.e., difficulty of obtaining the goal is unknown or unspecified), the intensity of an emotion experienced equals the potential intensity of that emotion and represents the importance of obtaining one’s goal (see Figure 1). When there is a low amount of deterrence, one’s emotional intensity is low because of the small amount of effort needed to obtain the goal. When there is a moderate level of deterrence, the intensity of emotion rises to a ...
Similar publications
A growing body of literature suggests that individuals respond more positively when outperformed by their partner (an upward comparison) than when they outperform the partner (a downward comparison). However, these findings may not apply to individuals high in attachment avoidance due to their negative working models of others. In two studies, we i...
This study proposed that levels of dispositional gratitude influence experiences of
intimacy within romantic relationships and that this influence is moderated by relationship attachment. Gratitude, in this study, was described as feelings of appreciation associated with the perception that one had been the focus of another’s intentionally benefici...
Previous research has demonstrated that imagined contact is useful to reducing prejudice against minorities (e.g. Turner & Crisp, 2010). In this research, we investigated whether imagined contact increases attraction to physically unattractive women, and whether this effect is moderated by perceiver's physical attractiveness and appearance orientat...
Citations
... A variety of subsequent experiments, all testing the e ects of distinct deterrents, replicated these surprising though predictable e ects. Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2013), for instance, tested whether the manipulated degree of reciprocation of a potential partner acted as a deterrent to romantic feelings by producing cubic e ects of deterrence on the intensity of attraction (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013). To test their hypothesis, the researchers asked participants to imagine a potential romantic partner who reciprocated either a strong, moderate, weak, or unspeci ed personal feeling of attraction (this latter condition instantiating the control condition of "reciprocation unmentioned"). ...
... A variety of subsequent experiments, all testing the e ects of distinct deterrents, replicated these surprising though predictable e ects. Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2013), for instance, tested whether the manipulated degree of reciprocation of a potential partner acted as a deterrent to romantic feelings by producing cubic e ects of deterrence on the intensity of attraction (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013). To test their hypothesis, the researchers asked participants to imagine a potential romantic partner who reciprocated either a strong, moderate, weak, or unspeci ed personal feeling of attraction (this latter condition instantiating the control condition of "reciprocation unmentioned"). ...
... As we have seen, the e ects of obstacles on romantic feelings depend on a combination of detailed circumstances. As such, they can either systematically decrease emotional intensity (when obstacles are either too weak or exert an excessive deterrence e ect), or even sharply increase the intensity of those feelings (when obstacles exert just a moderate deterrence e ect; e.g., Donato et al., 2018;Miron et al., 2009Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013;. ...
How do in-pair obstacles and difficulties affect the intensity of love? Why do people at some points in their romantic relationships emotionally disinvest? Does a reduction in the intensity of romantic feelings always result in relationship breakup? Core assumptions of emotional intensity theory suggest that feelings of love vary in strength according to an adaptive “energy conservation” principle. To save energy, romantic partners automatically adapt the intensity of their feelings to the minimum level needed to overcome the obstacles and difficulties the couple encounters daily (e.g., reciprocal partners’ flaws, relational stress, and perceived risk of breakup), because small relationship obstacles and difficulties only demand the investment of correspondingly small quantities of motivational/emotional resources to be surmounted. Thus, romantic feelings appear to diminish when obstacles are almost absent and, by contrast, to augment when obstacles grow stronger—with emotional strength reflecting the magnitude of what challenges the stability of the relationship. This specific fine-tuning of emotion intensity holds up, however, only to the point where maintaining the relationship is still worth the effort. Beyond this point, actual in-pair divestment occurs, because any further investment of energy would represent a useless (i.e., non-functional) waste of energy. In adopting the perspective of emotional intensity theory, this chapter reviews the most relevant empirical evidence on romantic relationships in light of a unitary, single-process explanation that reconciles past conflicting findings while also addressing new theoretical and practical implications for contemporary romantic partnerships.
... Jonason and Li [3] continue to discover the motive for people to play hard-to-get, and some of the reasons are increased demand, test commitment, uncertainty, and dating others. Reysen and Katzarska-Miller [7] show that playing moderately hard-to-get should result in the most beneficial outcome. ...
... Despite all the previous findings, it is still unclear how much of an advantage a person will gain from playing hard-to-get in a real-world setting. Meanwhile, the previous studies [3], [7] have mainly focused on letting the participant imagine being in a situation instead of being in the situation. ...
People often want success in everything, including dating. Hence, the strategy for dating was suggested--the method of playing hard-to-get. It spread rapidly with countless tutorials and posts on how to execute the plan. Despite its popularity, this paper examines the strategy's validity through experiments and refers to previous studies in the field. One hundred single heterosexual participants, each date with three opposite-sex confederates, are then asked to record their experience. The three confederates are asked to perform various levels of playing hard-to-get by the duration of the playing hard-to-get tactic during the date with the participant. Therefore, the participant would respond to each level differently, providing the comparison between the levels of playing hard-to-get and their effectiveness. The expected result of the experiment is that the moderate hard-to-get confederate gains an advantage over the other confederates. Therefore, by using tactics of playing hard-to-get moderately, people would obtain a comparative advantage in the dating world.
... Approximately 62% of experiments (n = 23) had between 40-70% of female participants. Only four articles reported participants' ethnicity (i.e., Bowen & Gillath, 2020;Gur, 2018;Jonason & Li, 2013;Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013); thus, these data were not included in the current review. ...
... In line with this idea, Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2013) found that when participants knew that a potential partner was unattracted to them (i.e., too hard-to-get) or, conversely, highly attracted to them (i.e., too easy-to-get), they felt less attraction to that potential partner. In contrast, not knowing whether a potential mate was attracted or knowing that they were moderately attracted increased their attraction to this person. ...
... Moderately available (vs. highly available or unavailable) targets are preferred for dating and committed relationships (Jonason & Li, 2013). Moreover, a pursued partner is perceived as most appealing when the pursuer either a) does not know whether the pursued partner is attracted to them; or b) knows that the pursued partner is moderately attracted to them (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013). These results replicated findings from older studies by Walster et al. (1973), Wright and Contrada (1986), and Bailey and Garrou (1983). ...
According to dating folklore, playing "hard-to-get" is an effective strategy for attracting prospective mates. However, some research suggests that this strategy could backfire if it leads prospective mates to withhold their attraction in return. The present research aimed to review the scope of research on the link between playing hard-to-get - i.e., appearing uncertain in one's interest and/or difficult to attract - and romantic or sexual outcomes. A scoping search was conducted in the electronic databases of PsycINFO, Sociology Source Ultimate, Anthropology Plus, and Academic Search Ultimate using key words related to playing hard-to-get in the context of dating. A total of 18 studies were included in the review. Research suggests that playing hard-to-get may work if optimal levels of perceived uncertainty and difficulty are achieved. Additional variables were identified as being important when evaluating the tactic's efficacy. These include the pursuer's own level commitment to the pursued partner and aversion to uncertainty, and both the pursuer and pursued partners' gender and attachment styles. Directions for future research and the relevance of sociocultural norms in dating are discussed. Keywords: playing hard-to-get, dating, romantic relationships, mating strategy, attraction.
... Within the emotional/motivational arena, then, deterrence has been shown to systematically influence the affective component of intentions (Miron & Pantaleo, 2010, for a review), and-at the intergroup levelalso affective social identification (Pantaleo et al., 2014), vicarious empathy (Pantaleo, 2011), and the intensity of specific intergroup emotions such as collective guilt (Schmitt et al., 2008). Crossing the interdisciplinary border of romantic relationships, then, EIT's predicted cubic pattern was observed as well in research on the intensity of positive and negative feelings towards the romantic partner (e.g., Donato et al., 2018;Miron et al., 2009;, and even towards just a would-be dating acquaintance, or a potential romantic partner (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013;Wright et al., 1985;see Sciara & Pantaleo, 2018; 2021, for reviews). ...
This article reports empirical findings on the strength and dissociation of experimentally
induced cognitive vs. emotional responses to instigators of prejudice towards people
affected by mental illness. Drawing on emotional intensity theory (EIT: Brehm,
1999), the experiment (N = 80) shows how growing and apparently reassuring reasons
(i.e., the deterrents) for not being prejudiced towards ‘the mentally ill’ differentially
affect the intensity of cognitive vs. emotional prejudiced responses. Such reassuring
information was conveyed to participants as the increasing likelihood that ordinary
people typically recover, if affected, from mental illness (likelihood not mentioned,
low [5%], moderate [50%], high [70%]). Whereas the intensity of cognitive responses
tended to diminish linearly with growing reasons for not being prejudiced (η2
= .06),
the intensity of emotional responses followed closely EIT’s predictions, and varied as a
cubic function of deterrence information (η2
= .61), that is, of information ironically
intended to reassure participants. These findings substantiate EIT in two important
respects. For one, they consistently reveal, and nicely conceptually replicate, EIT’s
predicted cubic pattern of paradoxical results for emotional responses with respect to
prejudiced affect. Most importantly, however, they also illustrate—theoretically and
empirically—the expected dissociation between emotional and cognitive responses
to deterrents. In our view, such a dynamic separation and convergence of cognitive
and affective components of prejudice has the full potential to inspire new theoretical
insight and understanding, theory-based research, and the development of evidence�based intervention practices.
Keywords: deterrence; emotional intensity; cognitive vs. emotional prejudice; intensity
of motivation; paradoxical affect; emotional and adaptation.
... Moderate (vs. high or low) perceived difficulty was most likely to motivate pursuit of an attractive HtG target (see also Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013). Consistent with research on effort justification (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959; see also Labroo & Kim, 2009), these findings suggest that when the reward of a potential mate exceeds some minimum threshold and surpasses the effort in attracting them, desire for that person is greater. ...
Playing “hard-to-get” (HtG) has received limited attention as a research topic. Recently, Jonason and Li (2013) suggested that HtG can be conceptualized as a mating strategy. Attachment theory provides a framework to study how individuals balance mating goals with their goals to self-protect and manage potential partners' behaviors. Further, attachment style has consistently predicted people's sexual motives and preferred mating strategies. Here we investigated whether attachment predicts tendencies to play HtG, and its complement behavior of pursuing HtG others. Across four studies (N = 906), we examined predictive and causal associations between attachment style and both HtG strategies. In Study 1, people higher on attachment avoidance and women (vs. men) reported more playing HtG. In Study 2, people higher on attachment anxiety and men (vs. women) reported more pursuing of HtG others. Using novel measures, we found that playing and pursuing reflected distinct relational and social goals. In Studies 3–4, we manipulated attachment (in)security, and found that primed avoidance led to greater reported likelihood of playing HtG among avoidant heterosexual men, whereas primed anxiety led to greater reported likelihood of pursuing HtG targets overall. These findings suggest that attachment style predicts and shapes HtG behavior, particularly among insecurely attached individuals.
... And yet, the few studies addressing this possibility have suffered from methodological limitations (e.g., using hypothetical scenarios, focusing only on one sex's reactions; Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013;Walster et al., 1973;Whitchurch et al., 2011) that preclude conclusions about whether and why playing hard to get facilitates mate pursuit. Another concern that has ambiguated interpretation of previous research is the lack of consensus about the conceptual and operational definitions of being hard to get. ...
... Other people, however, are reluctant to deploy this strategy because they worry that it may backfire, driving prospective partners away out of fears of rejection . The lack of consensus about the effectiveness of the "hard to get" strategy mirrors ambiguity in the literature, due to methodological limitations of past studies (e.g., employing vignettes rather than real interactions, including participants of only one sex; Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013;Whitchurch et al., 2011), which preclude conclusions about whether people who use this strategy are actually perceived to be more desirable mates. The present research adopted complementary methods to address these limitations while examining whether and why being hard to get affects prospective partners' desirability in the context of both online and face-to-face encounters. ...
... Prior research has used various operational definitions of being hard to get (e.g., feigning romantic disinterest by exhibiting a lack of responsiveness or by having limited availability), yielding conflicting results about the effectiveness of using the "hard to get" strategy for alluring mates (e.g., Dai et al., 2014;Jonason & Li, 2013). Furthermore, existing studies that did support this mating strategy did not provide evidence for a compelling explanation for its success (e.g., Dai et al., 2014;Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013). Our research helps fill this gap, indicating that using tactics that authentically make prospective partners hard to get (e.g., exhibiting selectivity in choosing mates) enhances their sexual desirability because it serves as a marker of mate value. ...
Playing hard-to-get is a common strategy used to attract mates. Past research has been unclear about whether and why this strategy facilitates mate pursuit. In three studies, we examined whether perceiving potential partners as hard-to-get instigated sexual desire and whether perceived partner mate value explained this effect. In doing so, we focused on tactics that give the impression that potential partners are hard-to-get and may genuinely signal their mate value (being selective in choosing mates, efforts invested in their pursuit). In all studies, participants interacted with an opposite-sex confederate and rated their perceptions of the confederate. In Study 1, participants interacted with confederates whose profile indicated that they were either hard-to-get or easy-to-attract. In Study 2, participants exerted (or not) real efforts to attract the confederate. In Study 3, interactions unfolded spontaneously and were coded for efforts made to see the confederate again. Results indicated that the perception of whether a confederate was hard-to-get was associated with their mate value, which, in turn, predicted greater desire and efforts to see the confederate again, suggesting that being hard-to-get is an effective strategy that heightens perceptions of partners’ mate value.
... Further, such a study is most needed for at least two additional reasons. First, both Miron et al. (2009) and Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2013) focused only on potential sources of relationship stress (i.e., partner flaws, and being not reciprocated by the partner, respectively), rather than on actual sources of stress within the relationship. Also, these studies assessed the intensity of romantic feelings towards potential partners (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013), or even just towards both real and imaginary partners . ...
... First, both Miron et al. (2009) and Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2013) focused only on potential sources of relationship stress (i.e., partner flaws, and being not reciprocated by the partner, respectively), rather than on actual sources of stress within the relationship. Also, these studies assessed the intensity of romantic feelings towards potential partners (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013), or even just towards both real and imaginary partners . Second, Sciara and Pantaleo (2018) limited their investigation to only potential consequences of stress (i.e., the risk of relationship breakup), without specifically focusing on stress per se. ...
... It should be noted that, according to EIT, there is no reason to expect gender differences in deterrence experiments, because both males and females should obey the same basic motivational and emotional laws regarding energy mobilization and effort expenditure (Brehm, 1999;Brehm & Miron, 2006; see also Richter, Gendolla, & Wright, 2016). Further, in line with EIT, gender differences have never been found or otherwise documented in studies of deterrence of romantic feelings Miron, Rauscher, Reyes, Gavel, & Lechner, 2012;Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013;Sciara & Pantaleo, 2018). In this study, therefore, the larger proportion of females should not be of concern, as it should not conceal or otherwise alter the predicted effects of manipulated stress (deterrence) on feelings of romantic affect. ...
According to Brehm’s emotional intensity theory (EIT), the strength of feelings of romantic affect towards a romantic partner should vary as a cubic function of increasing levels of relationship stress (i.e., deterrence to feelings of romantic affect). The study tested this hypothesis in a true experiment with 80 young adults actually engaged in a romantic relationship, by systematically manipulating stress, through a recall procedure, across four distinct levels of intensity (control vs. low vs. moderate vs. high levels of manipulated stress). As predicted by emotional intensity theory, feelings of romantic affect were strong in the control condition, reduced in the low stress condition (low deterrence), maintained intense in the moderate stress condition (moderate deterrence), and reduced, again, in the high stress condition (high deterrence). Findings and both theoretical and practical implications for professionals and future research are discussed, with special emphasis on how to promote partners’ everyday adjustments to stress and emotional intensity regulation.
... The Reciprocity Principle is founded upon the rule that, people like those who like them (Aronson &Worchel, 1966Curtis & Miller, 1986. Reciprocation of attraction has been long recognised as a key determinant of romantic attraction (Peretti & Abplanalp, 2004;Reysen& Miller, 2013). It is rewarding to be liked, and therefore generates positive feelings towards others (Montoya &Insko, 2008). ...
... In support of these findings, Walster et al., (1973) found that playing easy-to-get evoked more positive evaluation for potential partners, and limiting availability decreased liking and romantic attraction. Additionally, playing hard-to-get may increase wanting in an individual if there is a romantic interest apparent from the beginning (Dai et al., 2014).Furthermore, other researchers have reported that people have a decreased attraction towards those individual who elude an extreme hard-to-get stance (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013;Walster et al., 1973). Therefore, prior research defines the role of playing hard to get in the context of romantic attraction and its effectiveness; however research also illustrates that playing easy to get yields more liking response, and playing hard-to-get elicits more wanting in individuals. ...
... speed dating) (Mathews' et al., 1979;Walster et al., 1973), obscuring mate duration, such as short and long term relationships. Subsequently, other PSYCHOLOGICAL COMMITMENT AND PERCEIVED LIMITED AVAILABILITY 17 researchers a heavy reliance on undergraduate college samples (Jonason& Li, 2013;McCord, 2017;Reysen& Miller;2013;Dai, et al.,2014;Whitchurch et al., 2011) and thus, limiting relational context across different demographical information, including, different age group, and genders. ...
The interaction between psychological commitment and perceived limited availability; in the context of playing hard-to-get Elif Gur Word count: 9,948
... If considered in quantitative terms, this overall pattern obeys a cubic function. The cubic pattern predicted by EIT has been abundantly substantiated in research on happiness, anxiety, positive and negative (sensory) affect, prejudiced and attitude-related affect, anger, love, romantic interest, enjoyment, strength of affective social identification, collective guilt, and vicarious empathy (Brehm and Miron 2006;Brehm et al. 1999Brehm et al. , 2009Dill 1997;Fuegen and Brehm 2004;Miron et al. 2008Miron et al. , 2011Miron et al. , 2009Miron et al. , 2007Pantaleo 2011;Pantaleo et al. 2014;Reysen and Katzarska-Miller 2013;Schmitt et al. 2008;Silvia and Brehm 2001). One study by Brehm and colleagues (Brehm et al. 2009-Study 2), in particular, provided strong support for the predicted cubic effect across six distinct adjacent points of deterrence to the intensity of sensory negative affect (including the nodeterrent control condition). ...
... Recently, a series of experiments explicitly designed to test the paradoxical effects that obstacles to romantic feelings may have on such feelings of attraction and commitment, predicted and documented both affect-enhancing and affect-reducing effects (Miron et al. , 2012Reysen and Katzarska-Miller 2013). In testing EIT in the domain of romantic relationships, these deterrence experiments not only provided further support for the theory, but also a straightforward and coherent theoretical explanation for the above 'mixed', unexpected, and-perhaps for some-even somewhat puzzling results (e.g., Driscoll et al. 1972;Felmlee 2001;Lehmiller and Agnew 2006;Sinclair and Ellithorpe 2014): By acting as deterrents, obstacles to romantic feelings seem able to either reduce or enhance, in non-obvious ways, the intensity of attraction and commitment towards the romantic partner. ...
... To the extent that the perceived risk of ending a romantic relationship can be also assumed to have barrier-like properties, then it should likewise act as a deterrent to romantic feelings and, hence, systematically either reduce or enhance feelings of attraction towards the romantic partner (Miron et al. , 2012; see also Reysen and Katzarska-Miller 2013;Wright et al. 1985;Roberson and Wright 1994, on interpersonal attraction as determined by the difficulty of establishing a relationship with a potential date). Further, as romantic affect has also been demonstrated to instigate an urge to stay with the partner (Gonzaga et al. 2001;Miron et al. 2009Miron et al. , 2012, we would similarly expect the same deterrence effects of perceived risk of breakup on romantic commitment, as mediated by strength of romantic affect (Miron et al. , 2012. ...
Drawing on emotional intensity theory (EIT: Brehm in Personality and Social Psychology Review 3:2–22, 1999; Brehm and Miron in Motivation and Emotion 30:13–30, 2006), this experiment (N = 104) shows how the manipulated risk of ending a romantic relationship influences the intensity of romantic affect and commitment. As predicted by EIT, the intensity of both romantic feelings varied as a cubic function of increasing levels of manipulated risk of relationship breakup (risk not mentioned vs. low vs. moderate vs. high). Data additionally showed that the effects of manipulated risk on romantic commitment were fully mediated by feelings of romantic affect. These findings complement and extend prior research on romantic feelings (Miron et al. in Motivation and Emotion 33:261–276, 2009; Miron et al. in Journal of Relationships Research 3:67–80, 2012) (a) by highlighting the barrier-like properties of manipulated risk of relationship breakup and its causal role in shaping romantic feelings, and (b) by suggesting that any obstacle can systematically control—thus, either reduce or enhance—the intensity of romantic feelings to the extent that such obstacles are perceived as ‘risky’ for the fate of the relationship.
... (For recent reviews on attraction, see Finkel & Baumeister, 2010, Finkel & Eastwick, 2015Zhou, Chelberg, & Aron, 2015). The major predictors of romantic attraction seem to be the other's desirability (physical attractiveness and the possession of positive qualities such as warmth, kindness, and social status), believing the other likes you (although it is also important that the liking is for you specifically and not everyone, e.g., Eastwick, Finkel, Mochon, & Ariely, 2007, and the person being moderately hard to get may also be an advantage, Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013), familiarity, perceiving the other person to be similar, meeting a reasonably desirable person under conditions in which one is highly physiologically aroused (e.g., standing on a scary bridge), and the other being thought of well by one's social network. A recent line of research has focused on "deal breakers," such as will have sex with others, abusive, etc. (Hatfield et al., 2016). ...
