PSYC FPX 3520 Assessment 4 Good Bad and Loving

Student Name

Capella University

PSYC FPX 3520 Introduction to Social Psychology

Prof. Name:

Date

Introduction

This case study presents a scenario involving two young men, Moe and Joe, who decide to host a party and invite dates to accompany them. The purpose of this paper is to explore the social psychology concepts of unrequited love, along with the derivative concepts of fair-mindedness and causing harm, as they relate to the case study. Additionally, research findings, explanations, and examples of these psychological concepts will be discussed.

Case Study

Moe and Joe are two young men who have chosen to throw an exciting party. Moe invites Susan, who accepts the invitation, having seen Moe at the coffee shop on several occasions, where they have developed a casual acquaintance through mutual nods and smiles. Joe expresses his approval of Moe’s choice and wholeheartedly agrees that Susan is attractive and intelligent. Encouraged by Joe’s positive assessment, Moe happily concludes that Susan could be “the one.” He arrives at this conclusion after noticing that Susan allowed him to hold her hand and looked at him in a way that suggested her attraction. Moe feels extremely optimistic about the date, believing he is beginning a romantic relationship with Susan that will be solidified by the end of the party. When Joe playfully teases Moe about being in love after just one date, noting that he never thought Moe was the romantic type, Moe responds with his belief that sometimes one must reach out and take what they desire.

As the party continues, Moe demonstrates his strong attraction to Susan. While Susan appreciates Moe’s attention, she has been out of the social scene for some time and responds with a more subdued form of affection. When Susan accepts Moe’s friend request on Facebook, he interprets this as confirmation of a new relationship. Consequently, instead of moderating his display of affection to better suit the situation, Moe’s assumption that Susan shares his feelings is reinforced. However, at the end of the party, Susan simply thanks Moe for a pleasant evening and takes a cab home. Moe is left feeling devastated and angry, believing that Susan was leading him on through her willingness to hold his hand, her attentive gaze, and her decision to friend him on Facebook.

He interprets these actions as indicative of a budding relationship and declares that he will not give up. Moe expresses his intention to “track her down” at the coffee shop and post about their new relationship on her Facebook page to affirm his serious intentions in pursuing her. Joe empathizes with Moe and agrees that Susan is “his girl” and should be pursued accordingly. This case study reflects the social psychology theory of unrequited love, defined as a situation where one person loves another, but the feelings are not mutual and therefore not reciprocated (Baumeister & Bushman, n.d.). Additionally, this case highlights the social psychology concepts of causing harm and fair-mindedness as they relate to unrequited love.

Research Support

Research Summary

The first of two research studies introduces a cognitive model of unrequited love, suggesting that individuals who relentlessly pursue a romantic interest after being rejected may experience “negativeness blindness.” This condition implies a psychological state in which individuals do not fully register the rejection, rather than acknowledging it but choosing not to report it to maintain their dignity. It is also posited that if the pursuer had truly heard the rejection, they would cease their pursuit. While empirical evidence for this is lacking, some researchers argue that certain sexual harassers who engage in “unwanted sexual attention” suffer from “miscommunication” and require a clear “no” from the target to stop their pursuit. In some cases, the pursuer may hear the rejection but choose not to believe it, interpreting the rejector’s behavior as playing hard to get or adopting an idealistic view that “love conquers all.”

The second study indicated that instances of unrequited love are significantly more common than mutual love that develops over time (Bringle, Winnick, & Rydell, 2013). Just over 25 percent of participants in equal love relationships reported having experienced unrequited love, and 33 participants indicated they had multiple ongoing unrequited love relationships (Bringle et al., 2013). Consequently, researchers concluded that unrequited love relationships are more prevalent than equal love relationships and that equal love does not preclude the existence of relationships stemming from unrequited love.

Research Interpretation

Both research articles address the role of unrequited love in causing harm. The cognitive processes involved in unrequited love, where one party is committed to a clearly deteriorating relationship, can lead to behaviors such as stalking their former partner while simultaneously devaluing alternative relationships. Furthermore, when the pursuer devalues other potential relationships, they demonstrate a lack of fair-mindedness by not allowing a new relationship the opportunity to develop.

Application of Unrequited Love

The case study of Moe and Joe illustrates the dynamics of unrequited love and the subsequent harm it can cause. During the party, Joe exclaims, “Wow, Moe! Susan is terrific! Good looking and smart, just like you said. Way to go!” Moe responds, “No kidding! I think this could be the one, Joe! She’s given me the eye and lets me hold her hand, so I know she’s really into me. I never fall fast for someone, but I’m thinking by the end of tonight, she’s going to be my girl.” Moe’s intense response is noteworthy, considering they are just beginning to get to know each other. He adds, “Sometimes you just have to reach out and grab what’s yours.” Moe’s comments suggest that he is experiencing negativity blindness.

Ethical Reasoning Application

Social Psychology Theory

Unrequited love refers to a situation where an unequal love relationship exists, characterized by one person giving love while the other does not reciprocate (Baumeister, Wotman, & Stillwell, 1993, p. 377). In this case study, Moe remains highly attentive to Susan, who only reciprocates with mild affection and accepts his friend request on Facebook.

Supportive Evidence

Despite Susan’s lack of reciprocation to Moe’s attentiveness, he continues to believe that a solid relationship is developing. When the party concludes, Susan thanks him for a pleasant evening and takes a cab home. This leaves Moe feeling affronted and indignant that the relationship did not develop as he had anticipated. He begins to criticize Susan’s behavior and intentions, stating, “I can’t believe it! She led me on all night long, giving me looks, holding my hand, even friending me on Facebook. Everything she did showed she was into me and our relationship.”

Critical Thinking Application

Behavioral Ethics

The concept of causing harm examines the various types of harm that may be inflicted on individuals or groups and the potential justifications for such harms.

Supportive Evidence

When Moe declares, “I’m not giving up. I’m going to track her down at the coffee shop and post about our new relationship on Facebook,” he expresses his intention to engage in potentially harmful stalking behaviors. He feels justified in his plans to pursue a romantic relationship with Susan, disregarding the potential harm his actions may cause.

Behavioral Ethics Theory

Fair-mindedness involves treating all viewpoints equally, without regard to personal feelings or selfish interests, or the feelings and vested interests of friends, community, nation, or species (Elder & Paul, 2012).

Supportive Evidence

When Joe responds to Moe’s intention to continue pursuing Susan by saying, “You tell her, Moe! Don’t let a good one like her get away. She’s your girl!” he demonstrates a lack of fair-mindedness in evaluating the situation due to his friendship with Moe. Instead, he could have encouraged Moe to consider Susan’s perspective, which might have alleviated his cognitive dependence on the idea of forming a romantic relationship with her.

References

Allahverdyan, A. E., & Galstyan, A. (2014). Opinion dynamics with confirmation bias. PLoS One, 9(7). http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099557

Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. Social psychology and human nature, comprehensive edition. [Capella]. Retrieved from https://capella.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781337467841/

Conformity Bias – Ethics Unwrapped – UT Austin. (n.d.). Retrieved March 20, 2020, from https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/video/conformity-bias

Dyson, M. R. (2015). Still using the wrong yardstick: Measuring quality by the proxies of bias, conformity, and rumor. Columbia Journal of Gender & Law, 31(1), 154–163.