 So, I am just going to share my experience or knowledge of what we call how similar attitudes determine attraction. Let us see why I became interested in it. So, in my high school I became little curious about things. So, that curiosity I am sharing with you and how I search for meaning in it. And that first curiosity while this in every designs that Newton saw apple falling down. And this experience led Newton to explore or explain what happens. And he came up with this that law of universal gravitation. So, what this law is like from every designs we are taking from physics not from psychology any two objects in the universe exert gravitational attraction on each other. Now, this is happening in the matter. Then in social study I read something like this in high school or is total saying birds of a feather flock together. And apparently you can see pictures of so many dogs here not birds where it says that nothing replaces having a friend. So, when we have friend there must be some kind of force of attraction. Let us go back to the literature. So, when we go to sociology not in psychology sociology to famous psychologist Paul F. Lazarusfield and Robert Martin both of Columbia University. They coined this term called homophily by which we mean that we all have a tendency to be attracted to others who have similar attitudes value beliefs opinions. So, you see the background Newton talking about gravitational force sociologist talking about how people become friends. What why their method typically for sociologists they would ask people friends colleagues wives and so forth. What are your views about different things god money institution society and when you would correlate the two opinions usually the correlation would be positive and high. So, on that basis one would say that friends colleagues peers husband wife they are similar. This is the traditional sociological method or approach here are some problems. If we do research like this and we do most of the time did homophily lead to friendship working together or marriage or did friendship working together or marriage made them similar in views. If two strangers get married live together they can become similar that is also a possibility which is not that similarity brought together living together made them similar this is the issue we have here. So, causation could not be known what is cause and what is the effect. So, it was a big problem for sociologist to determine which one is cause and which one is effect. So, we have philosopher we have sociologist and now psychologist are coming. So, let us see what psychologist did. So, the relation we are learning from philosophy and sociology that attitude similarity leads to attraction. And to us as a psychologist we have a challenge how do we test this hypothesis. Let us go back to the history for this let us look at this quotation Alport in 1935 he said the concept of attitude is probably the most distinctive and indispensable concept in contemporary American social psychology. In 1996 quotation I have brought from man state who wrote in black will in psychopedia of psychology. In an oft quoted passage Gordon Alport asserted that the concept of attitude is probably the most distinctive and indispensable concept in contemporary American social psychology. Few if any statements this extreme about social psychology could reasonably be expected to remain valid over a period of nearly 60 years because he is talking about 96. 8 it is arguably true that attitude is a still at least one of the most indispensable concepts in social psychology if not the most indispensable one. So, apparently philosophers sociologist talked about attitude and attitude is so distinctive construct in social psychology. So, we have to see how attitude similarity leads to attraction this is the theme of the first lecture I am dealing with it. So, let us come back what is our attitude how do we conceptualize attitude and here I would like to present two quotations which I like very much one this is taken from page one of a book on attitude and look at it what definition it is a attitude is a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor this is the first sentence of this book from which I have taken this. That means we have a tendency to favor some objects disfavor some objects the moment we are doing it we are expressing our attitudes this is the way. Now if it is so then this is taken from psych review 2000 please pay attention to this quotation it is difficult to imagine a person who is impartial toward all that he or she encounters and it would be odd to hear someone say I am completely neutral toward my family my job my dog so on and so forth. And you know the latest literature is that we develop attitude toward any new thing within one tenth of a second it is so powerful that is why I said it is an anchor and once you form the attitude we start processing information based on that attitude this is the point we have hammered here. Now so we understand what is attitude now how do I test that attitude similarity can be a cause in psychology typically we follow the philosophers idea or scientist idea they said to be a cause four conditions would be satisfied the first condition is there should be association between two things two things must go together fire and birds and the flocking together fire and the smoke. So this is the first requirement there should be association between the two the second we say temporal precedence by temporal precedence we mean cause comes before effect so temporal order is important third one we say there should not be anything other than the cause all other things should be absent just the fire just the attitude only then we can say they have become friends so all other things should be controlled and only one thing should be different and that I also learned in my high school text book by Arun Kumar Datta when he said how do we perform an experiment and finally to achieve this we take group of people people differ in many ways so we randomly assign to two different groups and we believe that by random assignment to two different groups the two groups become equivalent to a start bit so these are the four conditions we need to satisfy one association to temporal sequence number three all other things are constant and four group people differ in many ways so we randomly assign them to two conditions one where there is a cause another where there is no cause if there is a difference then we say this must be the effect now let us come back to the first experiment on similarity and attraction in sixty one one article appeared so this study must have been done in fifty nine fifty eight at the same time when Lazarus Field and Merton coined that term homophily okay so see what he did Dunburn he surveyed opinions of students on campus later on he made some artificial surveyed where opinion should be similar to the student or dissimilar to the student when a student came to participate he randomly assigned them to two different groups and to some he gave a survey which had similar attitudes another who had dissimilar attitudes and asked them to indicate their attraction that you are going to meet a person so two things you tell me how much you would like this person who has expressed his views on the survey like as you had done before and number two how much you would enjoy working together with that person so he manipulated similarity and dissimilarity and measured attraction and his finding was that yes and the number of things I would like to draw your attention here let us look at how he conceptualize attitude and you can go back to the definition I had given favor or disfavor so he did precisely like that let us look at this environmental protection let us look at the six statements we have designed I am very much against environmental protection I am against environmental protection I am mildly against environmental protection at the bottom you see I am mildly in favor of environmental protection I am in favor of environmental protection I am very much in favor of environmental protection do you see a difference here first we have divided six into four and against like favor and disfavor. Then we have manipulated the degree neutral point is missing here. So, his method was you see here we have contra and we have four top three statements and bottom three statements are opposed. So, we have you know pro and con two different positions and they differ in the magnitude. And so, when we conceptualize attitude we have four and against and how much how do we manipulate similarity let us look at the trick here. If I survey your attitudes and give you back exactly like this you would suspect that you have given my own right. So, we have to use something. So, that participants take them as credible. So, Bern also devised a method let us suppose on environmental protection participant response is here at number two I am against environmental protection. So, how would you manipulate similarity now? We have two options now either we can go one step up and one step down same side then it would be similarity this is the method you used got it. Because, if we tick on the same you would not believe me that you have given back my own and asking me whether I am attracted toward myself or not. So, we have to make it credible how do we manipulate dissimilarity again go back to the same statement if we are putting here then what would you do dissimilarity means it must go on the other side right similarity should be on the same side dissimilarity must be on the other side. So, the trick he used he said always go three steps apart. So, two becomes five three becomes six right one becomes four something like this this is the trick he. So, neither similarity nor dissimilarity would be exactly like yours. So, you believe it is somebody else opinion. So, it is the we conceptualize attitude we are manipulating it in a realistic manner and how did he measure attraction? He developed a scale called interpersonal judgment a scale in which four items I have taken for you first two one measured intelligence another measured general knowledge he said knowledge of current events, but later on I modified at general knowledge. So, it is seven point a scale earlier was six point a scale you remember attitude here we have a continuous rating a scales in which the attraction items were the last two items one personal feelings how much I would how do you feel how much you like dislike you see continuous a scale we have and how much you would enjoy working together with this person original was in a psychological experiment later on I converted into a problem solving task fine because the students are doing. So, we have a continuous a scale here and participant would make a tick marks. So, that is all I find out your opinion manipulate similar dissimilar attitudes give you back and ask you that before I give you a chance to meet or work with this person you form an opinion and make few judgments about it fine I simple as this experiment and when he collected data. So, if we manipulate proportion of similar attitudes from zero to one he got this linear line and thought like Newton he is so much attached with his equation every time we correspond he says does my equation work you know you know in my thesis I in 74 we got very closer at the same Purdue this was Texas data this is Purdue University data. So, the line is linear fine. So, Newton has a law of universal gravitation we have a law now where we say attraction toward a person is a positive linear function of proportion of similar attitudes. So, greater the similarity more is the attraction. So, this became law of attraction as simple as this you see how simple experiments we do in psychology neat and clean nothing no confusion. So, this effect is so powerful we have not come across anyone who said that this finding is not replicable it is so powerful and. So, I give a number of in different country these that and in fact in 2005 park and seller said that if somebody agrees with you you will start believing that this fellow also shares some gene with me you know this much is the belief in the power of this attitude in 71 this much was a research I wrote my thesis came back to IIT Kanpur we got distracted started doing research in another area I bring you to a second part now first part we have concluded attraction is a positive linear function of proportion of similar attitudes fine. We all thought this paradigm is dead nothing would happen to it all of a sudden in 86 one article appears in JPSP and three things I would like to say that linear relationship implies that similar and dissimilar attitudes have equal and opposite effects on attraction this is the implication Rosenbaum Milton Rosenbaum he said I argue that similar attitude does not lead to liking but dissimilar attitude does indeed lead to repulsion. So, if you have similar dissimilar attitudes and similarity mean is higher than dissimilarity we say attraction effect he said no it is repulsion effect now how did he test it. So, this one so repulsion hypothesis simply said finding someone shares our views does not make us like that person but finding that he or she disagrees with us does lead us to son him or avoid him or her that became repulsion hypothesis by that time I had moved to Singapore and I was teaching social psychology. So, it brought me back and see what we did I so first let us come back to his two experiments of Rosenbaum what he did in experiment one he manipulated similar dissimilar attitudes and also gave photograph of the person you are going to interact and there is one condition in we gave only just photographs. So, we have similar attitudes dissimilar attitudes given with attractive unattractive photographs four conditions and then we have two conditions where we give just photographs no attitude information another experiment he did with democratic and republican delegates in America and said these are the positive personality characteristics mild or positive and again similar and dissimilar attitudes that means he created a control condition Bern had dissimilar similar he never had a condition of no attitude. So, Rosenbaum said let me give a photograph let me give personality characteristics and then see whether similar attitude would add something to it and dissimilar would subtract something to it you got a very simple experiment like this let us look at the graph that would make the things clearer this is his finding from the first experiment maybe I come back and show you here then. So, you see the lines here this line and this line this is based on similar attitudes this is based on we have photo not so attractive and attractive photographs then we have similar attitudes and dissimilar attitudes and this line is based on when we give only photographs similarly this is mildly positive mildly negative personality characteristics this is dissimilar attitude this is similar attitudes this is based on only personality characteristics what do you notice here similar and personality lines do not differ. However, dissimilar attitude line is lower so he said similar attitudes do not lead to attraction in contrast dissimilar attitudes do lead to repulsion you see somebody is entire work is demolished by two experiments this is the way we have scientific process here. Now, the question is is it true that is why I put no entry sign he said that similar attitudes do not produce attraction how do we solve the problem. So, I suggested to my one undergraduate students in town like this is the summary I have given no similarity effect why control condition line similar to similarity condition line why repulsion because control line is higher than dissimilarity line you see like how we test in a simple way how much a statistics is required no more than two three tests when we reach the conclusion to my a student I said this is not right test of this hypothesis. So, his hypothesis why dissimilarity leads to repulsion similarity does not lead to attraction and that became repulsion hypothesis. So, I advise my a student to conduct a new experiment and this is what you see let us look at the criticism any ideal test would compare no attitude with attitude not photographs because photograph is also leading to some kind of assumptions. So, no attitude versus attitudes. So, that let me to advise we said a students come and I have already done the survey using his method and say you are going to interact with a person and at the moment I am not going to tell you anything you tell me what is your opinion of this person how this person would look like what do you think his or her attitudes would be. So, you are inferring the attitudes of your peers then I said after that this is the second time these are his attitudes now I give them. So, I have two kinds of ratings dissimilar half similar half dissimilar three conditions I create first stage no information second stage three kinds of information and say how attracted you would be toward this person. So, I created a condition which is of no attitude information let us look at the findings now see this graph can you interpret this is the pre acquaintance line this is when similarity to this is half similar dissimilar this is all dissimilar what it now how would you interpret it there is similarity effect right there is dissimilarity effect. So, both similar and dissimilar attitudes are operating fine now. So, this is what are both similar and dissimilar in full well start reaction initial attraction right, but you can calculate something now this minus this and this minus this if you do. So, what do you notice that is why I have two vertical line now it is dissimilarity repulsion effect is a stronger than similarity attraction or similarity attraction effect is weaker than dissimilarity repulsion effect. So, Bern is right Rosenbaum is right something else we are getting it something else we are getting you see that this is the difference we are making now can you make a criticism of this there is a criticism we say reactive method what is reactive first you indicate how attracted you are toward me then I tell you something. So, you believe that in the light of this information I must give higher and lower response this is called reactive method I can defend it how can I defend if it is so then how come difference is a small in one case and more in another case it could have been equally a part, but less similarity effect and a stronger dissimilarity means in a spite of reactivity something is operating fine no. So, we said that we accepted this criticism reactivity, but ruled it out. How I did it very simple experiment I divide you into two groups no information and similar attitudes and say how attracted you are toward this person. So, no two judgments on you and when we did it it is very clear cut no information 20 participants similarity to 19 participants look at the two means this is similarity to the mean this is dissimilar one and apparently you can see similarity mean is higher even though I take one judgment. So, it is not reactivity similarity does produce an effect, but that effect was a smaller. So, that was the beginning here yes both similarity and dissimilarity make a difference, but there is a departure now original idea was similar and dissimilar attitudes have equal and opposite effects then it became at it similar attitudes have no effect. Now, I am demonstrating both similar and dissimilar have effects and similar have less effect than dissimilar new issue is coming like in the research you see like my topic is how attitudes determine and this is what I am carrying you by one by one. So, here is another thing I had asked experiment in the first time can you guess what would be the attitudes of this person based on that I know your attitudes and then you have inferred what would be your partner attitude. So, we calculated and we came up with the idea of assumed similarity and we found out that they had assumed similarity around 0.73. So, 7 3 and 1 difference is 0.27 7 3 and 0 is a difference of 7 0.73 and this is what we got one unit similarity and three unit dissimilarity. So, one hypothesis became that there is a person positivity bias anyone you are going to meet we go with a positivity positive orientation against that anchor that similarity and dissimilarity make adjustments right. So, one hypothesis became that person positivity bias operates this is the one possibility there are some other possibilities which I will share you. So, to handle this I ask another on our student to do a developmental study and what she did she asked children of 7 11 15 and 21 years and just like three between subject that similarity to dissimilarity to and no information about the partner is one of the NUSS students right. And two measures we took one measure of assumed similarity like when I do not give you attitude information I ask you can you infer when I give attitude similarity take you back and say can you recall what were the responses. So, that we made perceived similarity assumed similarity. So, let us look at this graph now you can see that at two younger age there is no difference between no information and similarity very similar to dozenba, but as we come to 15 and 21 year old we do have differences here see this difference is significant this difference is significant what would be the consequence of this on attraction. So, this one is mean perceived or assumed similarity you see there is difference here now let us come back to attraction difference here when you come to attraction see precisely the same kind of thing we are finding these two differ from dissimilarity these two differ from similarity and they do not differ in contrast when we come to 15 year old they differ when we come to 21 year old they differ and effectively all three are different. So, what I had seen that dissimilarity similarity asymmetry earlier I am able to get with 15 and 21 year olds at younger children we do not get it because they are very positive of other people. So, that was it. So, as at that time I did not know mediation analysis had inter the literature, but I did not know how to relate assumed similarity with attraction measure. So, we just raised as a hypothesis though it went to personality social bulletin, but we did not know reviewers did not know editors did not know at that time how to relate these things. So, it went like this, but one issue remains is effect of similarity to weaker than that of dissimilar because of this bias or because of something else that something else would be importance or weight how much importance you give to similarity and how much you give to dissimilarity somebody would disagree with you one on a that basis you say no more relationship somebody. So, may be it is not the difference it is the importance you assign that became the issue here. So, at this stage then now in that developmental study there is another interesting thing we got according to rozenbaum dissimilarity truth is most important right, but how come age difference you find in similar condition and dissimilar condition also if similar it is of no use there should be no difference in that condition everyone should react alike another point I made developmentally. So, now the issue two things became is this effect an outcome of adjustment with the anchor or is it because of the weight we assign to similar and dissimilar attitudes. Now, how do we test out you know and as I look at my career as a psychologist sometimes simple ideas do not enter into your head it takes years and years and decades to come across this. So, to another on our student we said that here is a challenge one possibility is this distance on anchoring type greater distance of dissimilarity than similarity from assumed similarity when attitudes are not known another possibility is that dissimilar attitudes take on greater weight than similarity tools. How do we test it let us control assumed similarity like in age says we varied assumed similarity we said let us hold assumed similarity constant and manipulate similarity dissimilarity and I do not know how this idea came we said we said very simple you design two survey survey A and survey B each one has six attitudes manipulate similarity in first and second manipulate similarity in and dissimilarity in the second. So, it becomes a simple two by two design just like the rozenbaum, but no photograph condition got it. So, two survey we said manipulate similarity dissimilar in the first survey second survey and look at how the four means would look like that became the point of interest that effect of attitude similarity in the first survey is it dependent upon the level of the second survey and we generated three hypothesis first hypothesis comes from burn in which he said there should be just two main effects because similar and dissimilar have equal and opposite effects two parallel lines second one rozenbaum said in his according to his hypothesis what did he say only dissimilar attitudes lead to repulsor right. So, as long as somebody disagrees with you you would reject him. So, when I am manipulating two by two there is only one condition where you have similar in all two form A and B in other conditions we have both dissimilar half dissimilar half similar. So, we said those three means would be different from similar condition. So, one means should be significantly greater than the other three which would be equivalent and third one we said which is my asymmetry hypothesis we said that no both similar and dissimilar would produce, but effect of similarity would be less at the dissimilar level of the other survey than on the similar level. Now, look at in the graph. So, we made now here is a challenge if you predict something which is not linear or which is non parallel then it may be an artifact that your response measure is not being used in a linear way by the participant. So, you also have to demonstrate that a scale is being used like 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 point must be used as continuous and not non linear way. So, this is my prediction on attraction measure attraction hypothesis would lead to the first graph, but Rosenbaum would lead to the second graph and my hypothesis would lead to the third graph asymmetry hypothesis right. So, now, you see two graphs predict non linear lines. So, here I utilize the response to intelligence and general knowledge if you look at it because asymmetry should take place in attraction not in judgment of your competence. So, when I did the experiment now see the findings this is the graph for attraction, this is the graph for respect. Later on I have termed use respect for the person, respect for the competence of the person and this is attraction toward the person here what do you notice here interaction is in attraction which I had predicted there is no interaction in the respect. So, one thing I am ruling out there is no problem in use of response measure right. So, now the question becomes if I test that simple effect you would notice see a very simple logic when you look at effect of similarity this is similarity to right and this is at the level of dissimilar in the second set of survey this difference is lower why because if you go near my tides and you feel weak, but if you go in front of a child you feel very powerful. So, when dissimilarity you see in similar condition it is more. So, this is the basis of judging which one is more important. So, you see here effect of similar dissimilar or difference is reduced when there is dissimilarity in the second survey similarly effect of similar dissimilar in the second survey is less when dissimilarity is in the first survey. Now, how this idea came it came spontaneously somehow and we said let us look like something this what would happen and this is what we demonstrated and we said that a symmetry arises at the level of waiting of information waiting of information means how much importance you attach to agreement and disagreement. That was and in respect we demonstrated parallel line. So, you remember reactivity was the challenge in the first one then we came to assumed similarity then we have come to wait and I do not know where whether you are noticing the change. This is 73 in 92 appears pre acquaintance and attraction 96 98 appears developmental 2000 this one appears. So, look at the time lag it is not that you do and next year you get the idea it takes sometime decades. So, on basis of parallelism we said linear use is true. Now, we are saying this asymmetry indicates the dissimilar attitudes relative to similar attitudes assume greater weight or take on greater weight this is the conclusion. We said weight is necessary and important we cannot ignore it, but still there is a challenge now is it at the level of response. So, it became important now there is a another challenge is this happening this weight is taking place at the level of responding or at the level of paying attention. So, another Chinese student came to me and I said can you test it and you can see how what kind of passion students have they said sir there is something in cognitive psychology. So, I said can you design something that attention gets caught by something if something captures my attention then my responding would become slow. This is the idea we designed to say and that Chinese a student now he has gone done PhD and he is now back at in US. What he designed you waiting at attention level and see what kind of experiments we do he said we are going to do a color naming experiment. Now, this paper appeared in 2009 first experiment there are many challenges burn said equivalent a positive effects I also got in my thesis linear line then came repulsion then we are saying asymmetry. So, if you understand something you should be able to resolve all these contradictions that became the challenge. So, two task were in fact is this happening at attention level and can we specify a condition where both similar and dissimilar can take equal importance this is what we did. So, we did two experiments now in the first one you come to the lab I have already found out your attitudes and when you come this is not attraction experiment I am interested in finding out individual differences in color naming fine. So, we selected your attitude then we generated some statements and example I have given that for example attitude to a divorce would be. So, we will make a suit refrain from divorcing we want to have favorable attitude like this. So, we have a sentences like this and participant is sitting in front of the computer and we display a sentence we say like Pandora you do not have to read the statement you have to name the color of that word blue red pink something like this. This is that no attraction experiment name the color do not read the statement because if you say somebody do not tell it then you would go and tell to everyone the same logic we have and to do that to control it takes your energy that is that is the logic we followed here. And how we created the steam light from the survey 12 statements where randomly we made it similar 12 where we randomly made dissimilar 12 we made which bear general knowledge items a spiders of eight leg India has 1.2 billion people something like general knowledge question some we made x x x x x that became our base line of steam light which have no meaning 5 x 6 x 2 x you know and we have color different x you got it. Now, when I am displaying the statement there is a challenge how do I display it. So, we designed a method here. So, first I just remember this part we have favorable unfavorable statements then we have created 12 base line control a steam light with x you know like you see one example I have given 6 x 5 x 3 x 2 x you know different thing are appearing on a screen 12 filler we have general knowledge. So, we have 4 set of a steam light now I am interested in how you respond to similar and dissimilar task is to name the color on the computer screen, but I am mixing exactly half number of a steam light which are irrelevant type x x x or general knowledge type. And you sit in front of heat and look at the kill all these base line control they are matched in number of words and letters even word frequency count we had considered, because if the difference is there would be confounding I remember I said all other things must be constant except one. So, we did that and this is our ingenuity on computer screen you see and that is why I say why in India it cannot be done for a particular participant we created 3 trials. So, on trial one he reads suit divorce when necessary where suit is as a color rest is black then we have a black screen then the same as suit divorce when necessary now divorce is colored here suit divorce when necessary this one is colored. So, the task is to name the color and press the cream the idea here is if what I have told them not to read name the color. So, if he is distracted by the sentence what would happen responding would become slow that is the logic. So, if we would see x x x responding should be faster, because it has no meaning to be no like if you are going if you are a Hindu temple can disrupt you, but if you are crossing a mosque you would not be that is the logic we have. So, x x x should not disrupt you similar this similar suit disrupt you this similar suit catch your attention more if it takes weight that is the logic we followed 3 trials we created, because we wanted to paint different part, because one would say no because of suit the difference you get is because of suit or somebody would say difference you are getting because of this to rule it out. And when we did it this experiment worked out see here sometime we have seen that things which you think it is so nonsensical makes lot of sense what you need to see here average of these are the 3 trials you see. So, for x x x this is the latency lower latency means faster responding for similar you find this for this similar you find this and we are measuring in milliseconds there is some trial effect familiarity effect, but what we demonstrated 2 things we were interested in first similar dissimilar responding to those stimuli is slower than control x x x x x. Number 2 between dissimilar and similar you see dissimilar is catching you get more disrupted by dissimilar attitudes it catches your attention automatically. So, that automatic literature we had taken here so our first experiment demonstrated dissimilar attitudes do capture your attention more than similar attitudes. So, waiting hypothesis is supported now the challenge is why sometime equal attention sometime unequal attention you see in this globalized world with telephone, Facebook, computer we are doing more work than we are supposed to do. So, our attention our resources have depleted so we have developed some default automatic responding type. So, respond giving greater weight to dissimilar is automatic default device at the same time we say we should be objective fair not biased we must consider take even sided approach something like this for that you have to have resources. So, we designed another experiment for this again coming from cognitive psychology and look at the method of this. Now, another thing we did here that 12 similar and dissimilar attitude we had selected one may say that how did you select your attitude participant may have had some opinion on this. So, for each individual we demonstrated that this effect holds independent of whether what the professor Misra thinks about divorce or what I think about God I said it was because of similarity dissimilarity not because of my position not whether I am favorable or unfavorable then next experiment we did we said cognitive resource is a moderator just like our 15 and 21 year old and 7 to 11 year old we thought they were cognitively depleted fellow with adult we have more cognitive resources we got idea from there. So, in this time we said this time you are supposed to read the statement this is not color name right. So, in one condition you are supposed to read the statement and press the key and it would be recorded. So, no cognitive load to other half of the participant we said no when you read it computer would randomly emit a tone and your task is to detect the tone. So, the moment you hear the tone press the key. So, in high cognitive resource condition means low load we said you read it and detect the tone and randomly on three attitude statement of each participant the tone would appear to other half participant we said when the tone is detected the moment you hear a start counting backward by difference of 7 and a number we used was taken from a cognitive psychology experiment like let us suppose 938. So, you have to remember 931. So, your resources are now diverted this is the logic we followed and when we did this this is the finding you are getting. You see in the condition of low cognitive load means high cognitive resources you see again the responding is faster and there is no effect whether this are three similar attitude dissimilar attitude or x x x in contrast when you go to the higher level. See here when they had to count backward by 7 from 938 means cognitive resource you are loaded like paying at multitasking type in that case responding became slower in detecting the tone and dissimilar took longer time than the other two conditions the only discrepancy we got there is no difference between similar and control here otherwise this is what. So, how these experiments how did I start how do similar attitudes determine attraction look at the history both have equal and opposite only dissimilar have effect similar have less effect than dissimilar is it happening because of assumed similarity or is it happening because of the weight is it happening at the responding or is it happening at the level of attention why did we do all these by doing all these now we say asymmetry when there is a load means low resources no asymmetry when there is no load and cognitive load or cognitive capacity is a moderator how we pay attention to the weight of dissimilar and similar attitudes this is what we have demonstrated, but our importance in resolving the controversy and here I say in a study where similar attitudes out weighted similar one dissimilar out weighted similar ones processic demands were typically high and how you know due to requirement of either you have to interact with the person you have to process photographs you have to process personality profile in those cases we find dissimilar attitudes are more effective than similar attitudes, but when there are no such requirements when you have ample cognitive resources when you are older in that condition we do pay equal attention to similar and dissimilar attitudes this is what we have understood. So, here is the summary now what we have learned out of this research for so many days those who think like us do exert gravitational force go back to the Newton upon us and we are automatically drawn to them this is what we have understood number two how much we are drawn to them depends upon our own person positivity bias it does play a role and also the wage of waiting similarity over dissimilarity at a particular point of time this much we have understood and our default style is in this age of globalization to pay greater give greater weight to dissimilarity over similarity this is what we have and given motivation and ability however we can pay equal attention to both that requires our time that requires our effort and in the first lecture this is what I wanted to share with you now imagine one thing 61 this is 2013 tomorrow I will tell you is still we do not understand it this simple puzzle here I have described how they do it tomorrow we talk about why do similarity to determine you know and how simple task like this can be how involving and complex another thing I have realized in my life in no research paradigm anything is ever complete in the middle 73 then almost we have stopped doing research right we went to another 90 again we come back 92 98 2000 2009 so it comes like every decade something you know it is like a virus growing in your brain but it depends upon your passion how you do this okay so ask something which I have a question especially based on your developmental study where you said that children who are young they generally go out with a very positive attitude towards others so on an application part can this be used to reduce the feeling of discrimination amongst the population you are saying that if I am that was the basis that children are more positive of the outside world than the adults so can this be used to increase putting positivity in them in all these experiments what we tell the participants you are going to interact with somebody so the moment we say you are going to interact with somebody you would say that we become very positive we dress nicely and we hope this person would be nice we know all kinds of things so this is the temporary state but with age in the initial year children are very frightened of others but when they become school going right one reason of positivity which we discussed in this paper was they have very rare occasion to discuss things because most of the time they assume we are similar right so because of that it appears that they believe that all others would hold opinions and views similar to mine so it is not really some kind of chronic characteristics and with an adult when we have a chance to discuss the law or all these people like when we discuss on some issues we agree on some we do not agree this we become aware much later so instead of saying this like a stable characteristic we said because they had a less chance to discuss different things they take it for granted others are similar so that is why the similar is making a difference in their case in other respect they are assuming similar he is my class mate you know we studied together you know he likes me you know something so that was the basis of sake but can this be a basis of developing positivity if it is so then giving the right kind of information it is possible in the same way I would also say by giving the wrong kind of information that do not drink water do not eat food given by somebody else what we are putting in their mind that the world is unsafe unkind people can trick you so do not accept it so we are reducing advice like some children if you give they would take it means they have positivity to some say no my parents have told me not to accept anything so it can be used as a mechanism you know like when I said attitude or that cycle review quotation I said actually once we form attitudes we become so biased any further information processing is always against that anchor tell to somebody you are going to meet be careful his entire interaction will be finished it is so powerful virus you know and just like germ it grows in the system this is what I understood yes do you take into consideration the attitude of the subjects that before coming to the exam yes no no but you see like I does it change no that attitude change we are we are not measuring here all I am doing I find out how do you think about different issues of this country your view right and I am manipulating similarity and dissimilarity but in each in case for example like in later experiments you know when we had manipulated you may be opposed to something you may be supportive of something we demonstrated that regardless of your initial opinion if it is similar you feel attracted if it is dissimilar you feel repulsed so your initial anchor is even though they are controlled similarity works that we have demonstrated but does it change the attitude that we have not measured because that was not the issue because it is a work of shelly teller because in that work that initial attitude is very negative about somebody and you give the positive information that you are similarity it leads to more disliking rather than liking that was her finding a very problem clearly brought out that pi attitude is very negative then similarity would be lead to further negative disliking no no if the prior attitude is negative very negative and then we give positive then it becomes more negative no because you discounted it no no many times like if you do not like somebody and if somebody is saying good thing about it you know look at how we react we discredit not that information even the person who is saying that all these are but these are different possibilities you see like in all these experiments we select one issue and try to see whether we are able to answer it or not at in I am the body in 93 I was giving a seminar on fair a local location of work load and norm which appeared in organizational behavior paper so after the seminar I said to the audience that I know this is management institute and some of you would ask me how my research will solve poverty problem of India so my research was not directed at solving poverty problem it was directed at solving my poverty problem and it has solved it also do not have to think about this life so in any of these research you do or you should be doing you have one particular goal which you are seeking have you been able to solve it that should be the no research is intended to solve all problem many times people ask this that but see somebody wanted to do this is he able to do it competently has analyzed drawn the conclusion ruled out the alternative hypothesis you see like a series of objections we had here one hypothesis came another hypothesis came the lull question their own opinion how the we dealt with those which were directly relevant to them it would be like how did we start with the sociology idea people get married and they are similar is it because of similarity or marriage marriage leads to similarity too we learn that look this is the way we can get along well in that case attitude changes or somewhere we say familiarity breeds content giant said family more you see it more you like it so these contradictions exist and we have to see conditions in which one holds and another and in this presentation what I have demonstrated yes there are conditions where similar and this attitude can be attended equally there are conditions when they would not be attended and what is the default device default is to get swayed more by this similarity that similarity and I think that seems to be the fact of life one disagreement is enough to finish relationship so that is the default but when you think out we disagreed we quarreled on a silly issue this realization comes when we have we are motivated we analyze you say it was not the correct position and many times we hear the two opponents of different views they discussed and after the discussion they start their change their views to each other those possibilities exist you people pick up there is one aspect of the whole series of experiments which draws a rotation and that relates with the notion of attitude itself I think the earlier view was more in terms of disposition now gradually it moves to the level of responding to situations stimuli in positive or negative way and then now you have demonstrated that the cognitive mediators are there how attention is paid how available attention is divided now I would like to understand that all these theories have used different notions of attitude too there is there is some change in the nature of conceptualization of the phenomenon of attitude no I just want to no no grace work here still we are saying it is a tendency to favor and disfavor so that this position part is there even the all point definition it is a predisposition to act and he meant tendency actually we tend to you see so that we are retaining what we are dealing with here is not on attitude per se we are dealing with once we have an attitude how it influences relationship that part I am dealing with it so original definition of attitude like a predisposition like I am disposed to favor you I am opposed you know disposed to oppose you that attitude I have but how this disposition leads to relationship that part I am dealing with so we have not challenged that and another aspect is that it is a need to design to address this issue but when we go to real life interactions like in family there are contradictions there are occasions when people have differences still they maintain the relationship now is there any possibility of incorporating such a situation because if you follow this line of argument that it is very neat and clean how dissimilarity will lead to you know weakening the relationship you see like in this research which I am presenting I am interested in acquaintance attraction type you know how attractor when you come to close relationship and some literature I have taken for next lecture where I took the idea of trust from close relationship and then I have developed the underlying mechanisms you see so for this session it was packaged with just one idea we manipulate similar dissimilar attitudes and how it determines you see so it became equal opposite it became more it became more or less and it what level so that way we have taken like this now tomorrow when we come to I have changed one word between the two sessions why there I have taken ideas from close relationship that how without some of those things relationship cannot be formed but that is a different but these research or these studies were not intended to solve like you know all problems they had a particular issue and they were addressed to that issue and we are saying are we able to deal but a strength you would see how one problem leads to another and when you think about it leads to and keep you busy just like you are playing and your musical instrument so this is the logic and see like in my high school this Newton thing whenever I teach research method I start with Newton because I got so ability to observe something and a starting thinking and doing is a good skill for a researcher and his gravitational idea is the basis of relationship objects are pose and you know repel each other it is so powerful same thing happens in human beings now why it happens we will talk tomorrow this is another you are referring to giant no no no tomorrow I come to giant and I was that reference that he very famous paper that no no no 90 80 American psychologist yes and he was saying that the effective responses are not contingent on the coordination no he said and tomorrow I come back to that his effect prime I see versus effect center tomorrow is the issue I have read all those literature and that has later asked something ask something because sometime when you asked I wanted to share an idea in the experiment where you change the color of the words and then you ask that fine you have to name the color and the whole response was based on the fact that if you engage yourself in reading the statement then your response time increases yes there is another if the same thing is using a eye tracking device it can be done same thing and say if initially my responses if my eye movement is jittery this means I am searching for the color so is it that the instruction that was given by the experimenter was actually complied by the subject or not that can very easily be tapped and in case you are reading the sentence then of course so the tracker will see how do you select the words identification of color is too easy if one pays attention to that similarly say is it that dependent on your reaction time dependent on your tracking style and also on say color versus the non color part of it which actually determines the attitude okay possibly a new interpretation can be given it is possible you see what we did from so far we were doing only paper pencil experiment I give you a survey you make a tick mark here we said okay in structure we get to the participants this is a study of individual differences in color naming when you see a color how fast you detect it and your a speed I am measuring so I am encouraging them to respond as fast as possible you remember but I am telling don't read like control yours there we manipulated the load it's a high load controlling yourself not reading it like I am give I am cooking very nice dish and I tell you you cannot eat it so that so that control color naming you do but manipulation I am doing that stimuli are of four different types something which are similar to your views some are dissimilar to your views some are general knowledge question some are xxx so when xxx which has no meaning you did not read it it's a very fast when you start reading then it becomes slower and it becomes slowest when you are reading something dissimilar because that's catching your example these is against me you know so that was the logic here but you can take it is it at the time of reading is it at the time of responding that would be the next stage which I don't think I can do now but with eye tracking or mapping it is also possible to see which region of the brain is activated while doing this responding to similar and dissimilar attitudes like positive effect and negative effect these are the challenges for these youngsters anything is possible but you know see how something can keep you engaged in solving it but so far you have seen it to borrow some of the other thing like some time having something like the two measures which I used as a measure of respect do you think that can be a source of problem for burn somebody attacked him based on that two measures therefore you would see the implication of it many times we do in a study many things randomly without thinking without realizing how it may be changing the process okay thank you