Looking for term to describe power of past association to the future.

July 5, 2009 2:47 AM

Is there a psychological term for this? You like/dislike certain names, traits, or appearances in people, then you go on to have positive or negative associations with those traits, favor/disfavor those names/traits/appearances with individuals you don't know, in the future.

Wondering if there is a psychological term for this.

For example: a male dates a sweet, wonderful girl named Shannon. She's petite, longish red hair, and he goes on to have a wonderful relationship with Shannon. They break up later, but very amicably, he doesn't see her again but always has positive associations with women named "Shannon," and finds himself more attracted to petite, red-haired women who remind him of Shannon--and this was a preference he didn't have before he dated Shannon.

We'll always remember the kids who picked on us in the schoolyard--I might have an aversion to people named "Meredith," or "Rick," because they remind me of Merediths and Ricks with whom I have had negative experiences, even though the future Merediths or Ricks have absolutely nothing to do with the Merediths and Ricks in my past.

I was wondering how far this can extend--and if it extends past relationships to the consumer world.
Also, is there any evolutionary reason for this mode of thinking? For example, I have had negative experiences with one guy, "John," and when I see men who remind me of John's physical appearance I am practically revolted. It seems unlikely that I could ever date anyone in the future with John's physical appearance, since I have such strong negative associations with it. On the other hand, I have had positive experiences with "Brad," and I've found myself more drawn to men who look and act like Brad since dating him. Is this, ultimately, logical in an evolutionary sense? How?

posted by Dukat to science & nature (11 comments total)

This could be an instance of confirmation bias.

Human brains are extremely sensitive to patterns, and are always seeing them, sometimes we get false positives. Our extreme sensitivity to patterns in all domains is one of our strongest adaptive traits.
posted by idiopath at 3:02 AM on July 5

"Conditioned response".
posted by stammer at 3:44 AM on July 5

Is there a psychological term for this? You like/dislike certain names, traits, or appearances in people...
I'm kindof interested in the responses here, so's I can maybe put a name (other than foolishness) to the experience I have, and have had, and want to have more of, with freckled-up red-headed women, especially these little bitty economy sized gals dressed up in clothes could be doll clothes, pretend clothing almost, little toy shoes and shirts and jeans, and they walk past not even knowing -- sadly, not caring, either, if/when they find out -- that they've got my trembling, quaking heart in their tiny freckled hands...

I was wondering how far this can extend--and if it extends past relationships to the consumer world.
You bet it extends into the consumer world -- I drive pickup trucks but if I didn't I'm pretty sure I wouldn't buy an American car, the Japanese and now the Koreans took what we had and ran with it, ran way ahead of Detroit. I'm dating myself here by telling you this, but when I was a kid anything from Japan was immediately called 'cheap Japanese junk' and we all of us accepted that as gospel truth, me and my buddies all laughed at Mark Burrows when he bought a bitty, shitty Honda Civic, the kind you could pick up and turn sideways in the driveway, which we did, because we were dicks. Of course today we'd want to pick up a Honda and walk it to the street and drive off in it, except we can't pick up more than a cup of coffee or a bottle of pain pills because we've trashed our backs by all those years sitting on American car seats.

Also, is there any evolutionary reason for this mode of thinking?
If you drive an American car you'll probably die in a car wreck because they're so poorly designed/executed. Plus your genetic line won't carry on because you won't have kids because you won't get laid if you're driving Detroit iron.

But this thing carries on in a reverse way also, or it has for me -- young, I worked for three different brothers and also my father in the trades, and two brothers in particular really screwed me over and it totally messed with my head, and by the time I staggered away from my family and out into the greater world it seems that I could find charismatic, fun guys to screw me over, and, if they didn't know exactly how that might be done, let's say they were good people maybe, why, I'd pretty much teach them how to get into my wallet so I could be all unhappy and whatnot. Repetition compulsion: Keep doing it again and again, trying to get it right. Freud, I think. Took me years to quit doing that, to quit setting myself up that way, and years more to get out of the trades, and even then I didn't leave until I'd trashed my back and had to leave. I'm hard-headed.

And I pretty much did this same thing with women -- every important relationship that I got into, the gals could have stepped into the same clothes as my ex-wife (yep, you guessed it, the original bitty freckled-up redhead), it was long years before I finally broke that pattern and it was a real relief, I knew finally that I cared about the live, breathing woman was standing right in front of me and not a chimera, a shadow of an old love dressed up in bitty little shoes and stuff. (I just wikipedia'd 'chimera' to make sure it was right usage and it says 'a monstrous, fire-breathing creature with the body of a lioness' and I'm like "Yep, that's Kathy all right" but it goes on to say that "The term chimera has also come to mean more generally, an impossible or foolish fantasy" and that's sortof what I thought when I used the word; either or both of those definitions would pretty much work.)
posted by dancestoblue at 4:12 AM on July 5 [8 favorites has favorites]

Guilt by association. Prediction. Things that make you go, hmmm. Anything by Andy Rooney. Prejudice. Claire is a fat girl's name.
posted by ActingTheGoat at 4:14 AM on July 5

I second confirmation bias and patterns. I also think humans try to avoid learning whenever possible. So, if I take the time to learn that a Jane likes cats and apples, then I may assume that every Jane I meet must like cats and apples, since relearning would suck.

Also, dancestoblue, I like the way you write a lot.
posted by ttyn at 4:54 AM on July 5

"Conditioned Response" is indeed one phrase to describe this. It it part of the Theory of Behaviorism which was put together from work from people like Rene Descartes, Ivan Pavlov and BF Skinner. This theory was very popular up until the 50s - and still has many adherents today. It is great if you are talking about animal behaviour but the argument is that it starts to become less valid when you are talking about humans. Cognitive psychology started to become more popular since the 50s. It is more interested in language and mental processes than behaviorism (which tended to see the brain as an unknowable "black box"). To a Cognitive Psychologist this type of behaviour might be an example of a "Heuristic" - basically a learned rule of thumb.

Neuropsychology offers a third way of looking at the issue: basically the brain is capable of forming new neural routes based on previous experiences.
posted by rongorongo at 6:49 AM on July 5

Confirmation Bias and Conditioned Response are good answers, but it is also an example of how the Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic affects decision making. Basically, when we are making decisions about new people/things we need a starting point or an "anchor" and this anchor is based on context either of the things we were just thinking about, or by our past experiences, for example when you are introduced to a new Meredith (in your case) your brain reaches for something to try to get a grasp of who this new person is, by grabbing your past experiences of Merediths, and starting there. The adjustment part of the heuristic is that through experience with that person you can adjust your starting opinion. However, the research has shown that your can't adjust your starting position very far, so if you start with "Merediths are horrible people." you might get to "This Meredith is pleasant." but you very likely won't get to "This Meredith is super sweet and is my new best friend."

And yes, it definitely goes strongly into the consumer world. And as far as reasoning behind it, your brain likes to make sense of your world, and it uses the information it has, however faulty it may be. Usually these short-cuts (or "Heuristics" as mentioned before) work out for the best and allow us to make faster decisions, but sometimes they led us astray. This is a fundamental concept of Cognitive Psychology.
posted by katers890 at 7:50 AM on July 5

I think the word that describes this phenomena is stereotype: a characterization based on conscious or unconscious assumptions that some one aspect—such as gender, age, ethnic or national identity, religion, occupation, marital status, and so on—is predictably accompanied by certain character traits, actions, even values. (link).

See this paper, One-Shot Illusory Correlations and Stereotype Formation (in PDF format) by Jane L. Risen, Thomas Gilovich, and David Dunning on how these stereotypes can arise. (link)

We contend that distinctive behavior performed by a member of an unusual group is not only arresting but also likely to trigger thoughts that lead to an association between the pertinent group and the behavior. Such associations arise because rare-rare pairings prompt people to entertain the hypothesis that the person’s group membership might explain his or her unusual behavior. Such attributional processes are less likely to arise when people see rare group members perform common acts or members of a common group perform unusual acts. As a consequence, a single occurrence of a rare-rare pairing may be sufficient to produce a nascent stereotype in the mind of the perceiver.

posted by Jasper Friendly Bear at 10:56 AM on July 5

I dunno, but I can relate. I've never known an Eric or Chad that I liked, so it's hard for me to give new Erics and Chads a chance.
posted by cmoj at 1:29 PM on July 5

Actually, to be more precise, I've disliked all of the Erics and Chads I've known so far.
posted by cmoj at 1:30 PM on July 5

[While we are talking about stereotypical responses to people with a particular name you might be interested in this recent study which describes how those who call their kid a particular name tend to cluster. The implication is that your apparently irrational dislike of all "Merediths" on the basis of one you met once might have more to it than you thought.]
posted by rongorongo at 4:08 PM on July 5 [1 favorite has favorites]