Terms of endearment such as “sweetie,” “honey,” and “sugar” are commonly used in the context of describing romantic partners. This article explores how a relatively subtle manipulation, namely taste sensations, might influence romantic perceptions of a nonestablished relationship. Consistent with predictions, results from Studies 1 and 2 (n = 280) showed that participants evaluated a hypothetical relationship, but not an existing relationship, more favorably when exposed to sweet taste compared to non-sweet taste control. Study 3 (n = 142) further showed that participants indicated greater interest in initiating a relationship with a potential partner when exposed to sweet taste, as compared to control participants. Implications for the role of sweet taste experiences in attraction and relationship initiation are discussed.
AschS. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290. doi: 10.1037/h0055756
2.
BalcetisE.DunningD. (2006). See what you want to see: Motivational influences on visual perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 612–625. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.612
3.
BartelsA.ZekiS. (2000). The neural basis of love. Neuron, 31, 681–697.
4.
ChanK. Q.TongM. W. E.TanD. H.KohA. H. Q. (2013). What does love and jealousy taste like?Emotion, 13, 1142–1149. doi:10.1037/a0033758
5.
De AraujoI. E. T.KringelbachM. L.RollsE. T.HobdenP. (2003). Representation of umami taste in the human brain. Journal of Neurophysiology, 90, 313–319. doi: 10.1152/jn.00669.2002
6.
DuttonD.AronA. (1974). Some evidence for heightened sexual attraction under conditions of high anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 510–517. doi: 10.1037/h0037031
7.
EastwickP.FinkelE. (2008). Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 245–264. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.245
8.
EastwickP. W.EaglyA. H.FinkelE. J.JohnsonS. E. (2011). Implicit and explicit preferences for physical attractiveness in a romantic partner: A double dissociation in predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 993–1011. doi:10.1037/a0024061
9.
EastwickP. W.FinkelE. J.EaglyA. H. (2011). When and why do ideal partner preferences affect the process of initiating and maintaining romantic relationships?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 1012–1032. doi:10.1037/a0024062
10.
EastwickP. W.RichesonJ. A.SonD.FinkelE. J. (2009). Is love colorblind? Political orientation and interracial romantic desire. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1258–1268. doi:10.1177/0146167209338524
11.
EfronB. (1987). Better bootstrap confidence intervals. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 171–185. doi:10.1080/01621459.1987.10478410
12.
FestingerL.BackK.SchachterS. (1950). Social pressures in informal groups: A study of human factors in housing. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
13.
FinkelE. J.EastwickP. W.MatthewsJ. (2007). Speed-dating as an invaluable tool for studying romantic attraction: A methodological primer. Personal Relationships, 14, 149–166. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00146.x
14.
FinkelE. J.EastwickP. W.KarneyB. R.ReisH. T.SprecherS. (2012). Online dating: A critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13, 3–66. doi:10.1177/1529100612436522
15.
FisherH.AronA.BrownL. L. (2005). Romantic love: An fMRI study of a neural mechanism for mate choice. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 493, 58–62. doi: 10.1002/cne.20772
16.
FletcherG.SimpsonJ. A.ThomasG. (2000). Ideals, perceptions, and evaluations in early relationship development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,79, 933–940. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.933
17.
HamiltonR. W.ThompsonD. V. (2007). Is there a substitute for direct experience? Comparing consumers’ preferences after direct and indirect produce experiences. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 546–555. doi:10.1086/520073
18.
HajnalA.SmithG.NorgrenR. (2004). Oral sucrose stimulation increases accumbens dopamine in the rat. American Journal of Physiology – Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, 286, R31–R37. doi: 10.1152/ajpregu.00282.2003
19.
HigginsE. T.RholesW.JonesC. (1977). Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141–154. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1031(77)80007-3
20.
IjzermanH.SeminG. (2009). The thermometer of social relations: Mapping social proximity on temperature. Psychological Science, 20, 1214–1220. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02434.x
21.
IjzermanH.SeminG. (2010). Temperature perceptions as a ground for social proximity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 867–873. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.015
22.
KeeferL. A.LandauM. J.SullivanD.RothschildZ. K. (2011). Exploring metaphor’s epistemic function: Uncertainty moderates metaphor-consistent priming effects on social perceptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 657–666.
23.
Kielcolt-GlaserJ. K.NewtonT. L. (2001). Marriage and health: His and her. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 427–503.
24.
LakoffG.JohnsonM. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
25.
LakoffG.JohnsonM. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York, NY: Basic Books.
26.
LandauM.MeierB.KeeferL. (2010). A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1045–1067. doi: 10.1037/a0020970
27.
LeeS. W.SchwarzN. (2012). Bidirectionality, mediation, and moderation of metaphorical effects: The embodiment of social suspicion and fishy smells. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 737–749. doi: 10.1037/a0029708
28.
LuoS.KlohnenE. (2005). Assortative mating and marital quality in newlyweds: A couple-centered approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 304–326. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.2.304
29.
MeierB. P.MoellerS. K.Riemer-PeltzM.RobinsonM. D. (2011). Sweet taste preferences and experiences predict prosocial inferences, personalities, and behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 163–174. doi: 10.1037/a0025253
30.
NewcombT. (1961). The acquaintance process. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. doi: 10.1037/13156-000
31.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
32.
ReisH. T.ManiaciM. R.CaprarielloP. A.EastwickP. W.FinkelE. J. (2011). Familiarity does indeed promote attraction in live interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 557–570. doi: 10.1037/a0022885
33.
RusbultC. E.ArriagaX. B.AgnewC. R. (2001). Interdependence in close relationships. In FletcherG.ClarkM. (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 359–387). Interpersonal processes. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
34.
SinghD.BronstadP. (2001). Female body odour is a potential cue to ovulation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 268, 797–801. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1589
35.
TropeY.LibermanN. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117, 440–463. doi:10.1037/a0018963
36.
WalsterE.AronsonV. (1966). Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 508–516. doi: 10.1037/h0021188
37.
WedekindC.FüriS. (1997). Body odour preferences in men and women: Do they aim for specific MHC combinations or simply heterozygosity?Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 264, 1471–1479. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1997.0204
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
