Interpersonal compatibility

Interpersonal compatibility is a concept that describes the long-term interaction between two or more individuals in terms of the ease and comfort of communication.

Existing concepts

Although various concepts of interpersonal compatibility have existed from ancient times (see e.g. Plato's Lysis), no general theory of interpersonal compatibility has been proposed in psychology. Existing concepts are contradictory in many details, beginning with the central point -- whether compatibility is caused by matching psychological parameters or by their complementarity. At the same time, the idea of interpersonal compatibility is analyzed in non-scientific fields (see e.g. Astrological compatibility).

Among existing psychological tools for studying and/or measuring interpersonal compatibility, the following are noteworthy:

• a test of interpersonal compatibility proposed by Timothy Leary
• a three-factor hypothesis by William Schutz (further developed into FIRO-B questionnaire)
• Hans Jurgen Eysenck's hypothesis on compatibility between temperaments
• Social psychological research on similarity of interests and attitudes
• Compatibility test pamphlets of the 1930s and early computer dating of the 1950s, developed by George W. Crane
• hypothesis of compatibility between personality attitudes by Russell Ackoff and Frederick Edmund Emery, ^[1]
• DMO tool by Lyudmila Sobchik (DMO stands for Interpersonal relations diagnostics, Russian: диагностика межличностных отношений)

Socionics has proposed a theory of intertype relationships between psychological types based on a modified version of C.G. Jung's theory of psychological types. Communication between types is described using the concept of information metabolism proposed by Antoni Kępiński. However, socionic theory is somewhat controversial because of a lack of experimental data (although socionic data are much more representative than e.g. those of Ackoff and Emery).

Alternative hypotheses of intertype relationships were later proposed by adherents of MBTI (D. Keirsey's hypothesis of compatibility between Keirsey temperaments^[2], an intertype relationships chart by Joe Butt and Marina Margaret Heiss^[3], LoveTypes by Alexander Avila^[4] and some other theories^[5][6][7]) Neither of these hypotheses is commonly accepted in the Myers-Briggs type theory. MBTI in Russia is often confused with socionics, although the 16 types in these theories are described differently and do not correlate exactly.

Controversy

The following problems may be reasons for the absence of a theory of psychological compatibility:

• lack of generally accepted criteria for measuring compatibility ('degrees of compatibility')
• the terms compatibility and matching, although not identical, are often confused in common speech (the first rather comprises complementarity and the second similarity of partners)
• the field's unclear status in social science (the problem may belong to social psychology, sociology, personality psychology etc.)
• different psychological theories propose different parameters of personality, but only few of them are generally accepted among psychologists (e.g. cognitive styles); still, even generally accepted criteria may be irrelevant to interpersonal compatibility
• some, if not all personality parameters (even genetically determined ones), may change over time and/or due to interpersonal interaction
• the non-traditional view of psychological dependency, which is not considered drug dependency, but rather a need (unilateral or mutual) for somebody else's psychological support that one cannot or can hardly provide by him/herself.

MHC and sexual mating

It has been suggested that MHC plays a role in the selection of potential mates, via olfaction. MHC genes make molecules that enable the immune system to recognise invaders; generally, the more diverse the MHC genes of the parents, the stronger the immune system of the offspring. It would obviously be beneficial, therefore, to have evolved systems of recognizing individuals with different MHC genes and preferentially selecting them to breed with.

Yamazaki et al. (1976) showed this to be the case for male mice, who show a preference for females of different MHC. Similar results have been obtained with fish.^[8]

In 1995, Swiss biologist Claus Wedekind determined MHC-dissimilar mate selection tendencies in humans. In the experiment, a group of female college students smelled t-shirts that had been worn by male students for two nights, without deodorant, cologne or scented soaps. Overwhelmingly, the women preferred the odors of men with dissimilar MHCs to their own. However, their preference was reversed if they were taking oral contraceptives.^[9] The hypothesis is that MHCs affect mate choice and that oral contraceptives can interfere with this. A study in 2005 on 58 test subjects confirmed the second part — taking oral contraceptives made women prefer men with MHCs similar to their own. ^[10]. However, without oral contraceptives, women had no particular preference, contradicting the earlier finding^[11]. However, another study in 2002 showed results consistent with Wedekind’s—paternally inherited HLA-associated odors influence odor preference and may serve as social cues.^[12].

In 2008, Peter Donnelly and colleagues proposed that MHC is related to mating choice in some human populations.

See also

• Arranged marriage
• Conflict
• Conflictology
• Dating
• Family therapy
• Friendship
• Human fit
• Interpersonal attraction
• Interpersonal communication
• Interpersonal relations
• Irreconcilable differences
• Love
• Psychological dependency
• Selection of a partner
• Social interaction
• Sociometry
• Socionics

Notes

Literature

• J Soc Psychol. 1974 Dec;94(2nd half):243-52. Husband-wife compatibility and the management of stress.Burke RJ, Firth J, McGrattan C. PMID: 4444276
• Васильев Вл. Н., Рамазанова А. П., Богомаз С. А. Познай других — найди себя (Лекции о психологических типах и их отношениях). — Томск: 1996. — 185 с.
• Гуленко В. В. Структурно-функциональная соционика: Разработка метода комбинаторики полярностей. — Ч.1 — Киев: «Транспорт України», 1999. — 187 с.
• Обозов Н. Н. Психология межличностных отношений. — К.: Высшая школа, 1990.
• Собчик Л. Н. Диагностика психологической совместимости. — СПб.: «Речь», 2002. — 80 с.
• Филатова Е. С. Соционика личных отношений. — М., «Чёрная белка», 2004. — 76 с.

External links

• R. Landwehr. Sozionik: eine neue Psychoreligion oder eine wissenschaftlich fundierte Lebenshilfe?
• Psychological compatibility of the crew members during outer space travel.
• The Truth about compatibility testing
• Personality Compatibility Analysis
• Психологическая (межличностная) совместимость
• Л.Н.Собчик. Ещё раз про любовь
• Интертипные отношения в Соционике, критерии комфортности

This psychology-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. v • d • e