Integrating evolutionary and social exchange perspectives on relationships: Effects of gender, self-appraisal, and involvement level on mate selection criteria.

Abstract

Two studies examined which traits males and females desire in partners at various levels of relationship development in an attempt to integrate evolutionary models (which emphasize sex differences) and social exchange models (which emphasize self-appraisals). In Study 1, male and female students specified their minimum criteria on 24 traits for a date, sexual partner, exclusive dating partner, marriage partner, and 1-night sexual liaison. They also rated themselves on the same dimensions. Sex differences were greatest for casual sexual liaisons, with men's criteria being consistently lower than women's. Men's self-ratings were generally less correlated with their criteria for a 1 -night stand, as well. Study 2 replicated the findings of Study 1, adding several modifications, including a measure of Ss' sex typing. Sex typing had few effects. The advantages of combining social psychological and evolutionary perspectives are discussed.

Evolution of human mate choice

“…Kenrick et al (1990), for instance, found that men rated the personality, friendliness, and sense of humor of a potential marriage partner very highly, and just as highly or more highly than her physical attractiveness (see also Kenrick, Groth, Trost, & Sadalla, 1993). Across cultures, Buss found that men rated the intelligence, kindness, and understanding of a prospective mate as important attributes, and for many men these traits were more important than her physical attractiveness.…”

The Globalisation of Marriage Fields: The Swedish Case

“…The result is that partners are often very similar in terms of age, level of education, ethnic background, religion, and social status (Smits, 1996). Although women are in general slightly younger than their male partner (Buunk et al, 2001;Kenrick et al, 1993). Part of these marriage patterns can be explained by the fact that peoples' choice of partner is constrained by the opportunities available (the supply side argument, see Fisher et al, 1977;Flap, 1999;Huckfeldt, 1983;Marsden, 1990;Kalmijn & Flap, 2001).…”

Dynamical evolutionary psychology: Individual decision rules and emergent social norms.

“…Although evolutionary theorists have agreed about the general principles of sex differences in sexual selection and parental investment, there are a number of alternative hypotheses about how these differences apply to humans (e.g., Buss & Schmitt, 1993;Gangestad & Simpson, 1990Graziano, Jensen-Campbell, Todd, & Finch, 1997;Hazan & Diamond, 2000;Hrdy, 1999;Kenrick et al, 1990;Kenrick, Groth, Trost, & Sadalla, 1993; L. C. Miller & Fishkin, 1997). For example, L. C. Miller and Fishkin (1997) argued that both sexes are primarily inclined toward monogamy, whereas Hrdy (1999) has advanced arguments that primate females in general, and human females in particular, are more promiscuous than is generally thought.…”