2008
DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.245
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner?

Abstract: In paradigms in which participants state their ideal romantic-partner preferences or examine vignettes and photographs, men value physical attractiveness more than women do, and women value earning prospects more than men do. Yet it remains unclear if these preferences remain sex differentiated in predicting desire for real-life potential partners (i.e., individuals whom one has actually met). In the present study, the authors explored this possibility using speed dating and longitudinal follow-up procedures. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

30
458
7
5

Year Published

2009
2009
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 389 publications
(504 citation statements)
references
References 82 publications
30
458
7
5
Order By: Relevance
“…The biosocial model (see Wood & Eagly, 2002) has been described as an alternative to, and in some regards a blend of, two other theoretical traditions often used to explain gender differences: (a) the essentialist perspective on gender (exemplified by evolutionary psychology; e.g., Buss & Schmitt, 2011;Pérusse, 1993)-which emphasizes men's evolved dispositions to participate in dominance contests and to control women's sexuality, along with women's evolved dispositions to select mates who provide more resources; cf. Eastwick & Finkel, 2008), and (b) the social constructionist perspective on gender (exemplified in sociology and anthropology; see Geertz, 1974;Mead, 1963;West & Zimmerman, 1987-which emphasizes gender differences as a local cultural phenomenon only, similar to the choice of clothing or hairstyles). The biosocial model offers a constellation of explanations for gender differences that is distinct from its predecessor theories.…”
Section: Narcissism and The Biosocial Approach To Social Role Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The biosocial model (see Wood & Eagly, 2002) has been described as an alternative to, and in some regards a blend of, two other theoretical traditions often used to explain gender differences: (a) the essentialist perspective on gender (exemplified by evolutionary psychology; e.g., Buss & Schmitt, 2011;Pérusse, 1993)-which emphasizes men's evolved dispositions to participate in dominance contests and to control women's sexuality, along with women's evolved dispositions to select mates who provide more resources; cf. Eastwick & Finkel, 2008), and (b) the social constructionist perspective on gender (exemplified in sociology and anthropology; see Geertz, 1974;Mead, 1963;West & Zimmerman, 1987-which emphasizes gender differences as a local cultural phenomenon only, similar to the choice of clothing or hairstyles). The biosocial model offers a constellation of explanations for gender differences that is distinct from its predecessor theories.…”
Section: Narcissism and The Biosocial Approach To Social Role Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, speed-dating research has shown that what people claim they seek in a partner before a dating event is not necessarily what they select during their real dating interactions (Eastwick & Finkel, 2008).…”
Section: Chapter 6 Settling For Less: Relationship Initiationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Within this small literature, there are two main types of studies. First, the speed-dating process has been modelled to study 'mate selection preferences' (e.g., Eastwick & Finkel, 2008a;2008b;Fisman et al, 2006;Provost et al, 2006). The aim is to provide a naturalistic setting for the study of such preferences, often focussing on gender differences.…”
Section: Speed-dating As An Empirical Topicmentioning
confidence: 99%