Sex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: What, whether, and why.

Abstract

Are there sex differences in criteria for sexual relationships? The answer depends on what question a researcher asks. Data suggest that, whereas the sexes differ in whether they will enter short-term sexual relationships, they are more similar in what they prioritize in partners for such relationships. However, additional data and context of other findings and theory suggest different underlying reasons. In Studies 1 and 2, men and women were given varying "mate budgets" to design short-term mates and were asked whether they would actually mate with constructed partners. Study 3 used a mate-screening paradigm. Whereas women have been found to prioritize status in long-term mates, they instead (like men) prioritize physical attractiveness much like an economic necessity in short-term mates. Both sexes also show evidence of favoring well-rounded long- and short-term mates when given the chance. In Studies 4 and 5, participants report reasons for having casual sex and what they find physically attractive. For women, results generally support a good genes account of short-term mating, as per strategic pluralism theory (S. W. Gangestad & J. A. Simpson, 2000). Discussion addresses broader theoretical implications for mate preference, and the link between method and theory in examining social decision processes.

Age and Beauty are in the Eye of the Beholder

“…In general, these theories imply that motivational states are conditioned through adaptation and thus create attentional biases towards increasing reproductive opportunities (Maner et al 2007). It has been strongly suggested that attention is specifically directed at individuals of the opposite sex with evolutionarily attractive qualities (young in appearance, fertilelooking, symmetrical, etc) or to other physically attractive members of the same sex who are considered threats or "intrasexual competition" (Li and Kenrick 2006;Maner et al 2003Maner et al , 2007. Therefore, these evolutionary theories of attention explain our findings that young participants are significantly more attentive to other young attractive faces.…”

The “Booty Call”: A Compromise Between Men's and Women's Ideal Mating Strategies

“…At one extreme, researchers have focused on shortterm, casual sexual relationships between relatively unacquainted individuals like the ''one-night stand'' (Cubbins & Tanfer, 2000;Li & Kenrick, 2006), the ''hookup'' (Paul et al, 2000), and the ''chance encounter'' (Fisher & Bryne, 1978). At the other extreme, researchers have studied long-term, committed relationships, most exemplified by marriage (Buss, 1989b;Christopher & Sprecher, 2000).…”

Why is low waist-to-chest ratio attractive in males? The mediating roles of perceived dominance, fitness, and protection ability

“…The good genes traits that relate especially positively to short-term attractiveness tend to be physical features, especially testosterone-linked traits such as relatively masculine body, face, and voice (Li & Kenrick, 2006;Little, Connely, Feinberg, Jones, & Roberts, 2011;Lucas, Koff, Grossmith, & Migliorini, 2011;Pawlowski & Jasienska, 2005;Provost, Kormos, Kosakoski, & Quinsey, 2006;Puts, 2010). With regard to bodily traits specifically, V-shaped upper body and features indicating muscularity, strength, and physical fitness have been found to be more important in short-term than in long-term contexts (Braun & Bryan, 2006;Li & Kenrick, 2006;Little et al, 2011;Lucas et al, 2011). In contrast, traits that are especially predictive of long-term attractiveness tend to relate more to parental investment, such as social status, access to resources, and the ability to provide protection (Buss & Schmitt, 1993;Li, 2007;Li & Kenrick, 2006).…”

“…With regard to bodily traits specifically, V-shaped upper body and features indicating muscularity, strength, and physical fitness have been found to be more important in short-term than in long-term contexts (Braun & Bryan, 2006;Li & Kenrick, 2006;Little et al, 2011;Lucas et al, 2011). In contrast, traits that are especially predictive of long-term attractiveness tend to relate more to parental investment, such as social status, access to resources, and the ability to provide protection (Buss & Schmitt, 1993;Li, 2007;Li & Kenrick, 2006). In summary, perceptions of physical traits indicating masculinity and formidability (i.e., dominance) and fitness are hypothesized to mediate the link between WCR and short-term attractiveness, and traits indicating the ability to provide investment and protection are hypothesized to mediate the link between WCR and long-term attractiveness.…”