Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 26, Issue 3 , Pages 227-244 , May 2005

HurryDate: Mate preferences in action

Received 17 June 2004 ,Accepted 24 August 2004.

References 

  1. Bereczkei T, Voros S, Gal A, Bernath L. Resources, attractiveness, family commitment: reproductive decisions in human mate choice. Ethology. 1997;103:681–699
  2. Berscheid E, Dion K, Walster E, Walster GW. Physical attractiveness and dating choice: a test of the matching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1971;7:173–189
  3. Buss DM. Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1989;12:1–49
  4. Buss DM. Sexual strategies theory: historical origins and current status. Journal of Sex Research. 1998;35:19–31
  5. Buss DM. The evolution of desire: strategies of human mating. Revised ed.. New York: Basic Books; 2003;
  6. Buss DM, Schmidt DP. Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review. 1993;100:204–232
  7. Buston PM, Emlen ST. Cognitive processes underlying human mate choice: the relationship between self-perception and mate preference in Western society. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2003;100:8805–8810
  8. Buunk BP, Dijkstra P, Kenrick DT, Warntjes A. Age preferences for mates as related to gender, own age, and involvement level. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2001;22:241–250
  9. Campos LS, Otta E, Siqueira JO. Sex differences in mate selection strategies: content analyses and responses to personal advertisements in Brazil. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2002;23:395–406
  10. Cooper ML, Sheldon MS. Seventy years of research on personality and close relationships: substantive and methodological trends over time. Journal of Personality. 2002;70:783–812
  11. Feingold A. Gender differences in effects of physical attractiveness on romantic attraction: a comparison across five research paradigms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1990;59:981–993
  12. Feingold A. Gender differences in mate selection preferences: a test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin. 1992;112:125–139
  13. Geary DC, Vigil J, Byrd-Craven J. Evolution of human mate choice. Journal of Sex Research. 2004;41:27–42
  14. Goode E. Gender and courtship entitlement: responses to personal ads. Sex Roles. 1996;34:141–169
  15. Greenlees IA, McGrew WC. Sex and age differences in preferences and tactics of mate attraction: analysis of published advertisements. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1994;15:59–72
  16. Hayek F. The fatal conceit. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1988;
  17. Ingoldsby B, Schvaneveldt P, Uribe C. Perceptions of acceptable mate attributes in Ecuador. Journal of Comparative Family Studies. 2003;34:171–185
  18. Jaffe K, Chacon-Puignau G. Assortative mating: sex differences in mate selection for married and unmarried couples. Human Biology. 1995;67:111–120
  19. Keller MC, Thiessen D, Young RK. Mate assortment in dating and married couples. Personality and Individual Differences. 1996;21:217–221
  20. Kenrick DT, Keefe RC. Age preferences in mates reflect sex differences in human reproductive strategies. Behavior and Brain Sciences. 1992;15:75–133
  21. Kenrick DT, Sadalla EK, Groth G, Trost MR. Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: qualifying the parental investment model. Journal of Personality. 1990;58:97–116[Special issue: biological foundations of personality: Evolution, behavioral genetics and psychophysiology]
  22. Li NP, Bailey JM, Kenrick DT, Linsenmeier JAW. The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002;82:947–955
  23. Lynn M, Shurgot BA. Responses to lonely hearts advertisements: effects of reported physical attractiveness, physique, and coloration. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1984;10:349–357
  24. Maisey DS, Vale ELE, Cornelissen PL, Tovée MJ. Characteristics of male attractiveness for women. Lancet. 1999;353:1500
  25. Pawlowski B, Dunbar RIM. Impact of market value on human mate choice decisions. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. 1999;266:281–285
  26. Pawlowski B, Dunbar RIM. Withholding age as putative deception in mate search tactics. Evolution and Human Behavior. 1999;20:53–69
  27. Pawlowski B, Koziel S. The impact of traits offered in personal advertisements. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2002;23:139–149
  28. Pinker S. How the mind works. New York: W.W. Norton & Company; 1997;
  29. Plomin R, DeFries JC, Roberts MK. Assortative mating by unwed biological parents of adopted children. Science. 1977;196:449–450
  30. Simpson JA, Gangestad SW. Individual differences in sociosexuality: evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1991;60:870–883
  31. Sitton S, Blanchard S. Men's preferences in romantic partners: obesity vs. addiction. Psychological Reports. 1995;77:1185–1186
  32. Smith VL. Papers in experimental economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991;
  33. Thiessen D, Young RK, Delgado M. Social pressures for assortative mating. Personality and Individual Differences. 1997;22:157–164
  34. Thornhill R, Grammer K. The body and face of woman: one ornament that signals quality?. Evolution and Human Behavior. 1999;20:105–120
  35. Todd PM. Searching for the next best mate. In:  Conte R,  Hegselmann R,  Terna P editor. Simulating social phenomena. Berlin: Springer; 1997;p. 419–436
  36. Tovée MJ, Cornelissen PL. Female and male perceptions of female physical attractiveness in front-view and profile. British Journal of Psychology. 2001;92:391–402
  37. Tovée MJ, Maisey DS, Emery JL, Cornelissen PL. Visual cues to female physical attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. 1999;266:211–218
  38. Tovée MJ, Reihardt S, Emery JL, Cornelissen PL. Optimal body-mass index and maximum sexual attractiveness. Lancet. 1998;352:548
  39. Trivers RL. Parental investment and sexual selection. In:  Campbell B editors. Sexual selection and the descent of man. Chicago: Aldine; 1972;p. 136–179
  40. U.S. Bureau of the Census (1996). Marital status and living arrangements: March 1994 (Current Population Reports, Series P20-484). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  41. Waynforth D, Dunbar RIM. Conditional mate choice strategies in humans: evidence from lonely hearts advertisements. Behaviour. 1995;132:755–779

PII: S1090-5138(04)00074-1

doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.012

Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 26, Issue 3 , Pages 227-244 , May 2005

Article Tools