An Experimental Study of Women's Internet Personal Ads

Archives of Sexual Behavior

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 253-260

  Strassberg, Donald S ^a   Holty, Stephen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

Author keywords

Internet dating; Interpersonal attraction; Personal ads

Indexed keywords

ADVERTIZING; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; E-MAIL; EXPERIMENTAL TEST; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERNET; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREDICTION; PUBLICATION; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; ADULT; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; HUMAN RELATION; RANDOMIZATION; SEX DIFFERENCE; SOCIOECONOMICS;

ADULT; ADVERTISING; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; RANDOM ALLOCATION; SEX FACTORS; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 0142259280     PISSN: 00040002     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1023465601718     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Bereczkei, T., Voros, S., Gal, A., & Bernath, L. (1997). Resources, attractiveness, family commitment: Reproductive decisions in human mate choice. Ethology, 103, 681-699.
2. Baize, H. R., & Schroeder, J. E. (1995). Personality and mate selection in personal ads: Evolutionary preferences in a public mate selection process. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 517-536.
3. Binik, Y. M. (2001). Sexuality and the Internet: Lots of hyp(otheses) - only a little data. Journal of Sex Research, 38, 281-282.
4. Buss, D. M. (1985). Human mate selection. American Scientist, 73, 47-51.
5. Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate selection: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49.
6. Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York: Basic Books.
7. Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 559-570.
8. Cicerello, A., & Sheehan, E. P. (1995). Personal advertisements: A content analysis. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 751-756.
9. Davis, S. (1990). Men as success objects and women as sex objects: A study of personal advertisements. Sex Roles, 23, 43-50.
10. Deaux, K., & Hanna, R. (1984). Courtship in the personals column: The influence of gender and sexual orientation. Sex Roles, 11, 363-375.
11. Feingold, A. (1990). Gender differences in physical attractiveness on romantic attraction: A comparison across five research domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 981-993.
12. Feingold, A. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 125-139.
13. Goode, E. (1996). Gender and courtship entitlement: Responses to personal ads. Sex Roles, 34, 144-169.
14. Greenlees, I. A., & McGrew, W. C. (1994). Sex and age differences in preferences and tactics of mate attraction: Analysis of published advertisements. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15, 59-72.
15. Harrison, A. A., & Saeed, E. (1977). Let's make a deal: An analysis of revelations and stipulations in lonely hearts advertisements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 257-264.
16. Koestner, R., & Wheeler, L. (1988). Self-presentation in personal advertisements: The influence of implicit notions of attraction and role expectations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 5, 149-160.
17. Lance, L. M. (1998). Gender differences in heterosexual dating: A content analysis of personal ads. Journal of Men's Studies, 6, 297-305.
18. Lynn, M., & Shurgot, B. A. (1984). Responses to lonely hearts advertisements: Effects of reported physical attractiveness, physique, and coloration. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 349-357.
19. Lynn, M., & Bolig, R. (1985). Personal advertisements: Sources of data about relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2, 377-383.
20. Matthews, T. D. (1999). A World-Wide Web-based research project. The Teaching of Psychology, 26, 227-230.
21. Okami, P., & Shakelford, T. K. (2001). Human sex differences in sexual psychology and behavior. Annual Review of Sex Research, 12, 186-241.
22. Sitton, S., & Blanchard, S. (1995). Men's preferences in romantic partners: Obesity vs addiction. Psychological Reports, 77, 1185-1186.
23. Smith, J. E., Waldorf, V. A., & Trembath, D. L. (1990). "Single white male looking for thin, very attractive ..." Sex Roles, 23, 675-685.
24. Symons, D. (1979). Evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
25. Symons, D. (1990). Adaptiveness and adaptation. Ethology and Sociobiology, 11, 427-444.
26. Thiessen, D., Young, R. K., & Burroughs, R. (1993). Lonely hearts advertisements reflect sexually dimorphic mating strategies. Ethology and Sociobiology, 14, 209-229.
27. Townsend, J. M. (1989). Mate-selection criteria: A pilot study. Ethology and Sociobiology, 10, 241-253.
28. Townsend, J. M., & Levy, G. D. (1990). Effects of partners' physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status on sexuality and partner selection. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 19, 149-164.
29. Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871-1971 (pp. 136-179). Chicago, IL: Aldine.
30. Wiederman, M. W., & Allgeier, E. R. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection criteria: Sociobiological or socioeconomic explanation. Ethology and Sociobiology, 13, 115-124.