Sex and generational differences in desired characteristics in mate selection

Psychological Reports

Volumn 96, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 19-25

  Amador, Jael ^a   Charles, Tanya ^a   Tait, Jairus ^a   Helm Jr , Herbert W ^a  

^a ANDREWS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 15544386444     PISSN: 00332941     EISSN: 1558691X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2466/pr0.96.1.19-25     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. BERK, L. E. (1998) Development through the lifespan. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
2. BULLOUGH, V. (2001) Religion, sex and science: some historical quandaries. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 26, 254-258.
3. Buss, D. M., SHACKELFORD, T. K., KIRKPATRICK, L. A., & LARSEN, R. J. (2001) A half century of mate preferences: the cultural evolution of values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 491-503.
4. HILL, R. (1945) Campus values in mate selection. Journal of Home Economics, 37, 554-558.
5. HUFFMAN, J. P., & MILLER, A. S. (1998) Denominational influences on socially decisive issues: polarization or continuity. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37, 528-546.
6. HOYT, L. L., & HUDSON, J. W. (1981) Personal characteristics important in mate preferences among college students. Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 93-96.
7. HUDSON, J. W., & HENZE, L. F. (1969) Campus values in mate selection: a replication. Social forces, 31, 772-775.
8. MCGINNIS, R. (1958) Campus values in mate selection: a repeat study. Social Forces, 36, 368-373.
9. WILLIAMS, L. M., & LAWLER, M. G. (2001) Religious heterogamy and religiocity: a comparison of interchurch and same church individuals. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 40, 465-478.