Brief report. Mate preferences of married persons in the newlywed year and three years later

Cognition and Emotion

Volumn 19, Issue 8, 2005, Pages 1262-1270

  Shackelford, Todd K ^a   Schmitt, David P ^b   Buss, David M ^c  

^a FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BRADLEY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; COGNITION; EMOTION; EMOTIONAL STABILITY; EXPERIENCE; HUMAN; LOVE; MARRIAGE; MATE CHOICE; NORMAL HUMAN; PERSONALITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; TIME;

EID: 31144478876     PISSN: 02699931     EISSN: 14640600     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02699930500215249     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Bentler, P. M., Newcomb, M. D. Longitudinal study of marital success and failure Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, (1978). 46: 1053-1070.
2. Buss, D. M. Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures Behavioral and Brain Sciences, (1989). 12: 1-49.
3. Buss, D. M. Conflict in married couples: Personality predictors of anger and upset Journal of Personality, (1991). 59: 663-688.
4. Buss, D. M. The evolution of desire (2004). (rev. ed.). New York: Basic Books
5. Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., Larsen, R. J. A half century of American mate preferences: The cultural evolution of values Journal of Marriage and the Family, (2001). 63: 491-503.
6. Eagly, A. H., Wood, W. The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved disposition versus social roles American Psychologist, (1999). 54: 408-423.
7. Ellis, B. J. The evolution of sexual attraction: Evaluative mechanisms in women The adapted mind, (1992). (pp. 267-288) In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.)New York: Oxford University Press
8. Gottman, J. M. The roles of conflict engagement, escalation, and avoidance in marital interaction: A longitudinal view of five types of couples Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, (1993). 61: 6-15.
9. Hill, R. Campus values in mate selection Journal of Home Economics, (1945). 37: 554-558.
10. Hoyt, L. L., Hudson, J. W. Personal characteristics important in mate preferences among college students Social Behavior and Personality, (1981). 9: 93-96.
11. Hudson, J. W., Henze, L. F. Campus values in mate selection: A replication Social Forces, (1969). 31: 772-775.
12. Karney, B. R., Bradbury, T. N. The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, method, and research Psychological Bulletin, (1995). 118: 3-34.
13. Kelly, E. L., Conley, J. J. Personality and compatibility: A prospective analysis of marital stability and marital satisfaction Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (1987). 52: 27-40.
14. Kenrick, D. T., Gutierres, S. E. Contrast effects and judgments of physical attractiveness: When beauty becomes a social problem Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (1980). 38: 131-140.
15. Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Zierk, K. L., Krones, J. M. Evolution and social cognition: Contrast effects as a function of sex, dominance, and physical attractiveness Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, (1994). 20: 210-217.
16. McGinnis, R. Campus values in mate selection: A repeat study Social Forces, (1958). 36: 368-373.
17. Murstein, B. I. Stimulus-value-role: A theory of marital choice Journal of Marriage and the Family, (1970). 32: 465-481.
18. Murstein, B. I. Who will marry whom? (1976). New York: Springer
19. Norman, W. T. Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nominations and personality ratings Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (1963). 66: 574-583.
20. Shackleford, T. K., Buss, D. M. Marital satisfaction and spousal cost infliction Personality and Individual Differences, (2000); 28: 917-928.
21. Singh, D. Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Role of waist-to-hip ratio Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (1993). 65: 293-307.
22. Symons, D. Beauty is in the adaptations of the beholder: The evolutionary psychology of human female sexual attractiveness Sexual nature, sexual culture, (1995). (pp. 80-118) In P. R. Abramson & S. D. Pinkerton (Eds.)Chicago: University of Chicago Press
23. Townsend, J. What women want - what men want (1998). New York: Oxford University Press
24. Wiederman, M. W., Allgeier, E. R. Gender differences in mate selection criteria: Sociobiological or socioeconomic explanation? Ethology and Sociobiology, (1992). 13: 115-124.