Minimum Mate Selection Standards as a Function of Perceived Mate Value, Relationship Context, and Gender

Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 53-73

  Regan, Pamela C ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249724617     PISSN: 08907064     EISSN: 15408698     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J056v10n01_04     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
2. Buss, D. M., & Bames, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 50. 559-570.
3. Buss, D. M., & Schmilt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategics theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232.
4. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex difference in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Gender and the emergence of leaders: A me La-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 60, 685-710.
6. Fisher, R. A. (1958). The genetical theory of natural selection (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon.
7. Gagnon, J. If., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. Chicago: Aklinc
8. Gangestad, S. W. (1993). Sexual selection and physical attractiveness: Implications for mating dynamics. Human Nature, 4, 205-235.
9. Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (1990). Toward an evolutionary history of female sociosexual variation. Journal of Personality, 58. 69-96.
10. Haifidd, E., Traupmann, J., Sprecher, S., Utne, M., & Hay, J. (1985). Equity and intimate relationships: Recent research. In W. Ickes (Ed.), Compatible and incompatible relationships. New York: Springer-Verlag.
11. Hinde, R. A. (1984). Why do the sexes behave differently in close relationships? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1, 471-501.
12. Howard, J. A., Blumstein, P., & Sdiwartz, P, (1987). Social or evolutionary theories? Some observations on preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 194-200.
13. Kenrick, D. T. (1994). Evolutionary social psychology: From sexual selection 10 social cognition. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 75-121.
14. Kenrick, D. T., Groth, G. E., Trost, M. R-, & Sadulla, E. K, (1993). Integrating evolutionary and social exchange perspectives on relationships: Effects of Kender, self-appraisal, and involvement level on mare selection criteria. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 951-969.
15. Kenrick, D. T., Keefe, R. C., Bryan, A., Barr, A., & Brown, S. (1995). Age preferences and mate choice among homosexuals and heterosexuals: A case for modular psychological mechanisms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1166-1172.
16. Kcnrick, D. T., Sadalla, E. K., Groth, G., & Trost, M. R. (1990). Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: Qualifying the parental investment model. Journal of Personality, 58, 97-116.
17. Ksnrick, D. T., & Trost, M. R. (1993). The evolutionary perspective. In A. H. Beall & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender (pp. 148-172). New York: Guilford Press.
18. Kollock, P., Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1994). The judgment of equity in intimate relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 340-351.
19. Lewis, R., & Casto, R. (1978). Developmental transitions in male sexuality. The Counseling Psephologist. 4, 15-19.
20. Murstein, B. I. (1970). Stiimilus-value-role: A theory of marital choice. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 32. 465-481.
21. Murstein, B. I. (1976). Who will many whom? Theories and research in marital choice. New York: Springer.
22. Reiss, I. L. (1981). Some observations on ideology and sexuality in America. Journal of Marriage rind the Family. 43, 271-283.
23. Regan, P. C., & Berscheid, E (1997). Gender differences in characteristics desired in a potential sexual and marriage partner. Journal of Psychology' and Human Sexuality, 9, 25-37.
24. Regan, P. C., & Sprecher, S. (1995). Gender differences in the value of contributions to intimate relationships. Sex Holes, 33, 221-238.
25. Sadalta, E. K., Kenrick, D. T., & Vershure, B. (1987). Dominance and heterosexual attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 730-738.
26. Slftinan, S., & Sloman, L. (1988). Male selection in the service of human evolution. Journal of Social and Biological Structures, 11, 457-468.
27. Symons, D. (1979). The emlution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
28. Taylor, P. A., & Gicnn, N. D. (1976). The utility of education and attractiveness for females' status attainment through marriage. American Sociological Review, 41, 484-498.
29. Tiefer, L. (1995). Sex is not a natural act and other essays. Boulder, CO: West-view Press.
30. Townsend, i. M. (1989). Mate selection criteria: A pilot Study. Ethology and Sociobiology. 10, 241-253.
31. Townsend, J. M., & Levy, G. D. (1990). Effects of potential partners' physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status on sexuality and partner selection. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 19, 149-164.
32. Trivers, R L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection, in B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man (pp. 136-179). Chicago, IL: Aldinc.
33. Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottman, L. (1966). Impartance of physical attractiveness in fating behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,4,508-516.
34. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, F., (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
35. Wiederman, M. W., & Ailgeier, E. R. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection criteria: Sociobiological or socioeconomic explanation? Ethology and Sociobiology, 13, 115-124.
36. Wright, R. (1994). The moral animal: The new science of evolutionary psychology. New York: Pantheon.