From preferred to actual mate characteristics: The case of human body shape

PLoS ONE

Volumn 5, Issue 9, 2010, Pages

  Courtiol, Alexandre ^a   Picq, Sandrine ^a   Godelle, Bernard ^a   Raymond, Michel ^a   Ferdy, Jean Baptiste ^b  

^a CNRS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PAUL SABATIER   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANTHROPOLOGY; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; BODY BUILD; BODY MASS; COGNITION; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; MATE CHOICE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEX DIFFERENCE; ADOLESCENT; ART; BODY SIZE; FAMILY SIZE; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUALITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BODY SIZE; FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS; FEMALE; HUMAN BODY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL PARTNERS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77958589488     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013010     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Rogers DW, Greig D (2009) Experimental evolution of a sexually selected display in yeast. Proc R Soc B 276: 543-549.
2. Lynch M, Walsh B (1998) Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits. Sunderland: Sinauer.
3. Gimelfarb A (1984) Quantitative characters under assortative mating: gametic model. Theor Popul Biol 25: 312-330.
4. Quader S (2005) Mate choice and its implications for conservation and management. Curr Sci 89: 1220-1229.
5. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
6. Kokko H, Brooks R (2003) Sexy to die for? Sexual selection and the risk of extinction. Ann Zool Fenn 40: 207-219.
7. Danley PD, Kocher TD (2001) Speciation in rapidly diverging systems: lessons from lake Malawi. Mol Ecol 10: 1075-1086.
8. Kirkpatrick M, Rand AS, Ryan MJ (2006) Mate choice rules in animals. Anim Behav 71: 1215-1225.
9. Courtiol A, Raymond M, Godelle B, Ferdy J-B (2010) Mate choice and human stature: homogamy as a unified framework for understanding mating preferences. Evolution. In press.
10. Gibson RM, Langen TA (1996) How do animals choose their mates? Trends Ecol Evol 11: 468-470.
11. Jennions MD, Petrie M (1997) Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol Rev 72: 283-327.
12. Widemo F, Sæther SA (1999) Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: causes and consequences of variation in mating preferences. Trends Ecol Evol 14: 26-31.
13. Cotton S, Small J, Pomiankowski A (2006) Sexual selection and conditiondependent mate preferences. Curr Biol 16: R755-R765.
14. Gimelfarb A (1988) Processes of pair formation leading to assortative mating in biological populations: encounter-mating model. Am Nat 131: 865-884.
15. Gimelfarb A (1988) Processes of pair formation leading to assortative mating in biological populations: dynamic interaction model. Theor Popul Biol 34: 1-23.
16. Beigel HG (1954) Body height in mate selection. J Soc Psychol 39: 257-268.
17. Gillis JS, Avis WE (1980) The male-taller norm in mate selection. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 6: 396-401.
18. Spuhler JN (1982) Assortative mating with respect to physical characteristics. Soc Biol 29: 53-66.
19. Mascie-Taylor CGN, Boldsen JL (1988) Assortative mating, differential fertility and abnormal pregnancy outcome. Ann Hum Biol 15: 223-228.
20. Tovée MJ, Reinhardt S, Emery JL, Cornelissen PL (1998) Optimum body-mass index and maximum sexual attractiveness. Lancet 352: 548-548.
21. Tovée MJ, Maisey DS, Emery JL, Cornelissen PL (1999) Visual cues to female physical attractiveness. Proc R Soc B 266: 211-218.
22. Holden C, Mace R (1999) Sexual dimorphism in stature and women's work: a phylogenetic cross-cultural analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol 110: 27-45.
23. Guégan J, Teriokhin AT, Thomas F (2000) Human fertility variation, sizerelated obstetrical performance and the evolution of sexual stature dimorphism. Proc R Soc B 267: 2529-2535.
24. Pawlowski B, Dunbar RIM, Lipowicz A (2000) Tall men have more reproductive success. Nature 403: 156.
25. Nettle D (2002) Height and reproductive success in a cohort of british men. Hum Nat 13: 473-491.
26. Nettle D (2002) Women's height, reproductive success and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in modern humans. Proc R Soc B 269: 1919-1923.
27. Silventoinen K, Kaprio J, Lahelma E, Viken RJ, Rose RJ (2003) Assortative mating by body height and BMI: finnish twins and their spouses. Am J Hum Biol 15: 62-627.
28. Fan J, Liu F, Wu J, Dai W (2004) Visual perception of female physical attractiveness. Proc R Soc B 271: 347-352.
29. Fan J, Dai W, Liu F, Wu J (2005) Visual perception of male body attractiveness. Proc R Soc B 272: 219-226.
30. Todd PM, Penke L, Fasolo B, Lenton AP (2007) Different cognitive processes underlie human mate choices and mate preferences. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104: 15011-15016.
31. Eastwick PM, Finkel EJ (2008) Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner? J Pers Soc Psych 94: 245-264.
32. Azouz ZB, Lepage CSR, Rioux M (2005) Extracting main modes of human body shape variation from 3-D anthropometric data. Ottawa: Fifth International Conference on 3-D Digital Imaging and Modeling.
33. Pawlowski B (2003) Variable preferences for sexual dimorphism in height as a strategy for increasing the pool of potential partners in humans. Proc R Soc B 270: 709-712.
34. Courtiol A, Ferdy J-B, Godelle B, Raymond M, Claude J (2010) Height and body mass influence on human body outlines: a quantitative approach using an elliptic fourier analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol 142: 22-29.
35. Tovée MJ, Emery JL, Cohen-Tovée EM (2000) The estimation of body mass index and physical attractiveness is dependent on the observer's own body mass index. Proc R Soc B 267: 1987-1997.
36. Fox J (2009) car: Companion to Applied Regression, R package version 1. pp 2-14.
37. Zeileis A, Hothorn T (2002) Diagnostic checking in regression relationships. R News 2: 7-10.
38. Venables WN, Ripley BD (2002) Modern Applied Statistics with S. New York: Springer.
39. Strug L, Sun L, Corey M (2003) The genetics of cross-sectional and longitudinal body mass index. BMC Genet 4: S14.
40. Galton F (1889) Natural inheritance. London and New York: MacMillan and Co.
41. Pearson K, Lee A (1903) On the laws of inheritance in man: I. inheritance of physical characters. Biometrika Trust 2: 357-462.
42. McManus IC, Mascie-Taylor CGN (1984) Human assortative mating for height: non-linearity and heteroscedasticity. Hum Biol 56: 617-623.
43. Weeden J, Sabini J (2005) Physical attractiveness and health in western societies: a review. Psychol Bull 131: 635-653.
44. Salska I, Frederick DA, Pawlowski B, Reilly AH, Laird KT, Rudd NA (2008) Conditional mate preferences: factors influencing preferences for height. Person Indiv Diff 44: 203-215.
45. Allison DB, Neale MC, Kezis MI, Alfonso VC, Heshka S, Heymsfield SB (1996) Assortative mating for relative weight: genetic implications. Behav Genet 26: 1573-3297.
46. Maisey DS, Vale EEE, Cornelissen PL, Tovée MJ (1999) Characteristics of male attractiveness for woman. Lancet 353: 1500.
47. Buss DM (1989) Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behav Brain Sci 12: 1-49.
48. Gale D, Shapley LS (1962) College admissions and the stability of marriage. Am Math Mon 69: 9-15.
49. Bergstrom CT, Real LA (2000) Towards a theory of mutual mate choice: lessons from two-sided matching. Evol Ecol Res 2: 493-508.
50. Mueller U, Mazur A (2001) Evidence of unconstrained directional selection for male tallness. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50: 302-311.
51. Amundsen T (2000) Why are female birds ornamented? Trends Ecol Evol 15: 149-155.
52. Bonduriansky R (2001) The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol Rev 76: 305-339.
53. Clutton-Brock T (2007) Sexual selection in males and females. Science 318: 1882-1885.