Human mate choice is a complex system

Complexity

Volumn 17, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 11-22

  Smaldino, Paul E ^a,b   Schank, Jeffrey C ^b  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Agent based models; Mate search; Mobility; Situated cognition; Spatial models

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861186954     PISSN: 10762787     EISSN: 10990526     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cplx.21382     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Feingold, A. Matching for attractiveness in romantic partners and same-sex friends: A meta-analysis and theoretical critique. Psychol Bull 1998, 104, 226-235.
2. Little, A.C.;Burt, D.M.;Perrett, D.I. Assortative mating for perceived facial personality traits. Pers Indiv Differ 2006, 40, 973-984.
3. Kreider, R.M.;Fields, J.M. Number, timing, and duration of marriages and divorces: Fall 1996. In: Current Population Reports; US Census Bureau: Washington, DC, 2001; pp 70-80.
4. Todd, P.M.;Billari, F.C.;Simão, J. Aggregate age-at-marriage patterns from individual mate-search heuristics. Demography 2005, 42, 559-574.
5. Smith, E.R.;Conrey, F.R. Agent-based modeling: A new approach for theory building in social psychology. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2007, 11, 87-104.
6. Pickett, C.L.;Smaldino, P.E.;Sherman, J.W.;Schank, J.C. Agent-based modeling as a tool for studying social identity processes: The case of optimal distinctiveness theory. In: Social Cognition, Social Identity, and Intergroup Relations; Kramer, R.M.;Leonardelli, G.J.;Livingston, R.W., Eds.; Psychology Press: London, 2011, pp. 127-143.
7. Epstein, J.M. Agent-based computational models and generative social science. Complexity 1999, 4, 41-60.
8. Kalick, S.M.;Hamilton, T.E. The matching hypothesis reexamined. J Pers Soc Psychol 1986, 51, 673-682.
9. Simão, J.;Todd, P.M. Emergent patterns of mate choice in human populations. Artif Life 2003, 9, 403-417.
10. French, R.M.;Kus, E.T. KAMA: A temperature-driven model of mate choice using dynamic partner preferences. Adapt Behav 2008, 16, 71-95.
11. Kalmijn, M. Intermarriage and homogamy: Causes, patterns, trends. Annu Rev Sociol 1998, 24, 395-421.
12. Haandrikman, K.;Harmsen, C.;van Wissen, L.J.G.;Hutter, I. Geography matters: Patterns of spatial homogamy in the Netherlands. Popul Space Place 2008, 14, 387-405.
13. Hills, T.;Todd, P.M. Population heterogeneity and individual differences in an assortative agent-based marriage and divorce model (MADAM) using search with relaxing expectations. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 2008, 11,
14. Fiore, A.;Donath, J. Homophily in online dating: When do you like someone like yourself? In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; ACM Press: New York, 2005; pp 1371-1374.
15. Furman, W.;Simon, V.A. Homophily in adolescent romantic relationships. In: Understanding Peer Influence in Children and Adolescents; Prinstein, M.J;Dodge, K.A., Eds.; Guilford Press: New York, 2008; pp 203-224.
16. Luo, S.;Klohnen, E.C. Assortative mating and marital quality in newlyweds: A couple-centered approach. J Pers Soc Psychol 2005, 88, 304-326.
17. McPherson, M.;Smith-Lovin, L.;Cook, J.M. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annu Rev Sociol 2001, 27, 415-444.
18. Kurzban, R.;Weeden, J. HurryDate: Mate preferences in action. Evol Hum Behav 2005, 26, 227-244.
19. Langlois, J.H.;Kalakanis, L.;Rubenstein, A.J.;Larson, A.;Hallam, M.;Smoot, M. Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychol Bull 2000, 126, 390-423.
20. Regan, P.C.;Levin, L.;Sprecher, S.;Christopher, F.S.;Gate, R. Partner preferences. J Psychol Human Sex 2000, 12, 1-21.
21. Botwin, M.D.;Buss, D.M.;Shackleford, T.K. Personality and mate preferences: Five factors in mate selection and marital satisfaction. J Pers 1997, 65, 107-136.
22. Lörincz, L. Rules of attraction: How do people select partners? Rev Sociol 2006, 12, 71-84.
23. Todd, P.M.;Miller, G.F. From pride and prejudice to persuasion: Satisficing in mate search. In: Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart; Gigerenzer, G.;Todd, P.M.; ABC Research Group, Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, 1999; pp 287-308.
24. Simão, J.;Todd, P.M. Modeling mate choice in monogamous mating systems with courtship. Adapt Behav 2002, 10, 113-136.
25. Wimsatt, W.C. Aggregate, composed, and evolved systems: Reductionistic heuristics as means to more holistic theories. Biol Philos 2006, 21, 667-702.
26. Miller, G.F.;Todd, P.M. Mate choice turns cognitive. Trends Cogn Sci 1998, 2, 190-198.
27. Todd, P.M.;Billari, F.C. Population-wide marriage patterns produced by individual mate-search heuristics. In: Agent-Based Computational Demography; Billari, F.C.;Prskawetz, A., Eds.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2003; pp 117-137.
28. Luke, S.;Cioffi-Revilla, C.;Sullivan, K.;Balan, G.C. MASON: A multi-agent simulation environment. Simulation 2005, 81, 517-527.
29. Wiegmann, D.D.;Weinersmith, K.L.;Seubert, S.M. Multi-attribute mate choice decisions and uncertainty in the decision process: A generalized sequential search strategy. J Math Biol 2010, 60, 543-572.
30. Apostolou, M. Sexual selection under parental choice: The role of parents in the evolution of human mating. Evol Hum Behav 2007, 28, 403-409.
31. Apostolou, M. Sexual selection under parental choice in agropastoral societies. Evol Hum Behav 2007, 31, 39-47.
32. Buunk, A.P.;Park, J.H.;Duncan, L.A. Cultural variation in parental influence in mate choice. Cross Cult Res 2010, 44, 23-40.