Effects of attractiveness and status in dating desire in homosexual and heterosexual men and women

Archives of Sexual Behavior

Volumn 41, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 673-682

  Ha, Thao ^a   Van Den Berg, Judith E M ^a   Engels, Rutger C M E ^a   Lichtwarck Aschoff, Anna ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Attractiveness; Heterosexuality; Homosexuality; Mate preference; Sexual orientation; Status

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COURTSHIP; ESTHETICS; FEMALE; HETEROSEXUALITY; HOMOSEXUALITY; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SEXUALITY; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BEAUTY; COURTSHIP; FEMALE; HETEROSEXUALITY; HOMOSEXUALITY; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; MEN; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; SEXUAL PARTNERS; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; WOMEN;

EID: 84864062209     PISSN: 00040002     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10508-011-9855-9     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Bailey, J. M., Gaulin, S., Agyei, Y., & Gladue, B. A. (1994). Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionarily relevant aspects of human mating psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1081-1093. doi:10. 1037/0022-3514. 66. 6. 1081.
2. Bailey, J. M., Kim, P. Y., Hills, A., & Linsenmeier, J. A. W. (1997). Butch, femme, or straight? Partnerpreferencesofgaymenand lesbians. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 960-973.
3. Bayard, K., Hellerstein, J., Neumark, D., & Troske, K. (2003). New evidence on sex segregation and sex differences in wages from matched employee-employer data. Journal of Labor Economics, 21, 887-922. doi:10. 1086/377026.
4. Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses testes in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brian Sciences, 12, 1-49. doi:10. 1017/S0140525 X00023992.
5. Buss, D. M., Abbott, M., Angleitner, A., Biaggio, A., Blanco-Villasenor, A., Bruchon-Schweitzer, M., et al. (1990). International preferences in selectingmates: Astudy of 37 societies. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 21, 5-47.
6. Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 559-570. doi:10. 1037/0022-3514. 50. 3. 559.
7. Buss, D. M., & Kenrick, D. T. (1998). Evolutionary social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 982-1026). New York: Mc Graw Hill.
8. Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232.
9. Buston, P. M., & Emlen, S. T. (2003). Cognitive processes underlying human mate choice: The relationship between self-perception and mate preference in Western society. Proceeding of the National Academy of the United States of America, 100, 8805-8810. doi:10. 1073/pnas. 1533220100.
10. Buunk, B. P., Dijkstra, P., Fetchenhauer, D., & Kenrick, D. T. (2002). Age and gender differences in mate selection criteria for various involvement levels. Personal Relationships, 9, 271-278. doi:10. 1111/1475-6811. 00018.
11. Child, M., Graff Low, K., Mc Donell Mc Cormick, C., & Cocciarella, A. (1996). Personal advertisements of male-To-female transsexuals, homosexual men, and heterosexuals. Sex Roles, 34, 447-455. doi:10. 1007/B F01547812.
12. Cohen, A. B., & Tannenbaum, I. J. (2001). Lesbian and bisexualwomen's judgments of the attractiveness of different body types. Journal of Sex Research, 38, 226-232.
13. Currie, T. E., & Little, A. C. (2009). The relative importance of the face and body in judgments of human physical attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 409-416.
14. Diamond, L. M. (2003). What does sexual orientation orient? A biobehavioral model distinguishing romantic love and sexual desire. Psychological Review, 110, 173-192.
15. Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285-290.
16. Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but : A meta-Analytic review of research on the physical. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109-128. doi:10. 1037/0033-2909. 110. 1. 109.
17. Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408-423.
18. Feingold, A. (1992a). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 125-139.
19. Feingold, A. (1992b). Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 304-341.
20. Finkel, E. J., Eastwick, P. W., & Matthews, J. (2007). Speed-dating as an invaluable tool for studying romantic attraction: Amethodological primer. Personal Relationships, 14, 149-166. doi:10. 1111/j. 1475-6811. 2006. 00146. x.
21. Fisman, R., Iyengar, S. S., Kamenica, E., & Simonson, I. (2006). Gender differences in mate selection: Evidence from a speed dating experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121, 673-697. doi:10. 1162/qjec. 2006. 121. 2. 673.
22. Gobrogge, K. L., Perkins, P. S., Baker, J. H., Balcer, K. D., Breedlove, S. M., & Klump, K. L. (2007). Homosexual mating preferences from an evolutionary perspective: Sexual selection theory revisited. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 717-723. doi:10. 1007/s10508-007-9216-x.
23. Gonzales, M. H., & Meyers, S. A. (1993). "Your mother would like me ": Self-presentation in the personal ads of heterosexual and homosexual men and women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 131-142.
24. Ha, T., Overbeek, G., & Engels, R. C. M. E. (2010). Effects of attractiveness and social status on dating desire in heterosexual adolescents: An experimental study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 1063-1071. doi:10. 1007/s10508-009-9561-z.
25. Hayes, A. F. (1995). Age preferences for same-And opposite-sex partners. Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 125-133.
26. Heffernan, K. (1999). Lesbian and the internalization of societal standards of weight and appearance. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 3, 121-127. doi:10. 1300/J155v03n04-16.
27. Howard, J. A., Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1987). Social or evolutionary theories? Some observations on preferences in humanmate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 194-200.
28. Hrdy, S. B. (1997). Raising Darwin's consciousness: Female sexuality and the prehominid origins of patriarchy. Human Nature, 8, 1-49. doi:10. 1007/s12110-997-1003-9.
29. Kenrick, D. T., Keefe, R. C., Bryan, A., Barr, A., & Brown, S. (1995). Age preferences andmate choice among homosexuals and heterosexuals: A case for modular psychological mechanisms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1166-1172. doi:10. 1037/0022-3514. 69. 6. 1166.
30. Khallad, Y. (2009). Mate selection in Jordan: Effects of sex, socioeconomic status, and culture. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22, 155-168. doi:10. 1177/0265407505050940.
31. Krupp, D. B. (2008). Throughevolution's eyes: Extractingmate preferences by linking visual attention to adaptive design. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 57-63.
32. Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? Ameta-Analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 390-423. doi:10. 1037//0033-2909. 126. 3. 390.
33. Langlois, J. H., Ritter, J. M., Roggman, L. A., & Vaughn, L. S. (1991). Facial diversity and infant preferences for attractive faces. Developmental Psychology, 27, 79-84.
34. Lanzieri, N., & Hildebrandt, T. (2011). Using hegemonic masculinity to explain gay male attraction to muscular and athletic men. Journal of Homosexuality, 58, 275-293.
35. Lippa, R. A. (2007). The preferred traits of mates in a cross-national study of heterosexual and homosexual men and women: An examination of biological and cultural influences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 193-208. doi:10. 1007/s10508-006-9151-2.
36. Lips, H., & Lawson, K. (2009). Work values, gender, and expectations about work commitment and pay: Laying the groundwork for the "motherhood penalty "? Sex Roles, 61, 667-676. doi:10. 1007/s11199-009-9670-0.
37. Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., Rouby, D. A., & Miller, S. L. (2007). Can't take my eyes off you: Attentional adhesion to mates and rivals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 389-401. doi:10. 1037/0022-3514. 93. 3. 389.
38. Meyer, I. H., & Colten, M. E. (1999). Sampling gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 37, 99-110. doi:10. 1300/J082v37n04-06.
39. Meyer, I. H., Rossano, L., Ellis, J. M., & Bradford, J. (2002). A brief telephone interview to indentify lesbian and bisexual women in random digit dialing sampling. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 139-144.
40. Olson, I. R., & Marshuetz, C. (2005). Facial attractiveness is appraised in a glance. Emotion, 5, 498-502. doi:10. 1037/1528-3542. 5. 4. 498.
41. Peplau, L. A. (2001). Rethinking women's sexual orientation: An interdisciplinary, relationship-focused approach. Personal Relationships, 8, 1-19.
42. Reiss, I. L. (1986). A sociological journey into sexuality. Journal of Marriage and Family, 48, 233-242.
43. Saxton, T. K., Burris, R. P., Murray, A. K., Rowland, H. M., & Roberts, S. C. (2009). Face, body and speech cues independently predict judgment of attractiveness. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 23-35. doi:10. 1556/J E P. 7. 2009. 1. 4.
44. Shackelford, T. K., Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2005). Universal dimensions of human mate preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 447-458. doi:10. 1016/j. paid. 2005. 01. 023.
45. Silverthorne, Z. A., & Quinsey, V. L. (2000). Sexual partner age preferences of homosexual and heterosexualmen andwomen. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 29, 67-76.
46. Smith, C. A., & Stillman, S. (2002). What do women want? The effects of gender and sexual orientation on the desirability of physical attributes in the personal ads of women. Sex Roles, 46, 337-342. doi:10. 1023/A: 1020280630635.
47. Teuscher, U., & Teuscher, C. (2007). Reconsidering the double standard of aging: Effects of gender and sexual orientation on facial attractiveness ratings. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 631-639. doi:10. 1016/j. paid. 2006. 08. 020.
48. Todd, P. M., Penske, L., Fasolo, B., & Lenton, A. P. (2007). Different cognitive processes underlie human mate choices and mate preferences. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 15011-15016. doi:10. 1073-pnas. 0705290104.
49. 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. doi:10. 1007/B F01542229.
50. Townsend, J. H., & Wasserman, T. (1998). Sexual attractiveness: Sex differences in assessment and criteria. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19, 171-191. doi:10. 1016/S1090-5138(98)00008-7.
51. Van Straaten, I., Engels, R. C. M. E., Finkenauer, C., & Holland, R. W. (2008). Sex differences in short-Term mate preferences and behavioral mimicry: A semi-naturalistic experiment. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 902-911. doi:10. 1007/s10508-007-9179-y.
52. Vander Laan, D. P., & Vasey, P. L. (2008). Mate retention behavior of men and women in heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 572-585. doi:10. 1007/s10508-006-9139-y.
53. Wood, D., & Brumbaugh, C. C. (2009). Using revealed mate preferences to evaluate market force and differential preference explanations for mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1226-1244. doi:10. 1037/a0015300.