Is a meta-analysis a foundation, or just another brick? Comment on Meltzer, mcnulty, Jackson, and Karney (2014)

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Volumn 106, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 429-434

  Eastwick, Paul W ^a   Neff, Lisa A ^a   Finkel, Eli J ^b   Luchies, Laura B ^c   Hunt, Lucy L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c DAEMEN COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Evolutionary psychology; Ideal partner preferences; Meta analysis; Physical attractiveness; Sex differences

Indexed keywords

ESTHETICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MARRIAGE; PSYCHOLOGY; SATISFACTION; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR;

BEAUTY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MARRIAGE; PERSONAL SATISFACTION; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84895157933     PISSN: 00223514     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0034767     Document Type: Note

References (34)

1. Blalock, H. M. (1963). Correlated independent variables: The problem of multicollinearity. Social Forces, 42, 233-237.
2. Buck, A. A., & Neff, L. A. (2012). Stress spillover in early marriage: The role of self-regulatory depletion. Journal of Family Psychology, 26, 698-708.
3. Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49.
4. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
5. Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2009). Handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
6. DeWall, C. N., Lambert, N. M., Slotter, E. B., Pond, R. S., Jr., Deckman, T., Finkel, E. J.,. Fincham, F. D. (2011). So far away from one's partner, yet so close to romantic alternatives: Avoidant attachment, interest in alternatives, and infidelity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 1302-1316.
7. Eastwick, P. W., Eagly, A. H., Finkel, E. J., & Johnson, S. E. (2011). Implicit and explicit preferences for physical attractiveness in a romantic partner: A double dissociation in predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 993-1011.
8. Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2008). Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 245-264.
9. Eastwick, P. W., Finkel, E. J., & Eagly, A. H. (2011). When and why do ideal partner preferences affect the process of initiating and maintaining romantic relationships? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 1012-1032.
10. Eastwick, P. W., & Hunt, L. L. (2013). Relational mate value: Consensus and uniqueness in romantic evaluations. Manuscript submitted for publication.
11. Eastwick, P. W., Luchies, L. B., Finkel, E. J., & Hunt, L. L. (in press). The predictive validity of ideal partner preferences: A review and metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin. Advance online publication.
12. Eastwick, P. W., Morgan, T. A., Graham, L. T., Slotter, E. B., Luchies, L. B., & Neff, L. A. (2013). Integrating strategy and stage perspectives on mating: Male physical attractiveness as a test case. Manuscript submitted for publication.
13. Eastwick, P. W., & Neff, L. A. (2012). Do ideal partner preferences predict divorce? A tale of two metrics. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 667-674.
14. Finlay, B. L., Darlington, R. B., & Nicastro, N. (2001). Developmental structure in brain evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 263-278.
15. 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.
16. Funk, J. L., & Rogge, R. D. (2007). Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the couples satisfaction index. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 572-583.
17. Gagné, F. M., & Lydon, J. E. (2004). Bias and accuracy in close relationships: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 322-338.
18. Gordon, R. A. (1968). Issues in multiple regression. American Journal of Sociology, 73, 592-616.
19. Gould, S. J. (1980). The panda's thumb: More reflections in natural history. New York, NY: Norton.
20. Hill, C. T., Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1976). Breakups before marriage: The end of 103 affairs. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 147-168.
21. Kurzban, R., & Weeden, J. (2005). Hurrydate: Mate preferences in action. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 227-244.
22. Lucas, T. W., Wendorf, C. A., Imamoglu, E. O., Shen, J., Parkhill, M. R., Weisfeld, C. C., & Weisfeld, G. E. (2004). Marital satisfaction in four cultures as a function of homogamy, male dominance and female attractiveness. Sexualities, Evolution & Gender, 6, 97-130.
23. Marks, S. R., Huston, T. L., Johnson, E. M., & MacDermid, S. M. (2001). Role balance among white married couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1083-1098.
24. McNulty, J. K., Neff, L. A., & Karney, B. R. (2008). Beyond initial attraction: Physical attractiveness in newlywed marriage. Journal of Family Psychology, 22, 135-143.
25. Meltzer, A. L., McNulty, J. K., Jackson, G., & Karney, B. R. (2014). Sex differences in the implications of partner physical attractiveness for the trajectory of marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 418-428.
26. Neff, L. A., & Karney, B. R. (2005). Gender differences in social support: A question of skill or responsiveness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 79-90.
27. Raudenbush, S. W., Brennan, R. T., & Barnett, R. C. (1995). A multivariate hierarchical model for studying psychological change within married couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 9, 161-174.
28. Ross, L., & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). The person and the situation: Perspectives of social psychology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
29. Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M., & Agnew, C. R. (1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357-387.
30. Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22, 1359-1366.
31. Sprecher, S., & Duck, S. (1994). Sweet talk: The importance of perceived communication for romantic and friendship attraction experienced during a get-acquainted date. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 391-400.
32. Townsend, J. M. (1993). Sexuality and partner selection: Sex differences among college students. Ethology and Sociobiology, 14, 305-329.
33. Trut, L. N., Plyusnina, I. Z., & Oskina, I. N. (2004). An experiment on fox domestication and debatable issues of evolution of the dog. Russian Journal of Genetics, 40, 644-655.
34. Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottman, L. (1966). Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 508-516.