Scholars have long been interested in exchange and matching (assortative mating) in romantic partner selection. But many analyses of exchange, particularly those that examine beauty and socioeconomic status, fail to control for partners’ tendency to match each other on these traits. Because desirable traits in mates are positively correlated between partners and within individuals, ignoring matching may exaggerate evidence of cross-trait beauty-status exchange. Moreover, many prior analyses assume a gendered exchange in which women trade beauty for men’s status, without testing whether men might use handsomeness to attract higher-status women. Nor have prior analyses fully investigated how the prevalence of beauty-status exchange varies between different types of couples. I use data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health Romantic Pair Sample, a large (N = 1,507), nationally representative probability sample of dating, cohabiting, and married couples, to investigate how often romantic partners exchange physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status, net of matching on these traits. I find that controlling for matching eliminates nearly all evidence of beauty-status exchange. The discussion focuses on the contexts in which beauty-status exchange is most likely and on implications these results have for market-based and sociobiological theories of partner selection.
AcockAlan C.2005. “Working with Missing Values.” Journal of Marriage and Family67(4):1012–28.
2.
AgrestiAlan. 1996. An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
3.
AlterovitzSheyna Sears-RobertsMendelsohnGerlad A.2009. “Partner Preferences across the Life Span: Online Dating by Older Adults.” Psychology and Aging24(2):513–17.
4.
BareldsDick P. H.DijkstraPieternelKoudenburgNamkjeSwamiViren. 2011. “An Assessment of Positive Illusions of the Physical Attractiveness of Romantic Partners.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships28(5):706–719.
5.
BearmanPeterJonesJoUdryJ. Richard. 2008. “The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health: Research Design.”Chapel Hill, NC: Carolina Population Center.
6.
BeckerGary S.1991. A Treatise on the Family, expanded ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
BereczkeiTamasCsanakyAndras. 1996. “Mate Choice, Marital Success, and Reproduction in a Modern Society.” Ethology and Sociobiology17(1):17–35.
8.
BerscheidEllenDionKarenWalsterElaineWalsterG. William. 1971. “Physical Attractiveness and Dating Choice: A Test of the Matching Hypothesis.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology7(2):173–89.
9.
BjerkDavid. 2009. “Beauty vs. Earnings: Gender Differences in Earnings and Priorities over Spousal Characteristics in a Matching Model.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization69(3):248–59.
10.
BlackwellDebra L.LichterDaniel T.2000. “Mate Selection among Married and Cohabiting Couples.” Journal of Family Issues21(3):275–302.
11.
BlackwellDebra L.LichterDaniel T.2004. “Homogamy among Dating, Cohabitating, and Married Couples.” Sociological Quarterly45(4):719–37.
12.
BlossfeldHans-PeterBuchholzSandra. 2009. “Increasing Resource Inequality among Families in Modern Societies: The Mechanisms of Growing Educational Homogamy, Changes in the Division of Work in the Family and the Decline of the Male Breadwinner Model.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies40(4):603–616.
13.
BourdieuPierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. London: Routledge.
14.
BrinesJulieJoynerKara. 1999. “The Ties That Bind: Principles of Cohesion in Cohabitation and Marriage.” American Sociological Review64(3):333–55.
15.
BurdettKennethColesMelvyn G.1997. “Marriage and Class.” Quarterly Journal of Economics112(1):141–68.
16.
BurdettKennethColesMelvyn G.1999. “Long-Term Partnership Formation: Marriage and Employment.” The Economic Journal109(456):307–334.
17.
BurdettKennethColesMelvyn G.2001. “Transplants and Implants: The Economics of Self-Improvement.” International Economic Review42(3):597–616.
18.
BussDavid M.1990. “International Preferences in Selecting Mates : A Study of 37 Cultures.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology21(1):5–47.
19.
BussDavid M.1998. “Sexual Strategies Theory: Historical Origins and Current Status.” Journal of Sex Research35(1):19–31.
20.
BussDavid M.BarnesMichael. 1986. “Preferences in Human Mate Selection.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology50(3):559–70.
21.
BussDavid M.ShackelfordTodd K.KirkpatrickLee A.LarsenRandy J.2001. “A Half Century of Mate Preferences: The Cultural Evolution of Values.” Journal of Marriage and Family63(2):491–503.
22.
CarmaltJulie H.CawleyJohnJoynerKaraSobalJeffery. 2008. “Body Weight and Matching with a Physically Attractive Romantic Partner.” Journal of Marriage and Family70(5):1287–96.
23.
ChantalaKim. 2006. “Guidelines for Analyzing Add Health Data.”Chapell Hill, NC: Carolina Population Center.
24.
ChooEugeneSiowAloysius. 2006. “Estimating a Marriage Matching Model with Spillover Effects.” Demography43(3):463–90.
25.
CliffordMargaret M.WalsterElaine. 1973. “The Effect of Physical Attractiveness on Teacher Expectations.” Sociology of Education46(2):248–58.
26.
CohnLawrence D.AdlerNancy E.1992. “Female and Male Perceptions of Ideal Body Shapes: Distorted Views among Caucasian College Students.” Psychology of Women Quarterly16(1):69–79.
27.
ColesMelvyn G.FrancesconiMarco. 2007. “On the Emergence of Toyboys: Equilibrium Matching with Ageing and Uncertain Careers.” Institute for the Study of Labor, Working Paper Series, Discussion Paper No. 2612.
28.
CunninghamMichael R.RobertsAlan R.BarbeeAnita P.DruenPerri B.WuCheng-Huan. 1995. “‘Their Ideas of Beauty Are, on the Whole, the Same as Ours’: Consistency and Variability in the Cross-Cultural Perception of Female Physical Attractiveness.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology68(2):261–79.
29.
DavisKingsley. 1941. “Intermarriage in Caste Societies.” American Anthropologist43(3):376–95.
30.
DavisSimon. 1990. “Men as Success Objects and Women as Sex Objects: A Study of Personal Advertisements.” Sex Roles23(1/2):43–50.
31.
DiPreteThomas A.BuchmanClaudia. 2006. “Gender-Specific Trends in the Value of Education and the Emerging Gender Gap in College Completion.” Demography43(1):1–24.
32.
EastwickPaul W.FinkelEli J.2008. “Sex Differences in Mate Preferences Revisited: Do People Know What They Initially Desire in a Romantic Partner?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology94(2):245–64.
33.
ElderGlen H.1969. “Appearance and Education in Marriage Mobility.” American Sociological Review34(4):519–33.
34.
EnglandPaulaMcClintockElizabeth Aura. 2009. “The Gendered Double Standard of Aging in US Marriage Markets.” Population and Development Review35(4):797–816.
35.
FeingoldAlan. 1988. “Matching for Attractiveness in Romantic Partners and Same-Sex Friends: A Meta-Analysis and Theoretical Critique.” Psychological Bulleton104(2):226–35.
36.
FismanRaymondIyengarSheena S.KamenicaEmirSimonsonItamar. 2006. “Gender Differences in Mate Selection: Evidence from a Speed Dating Experiment.” Quarterly Journal of Economics121(2):673–97.
FurnhamAdrian. 2009. “Sex Differences in Mate Selection Preferences.” Personality and Individual Differences47(4):262–67.
39.
GardynRebecca. 2002. “The Mating Game.” American Demographics24(7):33–37.
40.
GordonMilton. 1964. Assimilation in American Life. New York: Oxford University Press.
41.
GullicksonAaronFuVincent Kang. 2010. “An Endorsement of Exchange Theory in Mate Selection.” American Journal of Sociology115(4):1243–51.
42.
HamermeshDaniel S.BiddleJeff E.1994. “Beauty and the Labor Market.” American Economic Review84(5):1174–94.
43.
HamplovaDanaBourdaisCeline Le. 2009. “One Pot or Two Pot Strategies? Income Pooling in Married and Unmarried Households in Comparative Perspective.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies40(3):355–85.
44.
HarrisKathleen M.HalpernCarolyn T.WhitselEricHusseyJonTaborJ.EntzelP.UdryJ. Richard. 2009. The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health: Research Design (http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/design).
45.
HarrisonAlbert A.SaeedLaila. 1977. “Let’s Make a Deal: An Analysis of Revelations and Stipulations in Lonely Hearts Advertisements.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology35(4):257–64.
46.
HaskinsKatherine M.RansfordH. Edward. 1999. “The Relationship between Weight and Career Payoffs among Women.” Sociological Forum14(2):295–318.
47.
HitschGunter J.HortacsuAliArielyDan. 2010. “Matching and Sorting in Online Dating.” American Economic Review100(1):130–63.
48.
HowardJudith A.BlumsteinPhilipSchwartzPepper. 1987. “Social or Evolutionay Theories? Some Observations on Preferences in Human Mate Selection.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology53(1):194–200.
49.
JacksonLinda A.HunterJohn E.HodgeCarolyn N.1995. “Physical Attractiveness and Intellectual Competence: A Meta-Analytic Review.” Social Psychology Quarterly58(2):108–122.
50.
JoynerKaraKaoGrace. 2005. “Interracial Relationships and the Transition to Adulthood.” American Sociological Review70(4):563–81.
51.
KalickS. MichaelHamiltonThomas E.III. 1986. “The Matching Hypothesis Reexamined.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51(4):673–82.
52.
KalmijnMatthijs. 1993. “Trends in Black/White Intermarriage.” Social Forces72(1):119–46.
53.
KalmijnMatthijs. 1994. “Assortative Mating by Cultural and Economic Occupational Status.” American Journal of Sociology100(2):422–52.
54.
KalmijnMatthijs. 1998. “Intermarriage and Homogamy: Causes, Patterns, Trends.” Annual Review of Sociology24(1):395–421.
55.
KalmijnMatthijs. 2010. “Educational Inequality, Homogamy, and Status Exchange in Black-White Intermarriage.” American Journal of Sociology115(4):1252–63.
56.
KanazawaSatoshiKovarJody L.2004. “Why Beautiful People Are More Intelligent.” Intelligence32(3):227–43.
57.
KingGary. 1989. “Variance Specification in Event Count Models: From Restrictive Assumptions to a Generalized Estimator.” American Journal of Political Science33(3):762–84.
58.
KownerRotem. 1996. “Effect of Group Status in Physical Attractiveness Preferences: From the Japanese Case to a General Cognitive Perspective.” Genetic, Social & General Psychology Monographs122(2):215–48.
59.
LangloisJudith H.KalakanisLisaRubensteinAdam J.LarsonAndreaHallamMonicaSmootMonica. 2000. “Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review.” Psychological Bulleton126(3):390–423.
60.
LeamerEdward E.1983. “Let’s Take the Con out of Economics.” American Economic Review73(1):31–43.
61.
LiNorman P.BaileyJ. MichaelKenrickDouglas T.LinsenmeierJoan A. W.2002. “The Necessities and Luxuries of Mate Preferences: Testing the Tradeoffs.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology82(6):947–55.
62.
LiNorman P.KenrickDouglas T.2006. “Sex Similarities and Differences in Preferences for Short-Term Mates: What, Whether, and Why.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology90(3):468–89.
63.
LongJ. Scott. 1997. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
64.
LongJ. ScottFreeseJeremy. 2006. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
65.
LoughranDavid S.2002. “The Effect of Male Wage Inequality on Female Age at First Marriage.” Review of Economics and Statistics84(2):237–50.
66.
LovejoyMeg. 2001. “Disturbances in the Social Body: Differences in Body Image and Eating Problems among African American and White Women.” Gender and Society15(2):239–61.
67.
LuoShanhongZhangGuangjian. 2009. “What Leads to Romantic Attraction: Similarity, Reciprocity, Security, or Beauty? Evidence From a Speed-Dating Study.” Journal of Personality77(4):933–63.
68.
MareRobert D.1991. “Five Decades of Educational Assortative Mating.” American Sociological Review56(1):15–32.
69.
McClintockElizabeth Aura. 2010. “When Does Race Matter? Race, Sex, and Dating at an Elite University.” Journal of Marriage and Family72(1):45–72.
70.
McClintockElizabeth Aura. 2011. “Handsome Wants as Handsome Does: Physical Attractiveness and Gender Differences in Revealed Sexual Preferences.” Biodemography and Social Biology57(2):221–57.
71.
McNultyJames K.NeffLisa A.KarneyBenjamin R.2008. “Beyond Initial Attraction: Physical Attractiveness in Newlywed Marriage.” Journal of Family Psychology22(1):135–43.
72.
McPhersonMillerSmith-LovinLynnCookJames M.2001. “Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks.” Annual Review of Sociology27(1):415–44.
73.
MertonRobert. 1941. “Intermarriage and the Social Structure: Fact and Theory.” Psychiatry4:361–74.
74.
Minnesota Population Center. 2013. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series, International: Version 6.2 [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
75.
MossMartin K.MillerRichardPageRichard A.1975. “The Effects of Racial Context on the Perception of Physical Attractiveness.” Sociometry38(4):525–35.
76.
MursteinBernard I.1972. “Physical Attractiveness and Marital Choice.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology22(1):8–12.
77.
MursteinBernard I.ChristyPatricia. 1976. “Physical Attractiveness in Marriage Adjustment in Middle-Aged Couples.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology34(4):537–42.
78.
NevidJeffery S.1984. “Sex Differences in Factors of Romantic Attraction.” Sex Roles11(5/6):401–411.
79.
PressJulie E.2004. “Cute Butts and Housework: A Gynocentric Theory of Assortative Mating.” Journal of Marriage and Family66(4):1029–33.
80.
PresserHarriet B.1975. “Age Differences between Spouses.” American Behavioral Scientist19(2):190–205.
81.
QianZhenchao. 1997. “Breaking the Racial Barriers: Variations in Interracial Marriage Between 1980 and 1990.” Demography34(2):273–76.
82.
ReganPamela C.JoshiAnupama. 2003. “Ideal Partner Preferences among Adolescents.” Social Behavior and Personality31(1):13–20.
83.
RosenblatTanya S.2008. “The Beauty Premium: Physical Attractiveness and Gender in Dictator Games.” Negotiation Journal24(4):465–81.
84.
RosenblatTanya S.MobiusMarkus M.2006. “Why Beauty Matters.” American Economic Review96(1):222–35.
85.
RosenfeldMichael J.2001. “The Salience of Pan-national Hispanic and Asian Identities in U.S. Marriage Markets.” Demography38(2):161–75.
86.
RosenfeldMichael J.2005. “A Critique of Exchange Theory in Mate Selection.” American Journal of Sociology110(5):1284–1325.
87.
RosenfeldMichael J.2008. “Racial, Educational, and Religious Endogamy in the United States: A Comparative Historical Perspective.” Social Forces87(1):1–32.
88.
RosenfeldMichael J.2010. “Still Weak Support for Status-Caste Exchange in Black-White Intermarriage.” American Journal of Sociology115(4):1264–76.
89.
RoystonPatrick. 2004. “Multiple Imputation of Missing Values.” Stata Journal4(3):227–41.
90.
RugglesStevenAlexanderJ. TrentGenadekKatieGoekenRonaldSchroederMatthew B.SobekMatthew. 2010. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0 [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
91.
SasslerSharonJoynerKara. 2011. “Social Exchange and the Progression of Sexual Relationships in Emerging Adulthood.” Social Forces90(1):233–45.
92.
SchoenRobertChengYen-Hsin Alice. 2006. “Partner Choice and the Differential Retreat from Marriage.” Journal of Marriage and Family68(1):1–10.
93.
SchoenRobertWeinickRobin M.1993. “Partner Choice in Marriage and Cohabitations.” Journal of Marriage and Family55(2):408–414.
94.
SchoenRobertWooldredgeJohn. 1989. “Marriage Choices in North Carolina and Virginia, 1969–71 and 1979–81.” Journal of Marriage and Family51(2):465–81.
95.
SchwartzChristine R.2010. “Earnings Inequality and the Changing Association between Spouses’ Earnings.” American Journal of Sociology115(5):1524–57.
96.
SchwartzChristine R.MareRobert D.2005. “Trends in Educational Assortative Marriage from 1940 to 2003.” Demography42(4):621–46.
97.
SingerJerome E.1964. “The Use of Manipulative Strategies: Machiavellianism and Attractiveness.” Sociometry27(2):128–50.
98.
SprecherSusan. 1989. “The Importance to Males and Females of Physical Attractiveness, Earning Potential, and Expressiveness in Initial Attraction.” Sex Roles21(9/10):591–607.
99.
StevensGillian. 1991. “Propinquity and Educational Homogamy.” Sociological Forum6(4):715–26.
100.
StevensGillianOwensDawnSchaeferEric C.1990. “Education and Attractiveness in Marriage Choices.” Social Psychology Quarterly53(1):62–70.
101.
SweeneyMegan M.CancianMaria. 2004. “The Changing Importance of White Women’s Economic Prospects for Assortative Mating.” Journal of Marriage and Family66(4):1015–28.
102.
TaylorPatricia AnnGlennNorval D.1976. “The Utility of Education and Attractiveness for Females’ Status Attainment through Marriage.” American Sociological Review41(3):484–98.
103.
UdryJ. Richard. 1977. “The Importance of Being Beautiful: A Reexamination and Racial Comparison.” American Journal of Sociology83(1):154–60.
104.
UmbersonDebraHughesMichael. 1987. “The Impact of Physical Attractiveness on Achievement and Psychological Well-Being.” Social Psychology Quarterly50(3):227–36.
105.
WangHongyuKaoGraceJoynerKara. 2006. “Stability of Interracial and Intraracial Romantic Relationships among Adolescents.” Social Science Research35(2):435–53.
106.
WardleJaneWallerJoJarvisMartin J.2002. “Sex Differences in the Association of Socioeconomic Status with Obesity.” American Journal of Public Health92(8):1299–1304.
107.
WebbTammy T.LoobyE. JoanFults-McMurteryRegina. 2004. “African American Men’s Perceptions of Body Figure Attractiveness: An Acculteration Study.” Journal of Black Studies34(3):370–85.
YanceyGeorge A.2009. “Crossracial Differences in the Racial Preferences of Potential Dating Partners: A Test of the Alientation of African Americans and Social Dominance Orientation.” Sociological Perspectives50(1):121–43.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
