This study tested an evolutionary hypothesis that the mere prospect of caring for a child will increase sex differences in human mate selection criteria. That is, women would adopt a stronger preference for socially dominant men when parenting had been primed and men would adopt a stronger preference for physically attractive women when parenting had been primed. Male and female university students were randomly assigned to be exposed to a parenting prime or a nonparenting prime. Following the priming procedure, participants rated the romantic appeal of a target person of the opposite sex. Exposure to the parenting prime, the target’s social dominance, and the target’s physical attractiveness were orthogonally manipulated. As predicted, women adopted a stronger mate preference for social dominance when parenting was at the forefront of the mind. Contrary to predictions, the parenting prime had no effect on men’s mate preference for physical attractiveness.
Baize, H. R., & Schroeder, J. E. (1995). Personality and mate selection in personal ads: Evolutionary preferences in a public mate selection process. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 517-536.
2.
Bargh, J. A. (1990). Auto-motives: Preconscious determinants of social interaction. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 93-130). New York: Guilford.
3.
Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. L. (2000). The mind in the middle: A practical guide to priming and automaticity research. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 253-285). New York: Cambridge University Press.
4.
Baum, S. K., & Stewart, R. B. (1990). Sources of meaning through the lifespan. Psychological Reports, 67, 3-14.
5.
Baumeister, R. F. (2000). Gender differences in erotic plasticity: The female sex drive as socially flexible and responsive. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 347-374.
6.
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49.
7.
Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. L. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 559-570.
8.
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232.
9.
Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1996). Automatic activation of impression formation and memorization goals: Nonconscious goal priming reproduces effects of explicit task instructions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 464-478.
10.
Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: J. Murray.
11.
Eagly, A., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
12.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408-423.
13.
Feingold, A. (1990). Gender differences in effects of physical attractiveness on romantic attraction: A comparison across five research paradigms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 981-993.
14.
Feingold, A. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 125-139.
15.
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: The role of trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573-587.
16.
Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Garver-Apgar, C. E. (2005). Adaptations to ovulation. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 344-371). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
17.
Gutierres, S. E., Kenrick, D. T., & Partch, J. J. (1999). Beauty, dominance, and the mating game: Contrast effects in the self-assessment reflect gender differences in mate selection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1126-1134.
18.
Jensen-Campbell, L. A., Graziano, W. G., & West, S. G. (1995). Dominance, prosocial orientation, and female preferences: Do nice guys really finish last?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 427-440.
19.
Kenrick, D. T., Groth, G. E., Trost, M. R., & Sadalla, E. K. (1993). Integrating evolutionary and social exchange perspectives on relationships: Effects of gender, self-appraisal, and involvement level on mate selection criteria. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 951-969.
20.
Kenrick, D. T., Sadalla, E. K., Groth, G., & Trost, M. R. (1990). Evolution, traits, and stages of human courtship: Qualifying the parental investment model. Journal of Personality, 58, 97-116.
21.
Roney, J. R. (2003). Effects of visual exposure to the opposite sex: Cognitive aspects of mate attraction in human men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 393-404.
22.
Roney, J. R., Mahler, S. V., & Maestripieri, D. (2003). Behavioral and hormonal responses of men to brief interactions with women. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 365-375.
23.
Sadalla, E. K., Kenrick, D. T., & Vershure, B. (1987). Dominance and heterosexual attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 730-738.
24.
Schmitt, D. P. (2005). The fundamentals of human mating strategies. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
25.
Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1992). Sociosexuality and romantic partner choice. Journal of Personality, 60, 31-51.
26.
Singh, D. (1993). Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Role of waist-to-hip ratio. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 293-307.
27.
Spencer, S. J., Fein, S., Wolfe, C. T., Fong, C., & Dunn, M. A. (1998). Automatic activation of stereotypes: The role of self-image threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1139-1152.
28.
Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1660-1672.
29.
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
30.
Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1989). Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture: I. Theoretical considerations. Ethology and Sociobiology, 10, 29-49.
31.
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and descent of man 1871-1971 (pp. 136-179). Chicago: Aldine.
32.
Weeden, J., & Sabini, J. (2005). Physical attractiveness and health in western societies: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 635-653.
33.
Woodward, K., & Richards, M. H. (2005). The parental investment model and minimum mate choice criteria in humans. Behavioral Ecology, 16, 57-61.
