Men's and women's mate preferences impose on each a unique set of adaptive problems that must be solved when judging the desirability of prospective mates. One potentially revealing source of information about an individual's desirability as a romantic partner is contained in the decisions made by same-sex others. The present studies predicted that men's and women's desirability assessments would be affected in opposite ways when target persons were depicted with members of the target's opposite sex. Study 1 (N = 847) documented that women rated men more desirable when shown surrounded by women than when shown alone or with other men (a desirability enhancement effect). In sharp contrast, men rated women less desirable when shown surrounded by men than when shown alone or with women (a desirability diminution effect) . Study 2 (N = 627) demonstrated similar sexually divergent effects for estimates of the desirability of same-sex competitors.
Abbey, A., Cozzarelli, C., McLaughlin, K., & Harnish, R.J. (1987). The effects of clothing and dyad sex composition on perceptions of sexual intent: Do women and men evaluate these cues differently ? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 108-126.
2.
Abbey, A., & Melby, C. (1986). The effects of nonverbal cues on gender differences in perceptions of sexual intent. Sex Roles, 15, 283-298.
3.
Betzig, L. (1986). Despotism and differential reproduction: A Darwinian view of history. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.
4.
Borgerhoff Mulder, M. (1988). Is the polygyny threshold model relevant to humans? Kipsigis evidence. In C. G. N. Mascie-Taylor & A. J. Boyce (Eds.), Mating patterns (pp. 209-230). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Buss, D.M. (1988). The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 616-628.
6.
Buss, D.M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses testing in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 12, 1-49.
7.
Buss, D.M. (1991). Evolutionary personality psychology. Annual review of psychology. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, Inc.
8.
Buss, D.M. (2002). Human mate guarding. Neuroendocronology Letters Special Issue, 23, 23-29.
9.
Buss, D.M. (2003). Evolution of desire. New York : Basic Books. (Original work published 1994)
10.
Buss, D.M. (2005). The murderer next door: Why the mind is designed to kill. New York: Penguin.
11.
Buss, D.M., & Barnes, M.L. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 559-570.
12.
Buss, D.M., & Dedden, L.A. (1990). Derogation of competitors. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 395-422.
13.
Buss, D.M., Larsen, R.J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, J. (1992). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psychology. Psychological Science , 3, 251-255.
14.
Buss, D.M. & Schmitt, D.P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232.
15.
Buss, D.M., & Shackelford, T.K. (1997). Susceptibility to infidelity in the first year of marriage. Journal of Research in Personality , 31, 193-221.
16.
Byers, E.S., & Lewis, K. (1988). Dating couples' disagreements over the desired level of sexual intimacy. Journal of Sex Research, 30, 270-282.
17.
Clark, R.D., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers . Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 2, 39-55.
18.
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.
19.
Daly, M., Wilson, M., & Weghorst, S.J. (1982). Male sexual jealousy. Ethology and Sociobiology, 3, 11-27.
20.
Dawkins, R. (1986). Wealth, polygyny, and reproductive success. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9, 190-191.
21.
Dugatkin, L.A. (1992). Sexual selection & imitation: Females copy the mate choice of others. The American Naturalist, 139, 1384-1389.
Fisher, M.L. (2004). Female intrasexual competition decreases female facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Biology Supplement, 271, S283-S285.
24.
Fisher, R.A. (1958). The genetical theory of natural selection (2nd ed.). New York: Dover.
25.
Ford, C.S., & Beach, F.A. (1951). Patterns of sexual behavior. New York: Harper & Row.
26.
Gangestad, S.W., & Simpson, J.A. (2000). On the evolutionary psychology of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 23, 573-587.
27.
Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P.M. (1999). Fast and frugal heuristics: The adaptive toolbox. In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & The ABC Research Group (Eds.), Simple heuristics make us smart (pp. 3-36). New York: Oxford University Press.
28.
Graziano, W.G., Jensen-Campbell, L.A., Shebilske, L.J., & Lundgren, S.R. (1993). Social influence, sex differences, and judgments of beauty: Putting the interpersonal back in interpersonal attraction . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 522-531.
29.
Gutierres, S.E., Kenrick, D.T., & Partch, J.J. (1999). Beauty, dominance, and the mating game: Contrast effects in self-assessment reflect gender differences in mate selection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1126-1134.
30.
Hill, S.E., & Ryan, M.J. (2006). The role of female quality in the mate copying behavior of sailfin mollies. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Biology Letters, 2, 203-205.
31.
Jones, B.C., DeBruine, L.M., Little, A.C., Burriss, R.P., & Feinberg, D.R. (2007). Social transmission of face preferences among humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological Sciences, 274, 899-903.
32.
Kenrick, D.T., & Keefe, R.C. (1992). Age preferences in mates reflect sex differences in reproductive strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 15, 75-133.
33.
La Cerra, M.M. (1994). Evolved mate preferences in women: Psychological adaptations for assessing a man's willingness to invest in offspring. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara, Department of Psychology.
34.
Li, N.P., Bailey, J.M., Kenrick, D.T., & Linsenmeier, J.A.W. (2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 947-955.
35.
Mathes, E.W., Brennan, S.M., Haugen, P.M., & Rice, H.B. (1985). Ratings of physical attractivess as a function of age. Journal of Social Psychology, 125, 157-168.
36.
Murdock, G.P. (1967). Ethnographic atlas. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
37.
Orians, G.H. (1969). On the evolution of mating systems in birds and mammals. The American Naturalist, 103, 589-603.
38.
Pruett-Jones, S. (1992). Independent versus non-independent mate choice: Do females copy each other? The American Naturalist, 140, 1000-1009.
39.
Schwartz, B. (2004). The paradox of choice: Why more is less. New York: Harper Collins.
40.
Schlupp, I., Marler, C.A., & Ryan, M.J. (1994). Benefit to male sailfin mollies of mating with heterospecific females. Science, 263, 373-374.
41.
Sigall, H., & Landy, D. (1973). Radiating beauty: Effects of having a physically attractive partner on person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28, 218-224.
42.
Singh, D. (1993). Adaptive significance of waist-to-hip ratio and female physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 293-307.
43.
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
44.
Townsend, J.M., & Levy, G.D. (1990). Effects of potential partner's costume and physical attractiveness on sexuality and partner selection. Journal of Psychology, 124, 371-389.
45.
Trivers, R. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man: 1871-1971 (pp. 136-179). Chicago: Aldine.
46.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases . Science, 185, 1124-1130.
47.
Wade, M.J., & Pruett-Jones, S.G. (1990). Female copying increases the variance in male mating success. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 87, 5749-5753.
48.
Walster, E., Walster, G.W., Piliavin, J., & Schmidt, L. (1973). "Playing hard to get": Understanding an elusive phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 113-121.
49.
Williams, G.C. (1975). Sex and evolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
