Four studies investigated the importance of objective and subjective attributes to mate selection. This research tested whether perceivers' objective physical attractiveness influenced how they evaluated the physical attractiveness of others and, if considered, may provide a parsimonious account for matching in mate selection. Study 1 (N = 102) demonstrated that ratings of targets' attractiveness decreased as perceivers' objective physical attractiveness increased. Studies 2 (N = 89) and 3 (N = 68) revealed that as perceivers' objective physical attractiveness increased, reductions in expected satisfaction and rejection were mediated by perceivers' reduced assessments of targets' attractiveness. Study 4 (N = 114) produced patterns of matching by finding that attractive perceivers expected to date more attractive targets while unattractive perceivers expected to date less attractive targets. This research emphasizes the importance of objective physical attractiveness to target evaluations and describes how matching results from the combined influence of objective and subjective attributes.
Alicke, M.D. (1985). Global self-evaluation as determined by the desirability and controllability of trait adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1621-1630.
2.
Amundsen, T., & Forsgren, E. (2003). Male preference for colourful females affected by male size in a marine fish. Behvioral Ecology and Sociobiology , 54, 55-64.
3.
Aron, A. (1988). The matching hypothesis reconsidered again: Comment on Kalick and Hamilton. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 441-446.
4.
Arriaga, X.B. (2001). The ups and downs of dating: Fluctuations in satisfaction in newly formed romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 754-765.
5.
Ball, K., Crawford, D., & Kenardy, J. (2004). Longitudinal relationships among overweight, life satisfaction, and aspirations in young women. Obesity Research , 12, 1019-1030.
6.
Barber, N. (1995). The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Ethology and Sociobiology , 16, 395-424.
7.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
8.
Berscheid, E., Dion, K.K., Walster, E., & Walster, G.W. (1971). Physical attractiveness and dating choice: A test of the matching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 7, 173-189.
9.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley.
10.
Brislin, R.W., & Lewis, S.A. (1968). Dating and physical attractiveness: Replication . Psychological Reports, 22, 976.
11.
Brown, J.D. (1998). The self. New York: McGraw-Hill.
12.
Brown, J.D., & Marshall, M.A. (2001). Self-esteem and emotion: Some thoughts about feelings. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 575-584.
13.
Bryk, A.S., & Raudenbush, S.W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA : Sage.
14.
Burley, N. (1983). The meaning of assortative mating. Ethology and Sociobiology, 4, 191-203.
15.
Cash, T.F. (1981). Physical attractiveness: An annotated bibliography of theory and research in the behavioral sciences. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 11(Ms. No. 2370), 83.
16.
Catrambone, R., & Markus, H. (1987). The role of self-schemas in going beyond the information given. Social Cognition, 5, 349-368.
17.
Combs, A.W., & Snygg, D. (1959). Individual behavior: A perceptual approach to behavior. (Rev. ed.). Oxford, UK: Harpers.
18.
Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 163-228). New York: Oxford University Press.
19.
Feingold, A. (1988). Matching for attractiveness in romantic partners and same-sex friends: A meta-analysis and theoretical critique. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 226-235.
20.
Feingold, A. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin , 112, 125-139.
21.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Oxford, UK: Row, Peterson.
22.
Fleming, J.S., & Courtney, B.E. (1984). The dimensionality of self-esteem: II. Hierarchical facet model for revised measurement scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 404-421.
23.
Gagné, F.M., & Lydon, J.E. (2001). Mind-set and close relationships: When bias leads to (in)accurate predictions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 85-96.
24.
Gangestad, S.W. (2001). Adaptive design, selective history, and women's sexual motivations. In J. A. French, A. C. Kamil, & D. W. Leger (Eds.), Evolutionary psychology and motivation (pp. 37-74). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
25.
Gangestad, S.W., & Simpson, J.A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573-644.
26.
Huston, T.L. (1973). Ambiguity of acceptance, social desirability, and dating choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 9, 32-42.
27.
Jackson, L.A. (1992). Physical appearance and gender: Sociobiological and sociocultural perspectives. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
28.
Johnstone, R.A., Reynolds, J.D., & Deutsch, J.C. (1996). Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness . Evolution, 50, 1382-1391.
29.
Jones, E.E., & Gerard, H. (1967). Foundations of social psychology. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
30.
Kalick, S.M., & Hamilton, T.E. (1986). The matching hypothesis reexamined. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 673-682.
31.
Kalick, S.M., Zebrowitz, L.A., Langlois, J.H., & Johnson, R.M. (1998). Does human facial attractiveness honestly advertise health? Longitudinal data on an evolutionary question. Psychological Science, 9, 8-13.
32.
Karniol, R. (2003). Egocentrism versus protocentrism: The status of self in social prediction. Psychological Review, 110, 564-580.
33.
Kiesler, S.B., & Baral, R.L. (1970). The search for the romantic partner: The effects of self-esteem and physical attractiveness on romantic behavior. In K. Gergen & D. Marlowe (Eds.), Personality and social behavior (pp. 155-165). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
34.
Kirsner, B.R., Figueredo, A.J., & Jacobs, W.J. (2003). Self, friends, and lovers: Structural relations among Beck Depression Inventory scores and perceived mate values. Journal of Affective Disorders, 75, 131-148.
35.
Kopera, A.A., Maier, R.A., & Johnson, J.E. (1971). Perception of physical attractiveness: The influence of group interaction and group coaction on ratings of attractiveness of photographs of women. Proceedings of the 79th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 6, 317-318.
36.
Krull, J., & MacKinnon, D.P. (2001). Multilevel modeling of individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 249-277.
37.
Langlois, J.H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A.J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 390-423.
38.
Le, B., & Agnew, C.R. (2003). Commitment and its theorized determinants: A meta-analysis of the investment model. Personal Relationships, 10, 37-57.
39.
Lewin, K., Dembo, T., Festinger, L., & Sears, P.S. (1944). Level of aspiration. In J. Hunt (Ed.), Personality and the behavior disorders (pp. 333-378). Oxford, UK: Ronald Press.
40.
Lichter, D.T., Anderson, R.N., & Hayward, M.D. (1995). Marriage markets and marital choice. Journal of Family Issues, 16, 412-431.
41.
MacKinnon, D.P., Lockwood, C.M., Hoffman, J.M., West, S.G., & Sheets, V. (2002). Comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104.
42.
Markman, K.D., & McMullen, M.N. (2003). A reflection and evaluation model of comparative thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 244-267.
Montoya, R.M. (1998, March). Mate preferences for specific personality and body part characteristics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Boston.
45.
Montoya, R.M., & Horton, R. (2004). On the importance of cognitive evaluation as a determinant of interpersonal attraction in the similarity effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 696-712.
46.
Openshaw, D.K., Thomas, D.L., & Rollins, B.C. (1981). Adolescent self-esteem: A multidimensional perspective . Journal of Early Adolescence, 1, 273-282.
47.
Parker, G.A. (1983). Mate quality and mating decisions. In P. P. G. Bateson (Ed.), Mate choice (pp. 141-166). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
48.
Pawlowski, B., & Dunbar, R.I.M. (1999). Impact of market value on human mate choice decisions. Proceedings of the Royal Society (London), 266, 281-285.
49.
Pianka, E.R. (1970). On "r" and "K" selection. American Naturalist, 104, 592-597.
Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
52.
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive reference points. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 532-547.
53.
Rusbult, C.E., Davis, J.L., Finkel, E.J., Hannon, P.A., & Olsen, N. (2008). [Forgiveness of betrayal in close relationships] . Unpublished raw data.
54.
Rusbult, C.E., Johnson, D.J., & Morrow, G.D. (1986). Impact of couple patterns of problem solving on distress and nondistress in dating relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 744-753.
55.
Rusbult, C.E., Van Lange, P.A.M., Wildschut, T., Yovetich, N.A., & Verette, J. (2000). Perceived superiority in close relationships: Why it exists and persists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 521-545.
56.
Rusbult, C.E., Verette, J., Whitney, G.A., Slovik, L.F., & Lipkus, L. (1991). Accommodation processes in close relationships: Theory and preliminary empirical evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 53-78.
Sangrador, J.L., & Yela, C. (2000). "What is beautiful is loved": Physical attractiveness in love relationships in a representative sample. Social Behavior and Personality, 28, 207-218.
59.
SAS Institute. (1999). SAS advanced statistics manual. Cary, NC: Author .
60.
Shackelford, T.K., & Larsen, R.J. (1999). Facial attractiveness and physical health. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 71-76.
61.
Simão, J., & Todd, P.M. (2002). Modeling mate choice in monogamous mating systems with courtship. Adaptive Behavior, 10, 113-136.
62.
Sloman, L., & Price, J.S. (1987). Losing behavior (yielding subroutine) and human depression: Proximate and selective mechanisms. Ethology and Sociobiology, 8, 99-109.
63.
Sloman, S., & Sloman, L. (1988). Mate selection in the service of human evolution . Journal of Social and Biological Structures, 11, 457-468.
64.
South, S.J. (1995). Do you need to shop around? Age at marriage, spousal alternatives, and marital dissolution. Journal of Family Issues , 16, 432-449.
65.
Stapel, D.A., & Koomen, W. (2000). Distinctiveness of others, mutability of selves: Their impact on self-evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1068-1087.
66.
Tafarodi, R.W., Marshall, T.C., & Milne, A.B. (2003). Self-esteem and memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 29-44.
67.
Takeuchi, S.A. (2000). If I don't look good, you don't look good? Toward a new matching theory of interpersonal attraction based on the behavioral and the social exchange principles. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(11-A), 4198.
68.
Tesser, A., & Brodie, M. (1971). A note on the evaluation of a "computer date." Psychonomic Science, 23, 300.
69.
Thibaut, J.W., & Kelley, H.H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
70.
Todd, P.M., & Miller, G.F. (1999). From pride and prejudice to persuasion: Satisficing in mate search. In G. Gigerenzer & P. M. Todd (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 287-308). New York: Oxford University Press.
71.
Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1990). On the universality of human nature and the uniqueness of the individual: The role of genetics and adaptation. Journal of Personality, 58, 17-68.
72.
Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19-136). New York: Oxford University Press.
73.
Walster, E. (1970). The effect of self-esteem on liking for dates of various social desirabilities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6, 248-253.
74.
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.
75.
Walster, E., & Walster, G.W. (1969). The matching hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 248-253.
76.
Zebrowitz, L.A. (1990). Social perception. Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
