Using data from the file of a French matchmaking agency, this study confirmed some previous results on traditional male-female differences in stipulations by placers of advertisements: women seek features influencing financial resources, while men offer these characteristics and seek younger women. An interesting and original result is that the sampled women are older than the men, which partially explains why they spend relatively more money in professional matchmaking services as they age.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AhuviaA.AdelmanM. (1992) Formal intermediaries in the marriage market: A typology and review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 452–463.
2.
BaizeH. R.SchroederJ. E. (1995) Personality and mate selection in personal ads: Evolutionary preferences in a public mate selection process. Journal of Social Behavior Personality, 10, 517–536.
3.
BereczkeiT.VorosS.GalA.BernathL. (1997) Resources, attractiveness, family commitment; reproductive decisions in human mate choice. Ethology, 103, 681–699.
4.
CameronS.CollinsA. (1998) Sex differences in stipulated preferences in personal advertisements. Psychological Reports, 82, 119–123.
5.
CameronS.CollinsA. (1999) Looks unimportant? A demand function for male attractiveness by female advertisers. Applied Economics Letters, 6, 381–384.
6.
DeauxK.HannaR. (1984) Courtship in the personals column: The influence of gender and sexual orientations. Sex Roles, 11, 363–375.
7.
GoodwinR. (1990) Sex differences among partner preferences: Are the sexes really very similar?Sex Roles, 23, 501–513.
8.
HirschmanE. (1987) People as products: Analysis of a complex marketing exchange. Journal of Marketing, 51, 98–108.
9.
Le GuririecG.VaillantN. G. (2005) From libertinism to marital commitment: An economic analysis of the marital research's differentiated objectives. Journal of BioEconomics, 7, 84–95.
10.
LynnM.BoligR. (1985) Personal advertisements: Sources of data about personal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2, 377–383.
11.
PawlowskiB. (2000) The biological meaning of preferences on the human mate market. Anthropological Review, 63, 39–72.
12.
PawlowskiB.DunbarR. I. M. (1999a) Withholding age as putative deception in mate search tactics. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 53–69.
13.
PawlowskiB.DunbarR. I. M. (1999b) Impact of market value on human mate choice decisions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 266, 281–285.
14.
RajeckiD. W.BledsoeS. B.RasmussenJ. L. (1991) Successful personal ads: Gender differences and similarities in offers, stipulations and outcomes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 457–469.
15.
SittonS.RippeeE. T. (1986) Women still want marriage: Sex differences in lonely hearts advertisements. Psychological Reports, 58, 119–123.
16.
VaillantN. G. (2004a) Discrimination in matchmaking: Evidence from a French marriage bureau. Applied Economics, 36, 723–729.
17.
VaillantN. G. (2004b) Estimating the time elapsed between ending a relationship and joining a matchmaking agency: Evidence from a French marriage bureau. Journal of Economic Psychology, 25, 789–802.
18.
WaynforthD.DunbarR. I. M. (1995) Conditional mate choice strategies in humans: Evidence from “lonely hearts” advertisements. Behaviour, 132, 755–779.
