Predicting Romantic Interest at Zero Acquaintance: Evidence of Sex Differences in Trait Perception but Not in Predictors of Interest

We evaluated five competing hypotheses about what predicts romantic interest. Through a half–block quasi–experimental design, a large sample of young adults (i.e. responders; n = 335) viewed videos of opposite–sex persons (i.e. targets) talking about themselves, and responders rated the targets’ traits and their romantic interest in the target. We tested whether similarity, dissimilarity or overall trait levels on mate value, physical attractiveness, life history strategy and the Big Five personality factors predicted romantic interest at zero acquaintance and whether sex acted as a moderator. We tested the responders’ individual perception of the targets’ traits, in addition to the targets’ own self–reported trait levels and a consensus rating of the targets made by the responders. We used polynomial regression with response surface analysis within multilevel modelling to test support for each of the hypotheses. Results suggest a large sex difference in trait perception; when women rated men, they agreed in their perception more often than when men rated women. However, as a predictor of romantic interest, there were no sex differences. Only the responders’ perception of the targets’ physical attractiveness predicted romantic interest; specifically, responders’ who rated the targets’ physical attractiveness as higher than themselves reported more romantic interest. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology

[1]  C. Black The life history narrative: How early events and psychological processes relate to biodemographic measures of life history , 2016 .

[2]  Vincent Egan,et al.  Positive assortative pairing in social and romantic partners: A cross-cultural observational field study of naturally occurring pairs , 2015 .

[3]  P. Komesaroff,et al.  Obese Adults’ Perceptions of News Reporting on Obesity , 2015 .

[4]  C. Dunkel,et al.  Using the California Q-sort Measure of Life History Strategy to Predict Sexual Behavioral Outcomes , 2015, Archives of sexual behavior.

[5]  E. Chagnon,et al.  Do Men and Women Exhibit Different Preferences for Mates? A Replication of Eastwick and Finkel (2008) , 2015 .

[6]  Paul W. Eastwick,et al.  Best research practices in psychology: Illustrating epistemological and pragmatic considerations with the case of relationship science. , 2015, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  J. P. Rushton,et al.  The psychometric assessment of human life history strategy: A meta-analytic construct validation. , 2014 .

[8]  B. Karney,et al.  Men still value physical attractiveness in a long-term mate more than women: rejoinder to Eastwick, Neff, Finkel, Luchies, and Hunt (2014). , 2014, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[9]  Andrea L. Meltzer,et al.  Sex differences in the implications of partner physical attractiveness for the trajectory of marital satisfaction. , 2014, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  G. Fletcher,et al.  Predicting Romantic Interest and Decisions in the Very Early Stages of Mate Selection , 2014, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[11]  A. Figueredo,et al.  Comparison of life history strategy measures , 2014 .

[12]  Paul W. Eastwick,et al.  The predictive validity of ideal partner preferences: a review and meta-analysis. , 2014, Psychological bulletin.

[13]  G. Fletcher,et al.  Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection. , 2013, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  Paul W. Eastwick,et al.  Perceived, not actual, similarity predicts initial attraction in a live romantic context: Evidence from the speed-dating paradigm , 2013 .

[15]  R. Eisinga,et al.  The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? , 2013, International Journal of Public Health.

[16]  U. Schimmack The ironic effect of significant results on the credibility of multiple-study articles. , 2012, Psychological methods.

[17]  C. Copen,et al.  First marriages in the United States: data from the 2006-2010 National Survey of Family Growth. , 2012, National health statistics reports.

[18]  Peter Harms,et al.  An evaluation of the consequences of using short measures of the Big Five personality traits. , 2012, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[19]  A. Figueredo,et al.  Shared life history strategy as a strong predictor of romantic relationship satisfaction , 2012 .

[20]  Y. Pawitan,et al.  Heritability, Assortative Mating and Gender Differences in Violent Crime: Results from a Total Population Sample Using Twin, Adoption, and Sibling Models , 2011, Behavior Genetics.

[21]  P. Westfall,et al.  Multiple comparisons and multiple tests using SAS , 2011 .

[22]  Aurelio José Figueredo,et al.  Intentions Towards Infidelity Scale , 2010 .

[23]  A. Figueredo,et al.  Life history strategy as a longitudinal predictor of relationship satisfaction and dissolution , 2010 .

[24]  G. Fletcher,et al.  Through the eyes of love: reality and illusion in intimate relationships. , 2010, Psychological bulletin.

[25]  Eric D. Heggestad,et al.  Erratum to: Polynomial Regression with Response Surface Analysis: A Powerful Approach for Examining Moderation and Overcoming Limitations of Difference Scores , 2010 .

[26]  J. Nijenhuis,et al.  The General Factor of Personality: A meta-analysis of Big Five intercorrelations and a criterion-related validity study , 2010 .

[27]  Dan Ariely,et al.  What makes you click?—Mate preferences in online dating , 2010 .

[28]  C. Dunkel,et al.  Convergent validity of measures of life-history strategy , 2010 .

[29]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Similarity and Agreement in Self-and Other Perception: A Meta-Analysis , 2010, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[30]  Eric D. Heggestad,et al.  Polynomial Regression with Response Surface Analysis: A Powerful Approach for Examining Moderation and Overcoming Limitations of Difference Scores , 2010 .

[31]  S. McHale,et al.  Longitudinal predictors of change in number of sexual partners across adolescence and early adulthood. , 2010, The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.

[32]  B. Holmes,et al.  Adult attachment and romantic partner preference: A review , 2009 .

[33]  A. Furnham Sex differences in mate selection preferences , 2009 .

[34]  Aurelio José Figueredo,et al.  Assortative Pairing and Life History Strategy , 2009 .

[35]  Guangjian Zhang,et al.  What leads to romantic attraction: similarity, reciprocity, security, or beauty? Evidence from a speed-dating study. , 2009, Journal of personality.

[36]  S. Craig Roberts,et al.  MHC-correlated mate choice in humans: A review , 2009, Psychoneuroendocrinology.

[37]  A. Figueredo,et al.  Predicting romantic relationship satisfaction from life history strategy , 2009 .

[38]  J. Maner,et al.  A sharp eye for her SOI: perception and misperception of female sociosexuality at zero acquaintance , 2009 .

[39]  Aurelio José Figueredo,et al.  Assortative Pairing and Life History Strategy A Cross-Cultural Study , 2009 .

[40]  R. Horton,et al.  Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity , 2008 .

[41]  P. Donnelly,et al.  Is Mate Choice in Humans MHC-Dependent? , 2008, PLoS genetics.

[42]  S. Kennedy,et al.  FtsK-Dependent Dimer Resolution on Multiple Chromosomes in the Pathogen Vibrio cholerae , 2008, PLoS genetics.

[43]  Richard Arum,et al.  The romance of college attendance: Higher education stratification and mate selection ☆ , 2008 .

[44]  Paul W. Eastwick,et al.  Sex Differences in Mate Preferences Revisited : Do People Know What They Initially Desire in a Romantic Partner ? , 2008 .

[45]  D. Annis Dyadic Data Analysis , 2007 .

[46]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Accuracy in Judgments of Aggressiveness , 2007, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[47]  Kathleen D. Vohs,et al.  Encyclopedia of social psychology , 2007 .

[48]  Daniel N. Jones,et al.  The Ideal Romantic Partner Personality , 2006 .

[49]  W. J. Jacobs,et al.  Consilience and Life History Theory: From Genes to Brain to Reproductive Strategy. , 2006 .

[50]  Daniel J. Bauer,et al.  Testing and probing interactions in hierarchical linear growth models , 2006 .

[51]  D. Kenrick,et al.  Sex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: what, whether, and why. , 2006, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[52]  Shanhong Luo,et al.  Assortative mating and marital quality in newlyweds: a couple-centered approach. , 2005, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[53]  D. Watson,et al.  Match makers and deal breakers: analyses of assortative mating in newlywed couples. , 2004, Journal of personality.

[54]  A. Figueredo,et al.  The heritability of life history strategy: The k‐factor, covitality, and personality , 2004, Social biology.

[55]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  PERSON: A General Model of Interpersonal Perception , 2004, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[56]  Jerlando F. L. Jackson,et al.  The Declining "Equity" of American Higher Education , 2004 .

[57]  D. White Influences of social learning on mate-choice decisions , 2004, Learning & behavior.

[58]  R. Wootton The evolution of life histories: Theory and analysis , 1993, Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries.

[59]  C. Sedikides,et al.  Pancultural Self-Enhancement , 2002 .

[60]  S. Gosling,et al.  A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains , 2003 .

[61]  Shanhong Luo,et al.  Interpersonal attraction and personality: what is attractive--self similarity, ideal similarity, complementarity or attachment security? , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[62]  R. Thornhill,et al.  Major histocompatibility complex genes, symmetry, and body scent attractiveness in men and women , 2003 .

[63]  Daniel E. Martin,et al.  Traffic crash involvement: experiential driving knowledge and stressful contextual antecedents. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[64]  W. J. Jacobs,et al.  Self, friends, and lovers: structural relations among Beck Depression Inventory scores and perceived mate values. , 2003, Journal of affective disorders.

[65]  B. Buunk,et al.  Age and gender differences in mate selection criteria for various involvement levels , 2002 .

[66]  David Thissen,et al.  Quick and Easy Implementation of the Benjamini-Hochberg Procedure for Controlling the False Positive Rate in Multiple Comparisons , 2002 .

[67]  P. Salovey,et al.  Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) Users Manual , 2002 .

[68]  Michael C. Bailey,et al.  The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: testing the tradeoffs. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[69]  D. Perrett,et al.  Facial symmetry and judgements of apparent health: Support for a “good genes” explanation of the attractiveness–symmetry relationship , 2001 .

[70]  K. Grammer,et al.  Male facial attractiveness: evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design , 2001 .

[71]  H. Flap,et al.  Assortative Meeting and Mating: Unintended Consequences of Organized Settings for Partner Choices , 2001 .

[72]  D. Buss,et al.  A Half Century of Mate Preferences: The Cultural Evolution of Values , 2001 .

[73]  Michael Domjan,et al.  The Psychology of Being " Right " : The Problem of Accuracy in Social Perception and Cognition , 2001 .

[74]  J. Simpson,et al.  The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism , 2000, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[75]  D. Watson,et al.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Self-other Agreement in Personality and Affectivity: the Role of Acquaintanceship, Trait Visibility, and Assumed Similarity , 2022 .

[76]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  The social relations model for family data: A multilevel approach , 1999 .

[77]  W. Potts,et al.  The Evolution of Mating Preferences and Major Histocompatibility Complex Genes , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[78]  S. Sprecher Insiders' Perspectives on Reasons for Attraction to a Close Other , 1998 .

[79]  C. M. Davis,et al.  Handbook of Sexuality-Related Measures , 1998 .

[80]  N. Malamuth An evolutionary-based model integrating research on the characteristics of sexually coercive men. , 1998 .

[81]  A. Figueredo,et al.  Mating-effort in adolescence : A conditional or alternative strategy , 1997 .

[82]  Donn Byrne,et al.  An Overview (and Underview) of Research and Theory within the Attraction Paradigm , 1997 .

[83]  R. K. Young,et al.  Mate assortment in dating and married couples , 1996 .

[84]  D. Funder On the accuracy of personality judgment: a realistic approach. , 1995, Psychological review.

[85]  D. Watson,et al.  Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development , 1995 .

[86]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[87]  J. Edwards The Study of Congruence in Organizational Behavior Research: Critique and a Proposed Alternative , 1994 .

[88]  B. Muthén,et al.  Multilevel Covariance Structure Analysis , 1994 .

[89]  P. Borkenau,et al.  Convergence of stranger ratings of personality and intelligence with self-ratings, partner ratings, and measured intelligence. , 1993 .

[90]  D. Singh,et al.  Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: role of waist-to-hip ratio. , 1993, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[91]  D. Buss,et al.  Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating. , 1993, Psychological review.

[92]  Gilbert A. Churchill,et al.  Caution in the Use of Difference Scores in Consumer Research , 1993 .

[93]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  A power primer. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[94]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Consensus at zero acquaintance: replication, behavioral cues, and stability. , 1992, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[95]  P. Costa,et al.  Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO-Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) , 1992 .

[96]  J. Belsky,et al.  Childhood experience, interpersonal development, and reproductive strategy: and evolutionary theory of socialization. , 1991, Child development.

[97]  J. Simpson,et al.  Individual differences in sociosexuality: evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[98]  Alan Feingold,et al.  Gender differences in effects of physical attractiveness on romantic attraction: A comparison across five research paradigms. , 1990 .

[99]  Gary D. Levy,et al.  Effects of Potential Partners' Costume and Physical Attractiveness on Sexuality and Partner Selection , 1990 .

[100]  J. Townsend,et al.  Effects of potential partners' physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status on sexuality and partner selection , 1990, Archives of sexual behavior.

[101]  Jeffry A. Simpson,et al.  Perception of physical attractiveness: Mechanisms involved in the maintenance of romantic relationships. , 1990 .

[102]  P. Lachenbruch Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[103]  J. P. Rushton,et al.  Genetic similarity, human altruism, and group selection , 1989, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[104]  D. Buss,et al.  Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures , 1989, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[105]  A. Feingold Matching for attractiveness in romantic partners and same-sex friends: A meta-analysis and theoretical critique. , 1988 .

[106]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Consensus in personality judgments at zero acquaintance. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[107]  S. G. Vandenberg,et al.  Assortative mating for IQ and personality due to propinquity and personal preference , 1988, Behavior genetics.

[108]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Interpersonal Perception: A Social Relations Analysis , 1988 .

[109]  A. Aron,et al.  Love and the expansion of self: Understanding attraction and satisfaction. , 1988 .

[110]  D. Buss,et al.  Human Mate Selection , 2020 .

[111]  S. G. Vandenberg,et al.  Spouse similarity in American and Swedish couples , 1980, Behavior genetics.

[112]  R. J. Robertson,et al.  Offspring Quality and the Polygyny Threshold: "The Sexy Son Hypothesis" , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[113]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. , 1977 .

[114]  M. Snyder Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. , 1974 .

[115]  S. G. Vandenberg Assortative mating, or who marries whom? , 1972 .

[116]  R. Trivers Parental investment and sexual selection , 1972 .

[117]  G. William Walster,et al.  Physical attractiveness and dating choice: A test of the matching hypothesis☆ , 1971 .

[118]  R. Winch Another Look at the Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate-Selection , 1967 .

[119]  E. Walster,et al.  Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. , 1966, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[120]  D. Byrne,et al.  ATTRACTION AS A LINEAR FUNCTION OF PROPORTION OF POSITIVE REINFORCEMENTS. , 1965, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[121]  T. C. Chamberlin The Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses: With this method the dangers of parental affection for a favorite theory can be circumvented. , 1965, Science.

[122]  R. Winch The Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate-Selection: A Test of One Kind of Complementariness , 1955 .

[123]  E. Brunswik,et al.  Ecological cue-validity of proximity and of other Gestalt factors. , 1953, The American journal of psychology.

[124]  P. Samuelson A Note on the Pure Theory of Consumer's Behaviour , 1938 .

[125]  T. C. Chamberlin The Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses , 1931, The Journal of Geology.

[126]  R. Punnett,et al.  The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection , 1930, Nature.