International Preferences in Selecting Mates

This study sought to identify the effects of culture and sex on mate preferences using samples drawn world-wide. Thirty-seven samples were obtained from 33 countries located on six continents and five islands (N = 9,474). Hierarchical multiple regressions revealed strong effects of both culture and sex, moderated by specific mate characteristics. Chastity proved to be the mate characteristic on which cultures varied the most. The preference ordering of each sample was contrasted with an international complement. Each culture displayed a unique preference ordering, but there were some similarities among all cultures as reflected in a positive manifold of the cross-country correlation matrix. Multidimensional scaling of the cultures yielded a five dimensional solution, the first two of which were interpreted. The first dimension was interpreted as Traditional versus Modern, with China, India, Iran, and Nigeria anchoring one end and the Netherlands, Great Britain, Finland, and Sweden anchoring the other. The second dimension involved valuation of education, intelligence, and refinement. Consistent sex differences in value attached to eaming potential and physical attractiveness supported evolution-based hypotheses about the importance of resources and reproductive value in mates. Discussion emphasizes the importance of psychological mate preferences for scientific disciplines ranging from evolutionary biology to sociology.

Shulamith Kreitler | L. Van Langenhove | Marilyn P. Safir | Mario Fioravanti | Maritza Montero | James Georgas | Anna-Maija Pirttilä-Backman | Mark A. Runco | Robert Serpell | N. Janakiramaiah | Kari Troland | D. Buss | M. Runco | Janusz Czapiński | S. Iwawaki | B. Ekehammar | A. Mundy-castle | G. V. van Heck | J. Georgas | A. Biaggio | Kuo-shu Yang | Elka Todorova | R. Sanitioso | M. Tadinac | Evaristo Nsenduluka | L. Van Langenhove | P. Gjerde | M. Safir | B. Little | T. Niit | A. Angleitner | L. Langenhove | Kadi Liik | R. Serpell | M. Montero | S. Kreitler | C. Samuels | N. Janakiramaiah | M. Bruchon-Schweitzer | L. Lachenicht | David M. Buss | Alois Angleitner | Nico G. Smid | Kuo-Shu Yang | R. Guttman | K. Troland | Geraldine Moane | Ruth Guttman | Rasyid Sanitioso | Á. Blanco-Villaseñor | Max Abbott | Armen Asherian | Angela Biaggio | Angel Blanco-Villasenor | M. Bruchon-Schweitzer | Hai-Yuan Ch'U | Janusz Czapinski | Boele Deraad | Bo Ekehammar | Noha El Lohamy | Per Gjerde | Fatima Hazan | Saburo Iwawaki | Fatemeh Khosroshani | Lance Lachenicht | Margaret Lee | Kadi Liik | Brian Little | Stanislaw Mika | Mariam Moadel-Shahid | A. C. Mundy-Castle | Toomas Niit | Evaristo Nsenduluka | Ryszard Pienkowski | Julio Ponce De Leon | Jacques Rousseau | Curtis Samuels | Nico Smid | Christopher Spencer | Meri Tadinac | Elka N. Todorova | L. Van Den Brande | Guus Van Heck | M. Fioravanti | R. Pieńkowski | A. Pirttilä-Backman | L. Van den Brande | G. Moane | G. V. Heck | Armen Asherian | J. P. de Leon | Christopher Spencer | Maxwell Abbott | H. Ch'U | B. Deraad | Noha El Lohamy | Fatima Hazan | Fatemeh Khosroshani | Margaret G. Lee | Stanislaw Mika | Mariam Moadel-Shahid | J. Rousseau | L. V. D. Brande | Anna-Maija Pirttilä-Backman | M. Bruchon‐Schweitzer | Noha El Lohamy | Anne-Maija Pirtila-Backman | Julio Ponce De Leon

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

[2]  C. Darwin The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex: INDEX , 1871 .

[3]  H. Giles,et al.  Sex‐trait stereotypes in England, Ireland and the United States , 1977 .

[4]  R. McGinnis Campus Values in Mate Selection: A Repeat Study , 1958 .

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

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

[7]  J. M. Digman,et al.  Further specification of the five robust factors of personality. , 1986 .

[8]  George C. Williams,et al.  Sex and evolution. , 1975, Monographs in population biology.

[9]  H. Triandis,et al.  Individualism and Collectivism: Cross-cultural Perspectives on Self-ingroup Relationships We Wish to Thank Our Research Collaborators for Stimulating Ideas, Data, and Moral Support in Carrying out a Complex Set of Studies. They , 2022 .

[10]  W. T. Norman,et al.  Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: replicated factors structure in peer nomination personality ratings. , 1963, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[11]  R. Short Chapter 13 – SEXUAL SELECTION IN MAN AND THE GREAT APES , 1981 .

[12]  P. Costa,et al.  Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  C. Osgood,et al.  The Measurement of Meaning , 1958 .

[14]  J. Hudson,et al.  Campus Values in Mate Selection: A Replication. , 1969 .

[15]  Robert Plomin,et al.  Behavioral Genetics : A Primer , 1980 .

[16]  D. Buss,et al.  Preferences in human mate selection. , 1986 .

[17]  B. Campbell Forces and Strategies in Evolution. (Book Reviews: Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, 1871-1971) , 1972 .

[18]  L. Willerman The psychology of individual and group differences , 1979 .