Sex differences in perceived controllability of mate value: An evolutionary perspective.

Hamida, Souhir Ben; Mineka, Susan; Bailey, J. Michael

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.4.953

Cited by 42 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 89 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Self-esteem should not just respond to capacity rejection in a mating relationship in general, but more specifically to one's being capacity rejected on the traits that contribute most to mate value. Men's desirability as a mate (compared with women's) seems more strongly dependent on traits associated with competence and social status whereas women's desirability (compared with men's) seems more strongly dependent on traits associated with physical attractiveness (e.g., Ben Hamida, Mineka, & Bailey, 1998;Buss & Schmitt, 1993;Li, Bailey, Kenrick, & Linsenmeier, 2002). Thus, young men and women may be especially sensitive not only to capacity rejection within mating relationships (compared to friendship relationships) but also to whether the rejection experience targets their most important trait as a mate.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

All you need is love: Is the sociometer especially sensitive to one's mating capacity?

Pass¹,

Lindenberg²,

Park³

2009

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-esteem has been proposed to serve as a sociometer, a gauge of one's value as a relationship partner. Based on evolutionary reasoning, we hypothesized that the sociometer is particularly sensitive to ''capacity rejection'' in the mating domain. Capacity rejection implies that one has low potential to be an acceptable mate now and in the future. In Study 1, participants received no feedback or negative feedback regarding their capacity for being an acceptable mate or friend. Although participants in both mate and friend conditions felt rejected, only those in the mate condition exhibited significantly lower state self-esteem. In Study 2, we examined sex differences in attributes relevant to mate capacity. Participants were given no feedback or negative feedback regarding their capacity as a mate: Some were told that their low mate capacity is due to their physical attractiveness whereas others were told it is due to their competence and status. Among men, state self-esteem was lower only after competence and status-based rejection; among women, state selfesteem was lower only after physical attractiveness-based rejection. In both studies, additional results revealed that even while self-esteem decreased, positive beliefs about the self were maintained, suggesting that feelings and beliefs about the self react differently to rejection.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

All you need is love: Is the sociometer especially sensitive to one's mating capacity?

Pass¹,

Lindenberg²,

Park³

2009

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Past research on effort supports the higher desirability ratings of the hardworking target (Ben Hamida et al, 1998;Bochner & Van Zyl, 1985). Hard work and industriousness, traits related to effort, are desirable traits for close others to possess.…”

Section: Abilitymentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Research shows that hard work and effort are desired characteristics for a person to possess and are a crucial and beneficial component of a relationship (Ben Hamida et al, 1998;Bochner & Van Zyl, 1985;Van Lange et al, 1997;Wieselquist et al, 1999). We also know that one specific trait can have a broad effect on how people perceive others.…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Hard Work Pay Off? The Influence of Perceived Effort on Romantic Attraction

Dwiggins

Lewandowski

2015

Interpersona

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines how a person's willingness to exert effort affects how others perceive their romantic desirability. The study also examines whether the participants' implicit theory of personality (incremental or entity) influences ratings of the target's romantic desirability based on the target's level of effort. Seventy-eight (17 males, 61 females) single college students participated in the study. Participants read one of four descriptions of a target. The descriptions manipulated both the target's ability (hard work or natural ability) and success (successful or unsuccessful). Participants also completed a measure to assess their implicit theory of personality. Participants then rated the target's desirability. There was a significant difference in desirability ratings of the target for the main effect of ability. There were no other significant differences found between the variables. The findings suggest that when a person expends effort, they are more romantically desirable regardless of how successful they are. Findings also suggest that a person's implicit theory of personality does not interact with the target's effort to affect romantic desirability.

show abstract

“…Alternatively, there are numerous studies have found that men compared to women place greater emphasis on a potential mate's availability for sexual relations (e.g., Regan et al 2008), youthfulness (e.g., Marlowe 2004;Hudson and Henze 1969;Hamida et al 1998), and physical beauty (e.g., Buss 1985Buss , 1994Buss et al 2001).…”

Section: Gender Differences In Mate Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous studies have found that women compared to men prefer mates who are rich in resources (e.g., Buss 1985;Buss et al 1990;Fisman, Iyengar, Kamenica, and Simonson 2006;Goetz 2013;Gottschall, Martin, Quish, and Rea 2004;Iredale, Vugt, and Dunbar 2008;Hudson and Henze 1969;Asendorpf, Penke, and Back 2011;Buss, Shackelford, Kirkpatrick, and Larsen 2001), interested in commitment (e.g., Marlowe 2004;Hamida, Mineka, and Bailey 1998), and interested in child rearing (e.g., Hudson and Henze 1969;Hoyt and Hudson 1981;Buss et al 2001). Alternatively, there are numerous studies have found that men compared to women place greater emphasis on a potential mate's availability for sexual relations (e.g., Regan et al 2008), youthfulness (e.g., Marlowe 2004;Hudson and Henze 1969;Hamida et al 1998), and physical beauty (e.g., Buss 1985Buss , 1994Buss et al 2001).…”

Section: Gender Differences In Mate Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Gender and Cost on Suspicion in Initial Courtship Communications

Walsh

Millar

Westfall

2016

Evolutionary Psychological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of gender on suspicion towards claims made during courtship communications. It was hypothesized that participants would be more suspicious of claims made about reproductive relevant traits. To test the hypothesis, participants read a total of eight scenarios describing traits relevant to female reproduction (wealth, commitment, and child interest), traits relevant to male reproduction (physical beauty, youth, and sexual availability), and traits neutral to both genders (stargazing and game playing). After each scenario, participants indicated their suspiciousness about the veracity of the communication on five scales. As predicted, both men and women believed the neutral claim scenarios more than claims about reproductively significant traits. Women compared to men were more suspicious of claims related to wealth, commitment, and child interest, while men compared to women were more suspicious of claims related to physical beauty, youth, and sexual availability. Keywords Courtship communication . Suspicion . GenderDeception is common during human mate selection where both men and women engage in intersexual deceit in an effort to obtain high-quality mates (Dussault, Hojjat, and Boone 2013;Epstein 2007). A common intersexual deceptive strategy is to exaggerate or use false statements to convince prospective mates that they possess traits desired by the opposite sex (Bleske-Rechek and Buss 2006; Gonzaga, Keltner, Londahl, and Smith 2001; Toma and Hancock 2010). Gender Differences in Mate PreferencesEvolutionary psychologists drawing on Trivers' (1972) parental investment theory have specified a number of potential differences between the mate preferences of men and women. Trivers (1972) noted that biological differences between men and women (e.g., differences in reproductive capacity, energy and time to reproduce, and parental certainty) would result in sex-differentiated mating strategies and mate preferences. Specifically, women compared to men should be more interested in restricting reproduction, investing heavily in each child, and finding a mate that is willing do likewise. Consequently, when selecting long-term mates, it is beneficial for women to consider a man's willingness to commit to a long-term relationship and his ability and willingness to assist in raising offspring (Todd, Penke, Fasolo, and Lenton 2007). Alternatively, given the shorter reproductive life women, men will need to place more emphasis on cues related to the reproductive status such as youth. Further, the smaller initial investment in reproduction by men may allow them to place more emphasis on cues associated with immediate reproductive value such as beauty.Numerous studies have found that women compared to men prefer mates who are rich in resources (e.g., Buss 1985;

show abstract

Sex differences in perceived controllability of mate value: An evolutionary perspective.

Cited by 42 publications

References 89 publications

All you need is love: Is the sociometer especially sensitive to one's mating capacity?

All you need is love: Is the sociometer especially sensitive to one's mating capacity?

Does Hard Work Pay Off? The Influence of Perceived Effort on Romantic Attraction

The Effects of Gender and Cost on Suspicion in Initial Courtship Communications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About