Abstract

This study addresses two limitations in the mate preferences literature. First, research all-too-often relies on single-item assessments of mate preferences precluding more advanced statistical techniques like factor analysis. Second, when factor analysis could be done, it exclusively has done for long-term mate preferences, at the exclusion of short-term mate preferences. In this study (N = 401), we subjected 20 items designed to measure short- and long-term mate preferences to both principle components (n = 200) and confirmatory factor analysis (n = 201). In the long-term context, we replicated previous findings that there are three different categories of preferences: physical attractiveness, interpersonal warmth, and social status. In the short-term context, physical attractiveness occupied two parts of the structure, social status dropped out, and interpersonal warmth remained. Across short- and long-term contexts, there were slight changes in what defined the shared dimensions (i.e., physical attractiveness and interpersonal warmth), suggesting prior work that applies the same inventory to each context might be flawed. We also replicated sex differences and similarities in mate preferences and correlates with sociosexuality and mate value. We adopt an evolutionary paradigm to understand our results.

Highlights

  • This study addresses two limitations in the mate preferences literature

  • Using 200 of the participants, we examined the latent dimensions of long- and short-term mate preferences, and ran a series of separate principle components analyses (PCAs) for each

  • By running separate factor analyses, we were able to show that did the content of mate preferences differ by mating context, but that each context has three primary dimensions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This study addresses two limitations in the mate preferences literature. First, research all-too-often relies on single-item assessments of mate preferences precluding more advanced statistical techniques like factor analysis. The “obsession” with this topic should be of little surprise; the most important questions in life revolve around love and sex These questions have received considerable attention from researchers (Buss, 1989; Eagly, 1987; Li, Bailey, Kenrick, & Linsenmeier, 2002; Sprecher, Sullivan, & Hatfield, 1994; Wiederman & Dubois, 1998) because choosing mates has consequences in terms of reproductive fitness and psychosocial outcomes (Buss & Schmitt, 1993; DeLamater, 1987). We contend that what is needed to better understand mate preferences is to use factor analysis to understand the latent structure of mate preferences so that our knowledge (1) does not rely on intuitively chosen items and (2) is not subject to the well-known limitations of single-item assessments

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call