Modeling dating decisions in a mock swiping paradigm: An examination of participant and target characteristics

How Do People Feel About Mates?

Where do positive feelings about a romantic or sexual partner come from? This article offers an overview of-and imposes some structure on-the enormous literature on mate evaluation, from initial attraction to long-term relationship settings. First, we differentiate between research that identifies the factors that predict positive evaluation on average (i.e., normative desirability) and research that attempts to document for whom certain factors are more versus less positive (i.e., heterogeneity in desirability). Second, we review the positive biases that tend to dominate the evaluative process, as well as the promising (and sorely needed) new methods in this research space. Third, we cover contemporary perspectives on the mechanisms that explain how evaluations shift and change over the entire relationship arc. Fourth and finally, we discuss how diversifying the samples and perspectives in mate evaluation research will address novel and generative questions about culture, stigma, and socioeconomic status.

The (Un)Attractiveness of Dark Triad Personalities: Assessing Fictitious Characters for Short- and Long-Term Relationships

OBJECTIVE

The current study assessed how individuals evaluate potential romantic partners who display either low, medium, or high levels of DT traits for short-term (STR) and long-term (LTR) relationships.

METHODS

Nine fictitious persons in the form of vignettes (description of behavior and facial image) were presented to every participant. The sex of the fictitious persons was determined by sexual orientation of each participant, while the displayed faces were selected from an existing image bank and matched for physical attractiveness. Study 1 (n = 475) used a fixed composition for face and trait description, while the composition for Study 2 (n = 794) was randomized. Mixed-effects modeling was implemented for both studies.

RESULTS

Study 1 demonstrated people with a male preference (mostly women) perceived medium levels of the three traits as the most attractive STR. For Study 2, both men and women found the low levels the most attractive for both STRs and LTRs.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from Study 1 were mostly consistent across previous DT attractiveness literature, while findings from Study 2 contradicted them. This could suggest that the concept of DT is not as attractive even for STRs unless it is accompanied by physical attractiveness.

The role of category valence in prototype preference

People prefer prototypical stimuli over atypical stimuli. The dominant explanation for this prototype preference effect is that prototypical stimuli are processed more fluently. However, a more recent account proposes that prototypes are more strongly associated with their category's valence, leading to a reversed prototype preference effect for negative categories. One critical but untested assumption of this category-valence account is that no prototype preference should emerge for entirely neutral categories. We tested this prediction by conditioning categories of dot patterns positively, negatively, or neutrally. In line with previous findings on the category-valence account, prototype preference reversed for negatively conditioned categories. However, prototype preference was similarly strong for positive and neutral categories. These findings imply that prototype preferences do not only reflect a transfer of category valence to exemplars. Instead, the results suggest that prototype preference is a multi-process phenomenon arising from the activated category valence and a fluency-based process. We discuss further implications for theories on fluency and prototype preference.

Motivations for Endogamous Relationship Preferences

People tend to select romantic partners who belong to the same social group as themselves (i.e., endogamy). However, there is limited research on the proximal psychological motivations for choosing endogamous relationship partners. The purpose of this research was to develop a measure of motivations for endogamous relationship preferences and to assess whether such motivations were associated with actual dating experiences and attitudes toward endogamy across four common social categories: race and/or ethnicity, religion, social class, and education. Data from an online sample of participants (Study 1, n = 341) were used to generate items assessing motivations for endogamous relationship preferences. This initial set of items was administered to a new sample of participants (Study 2, n = 193) to establish the component structure of the measure and to examine whether the motivational components were associated with participants' past exogamous dating experiences as well as the perceived importance of dating within one's own racial and/or ethnic, religious, socioeconomic, and educational group. Endogamy motivations characterized by intergroup prejudice were the strongest and most consistent correlates of endogamous relationships and the perceived importance of endogamy. Study 3 (n = 332) replicated the component structure of the measure and the general pattern of associations documented in Study 2, and provided evidence for the measure's construct validity. The overall findings suggest that intergroup prejudice partially explains preferences for endogamous relationships.

Evidence of correlations between human partners based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of 22 traits and UK Biobank analysis of 133 traits

Positive correlations between mates can increase trait variation and prevalence, as well as bias estimates from genetically informed study designs. While past studies of similarity between human mating partners have largely found evidence of positive correlations, to our knowledge, no formal meta-analysis has examined human partner correlations across multiple categories of traits. Thus, we conducted systematic reviews and random-effects meta-analyses of human male-female partner correlations across 22 traits commonly studied by psychologists, economists, sociologists, anthropologists, epidemiologists and geneticists. Using ScienceDirect, PubMed and Google Scholar, we incorporated 480 partner correlations from 199 peer-reviewed studies of co-parents, engaged pairs, married pairs and/or cohabitating pairs that were published on or before 16 August 2022. We also calculated 133 trait correlations using up to 79,074 male-female couples in the UK Biobank (UKB). Estimates of the 22 mean meta-analysed correlations ranged from rmeta = 0.08 (adjusted 95% CI = 0.03, 0.13) for extraversion to rmeta = 0.58 (adjusted 95% CI = 0.50, 0.64) for political values, with funnel plots showing little evidence of publication bias across traits. The 133 UKB correlations ranged from rUKB = -0.18 (adjusted 95% CI = -0.20, -0.16) for chronotype (being a 'morning' or 'evening' person) to rUKB = 0.87 (adjusted 95% CI = 0.86, 0.87) for birth year. Across analyses, political and religious attitudes, educational attainment and some substance use traits showed the highest correlations, while psychological (that is, psychiatric/personality) and anthropometric traits generally yielded lower but positive correlations. We observed high levels of between-sample heterogeneity for most meta-analysed traits, probably because of both systematic differences between samples and true differences in partner correlations across populations.

We're Not That Choosy: Emerging Evidence of a Progression Bias in Romantic Relationships

Dating is widely thought of as a test phase for romantic relationships, during which new romantic partners carefully evaluate each other for long-term fit. However, this cultural narrative assumes that people are well equipped to reject poorly suited partners. In this article, we argue that humans are biased toward pro-relationship decisions-decisions that favor the initiation, advancement, and maintenance of romantic relationships. We first review evidence for a progression bias in the context of relationship initiation, investment, and breakup decisions. We next consider possible theoretical underpinnings-both evolutionary and cultural-that may explain why getting into a relationship is often easier than getting out of one, and why being in a less desirable relationship is often preferred over being in no relationship at all. We discuss potential boundary conditions that the phenomenon may have, as well as its implications for existing theoretical models of mate selection and relationship development.

Racial preferences in sexual attraction among White heterosexual and gay men: Evidence from sexual arousal patterns and negative racial attitudes

Racial preferences in sexual attraction are highly visible and controversial. They may also negatively impact those who are excluded. It is unclear whether these preferences are merely self-attributed or extend to patterns of experienced sexual arousal. Furthermore, some argue that racial preferences in sexual attraction reflect idiosyncratic personal preferences, while others argue that they are more systematically motivated and reflect broader negative attitudes toward particular races. In two studies, we examined these issues by measuring the sexual arousal patterns and negative racial attitudes of 78 White men in relation to their racial preferences in sexual attraction to White versus Black people. For both White heterosexual men (n = 40; Study 1) and White gay men (n = 38; Study 2), greater racial preferences in sexual attraction to White versus Black people of their preferred gender were associated with more subjective and genital arousal by erotic stimuli featuring White versus Black people of their preferred gender, and with more explicit and implicit negative attitudes toward Black people. Findings suggest that racial preferences in sexual attraction are reflected in patterns of sexual arousal, and they might also be systematically motivated by negative attitudes toward particular races.