The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs

Norman P. Li, Douglas T. Kenrick, J. Michael Bailey, Joan A.W. Linsenmeier

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

468 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Social exchange and evolutionary models of mate selection incorporate economic assumptions but have not considered a key distinction between necessities and luxuries. This distinction can clarify an apparent paradox: Status and attractiveness, though emphasized by many researchers, are not typically rated highly by research participants. Three studies supported the hypothesis that women and men first ensure sufficient levels of necessities in potential mates before considering many other characteristics rated as more important in prior surveys. In Studies 1 and 2, participants designed ideal long-term mates, purchasing various characteristics with 3 different budgets. Study 3 used a mate-screening paradigm and showed that people inquire 1st about hypothesized necessities. Physical attractiveness was a necessity to men, status and resources were necessities to women, and kindness and intelligence were necessities to both.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)947-955
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Personality and Social Psychology
Volume82
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2002

Fingerprint

luxuries
social attraction
Budgets
Marriage
Intelligence
intelligence
budget
Economics
Research Personnel
paradigm
Research
resources
economics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences : Testing the tradeoffs. / Li, Norman P.; Kenrick, Douglas T.; Bailey, J. Michael; Linsenmeier, Joan A.W.

In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 82, No. 6, 01.01.2002, p. 947-955.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Li, Norman P. ; Kenrick, Douglas T. ; Bailey, J. Michael ; Linsenmeier, Joan A.W. / The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences : Testing the tradeoffs. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002 ; Vol. 82, No. 6. pp. 947-955.
@article{7a7097d8e2f847409e74db97d0cd224c,
title = "The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs",
abstract = "Social exchange and evolutionary models of mate selection incorporate economic assumptions but have not considered a key distinction between necessities and luxuries. This distinction can clarify an apparent paradox: Status and attractiveness, though emphasized by many researchers, are not typically rated highly by research participants. Three studies supported the hypothesis that women and men first ensure sufficient levels of necessities in potential mates before considering many other characteristics rated as more important in prior surveys. In Studies 1 and 2, participants designed ideal long-term mates, purchasing various characteristics with 3 different budgets. Study 3 used a mate-screening paradigm and showed that people inquire 1st about hypothesized necessities. Physical attractiveness was a necessity to men, status and resources were necessities to women, and kindness and intelligence were necessities to both.",
author = "Li, {Norman P.} and Kenrick, {Douglas T.} and Bailey, {J. Michael} and Linsenmeier, {Joan A.W.}",
year = "2002",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.947",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "82",
pages = "947--955",
journal = "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology",
issn = "0022-3514",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences

T2 - Testing the tradeoffs

AU - Li, Norman P.

AU - Kenrick, Douglas T.

AU - Bailey, J. Michael

AU - Linsenmeier, Joan A.W.

PY - 2002/1/1

Y1 - 2002/1/1

N2 - Social exchange and evolutionary models of mate selection incorporate economic assumptions but have not considered a key distinction between necessities and luxuries. This distinction can clarify an apparent paradox: Status and attractiveness, though emphasized by many researchers, are not typically rated highly by research participants. Three studies supported the hypothesis that women and men first ensure sufficient levels of necessities in potential mates before considering many other characteristics rated as more important in prior surveys. In Studies 1 and 2, participants designed ideal long-term mates, purchasing various characteristics with 3 different budgets. Study 3 used a mate-screening paradigm and showed that people inquire 1st about hypothesized necessities. Physical attractiveness was a necessity to men, status and resources were necessities to women, and kindness and intelligence were necessities to both.

AB - Social exchange and evolutionary models of mate selection incorporate economic assumptions but have not considered a key distinction between necessities and luxuries. This distinction can clarify an apparent paradox: Status and attractiveness, though emphasized by many researchers, are not typically rated highly by research participants. Three studies supported the hypothesis that women and men first ensure sufficient levels of necessities in potential mates before considering many other characteristics rated as more important in prior surveys. In Studies 1 and 2, participants designed ideal long-term mates, purchasing various characteristics with 3 different budgets. Study 3 used a mate-screening paradigm and showed that people inquire 1st about hypothesized necessities. Physical attractiveness was a necessity to men, status and resources were necessities to women, and kindness and intelligence were necessities to both.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047671787&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85047671787&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.947

DO - 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.947

M3 - Article

C2 - 12051582

AN - SCOPUS:85047671787

VL - 82

SP - 947

EP - 955

JO - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

SN - 0022-3514

IS - 6

ER -