Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Sex Differences in Mate Preferences Across 45 Countries: A Large-Scale Replication.
Walter, Kathryn V; Conroy-Beam, Daniel; Buss, David M; Asao, Kelly; Sorokowska, Agnieszka; Sorokowski, Piotr; Aavik, Toivo; Akello, Grace; Alhabahba, Mohammad Madallh; Alm, Charlotte; Amjad, Naumana; Anjum, Afifa; Atama, Chiemezie S; Atamtürk Duyar, Derya; Ayebare, Richard; Batres, Carlota; Bendixen, Mons; Bensafia, Aicha; Bizumic, Boris; Boussena, Mahmoud; Butovskaya, Marina; Can, Seda; Cantarero, Katarzyna; Carrier, Antonin; Cetinkaya, Hakan; Croy, Ilona; Cueto, Rosa María; Czub, Marcin; Dronova, Daria; Dural, Seda; Duyar, Izzet; Ertugrul, Berna; Espinosa, Agustín; Estevan, Ignacio; Esteves, Carla Sofia; Fang, Luxi; Frackowiak, Tomasz; Garduño, Jorge Contreras; González, Karina Ugalde; Guemaz, Farida; Gyuris, Petra; Halamová, Mária; Herak, Iskra; Horvat, Marina; Hromatko, Ivana; Hui, Chin-Ming; Jaafar, Jas Laile; Jiang, Feng; Kafetsios, Konstantinos; Kavcic, Tina.
Afiliação
  • Walter KV; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara.
  • Conroy-Beam D; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara.
  • Buss DM; Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin.
  • Asao K; Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin.
  • Sorokowska A; Institute of Psychology, University of Wroclaw.
  • Sorokowski P; Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Smell & Taste Clinic, Technische Universität Dresden.
  • Aavik T; Institute of Psychology, University of Opole.
  • Akello G; Institute of Psychology, University of Tartu.
  • Alhabahba MM; Department of Mental Health, Faculty of Medicine, Gulu University.
  • Alm C; English Language Department, Middle East University.
  • Amjad N; Department of Psychology, Stockholm University.
  • Anjum A; Institute of Applied Psychology, University of the Punjab.
  • Atama CS; Institute of Applied Psychology, University of the Punjab.
  • Atamtürk Duyar D; Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Nigeria.
  • Ayebare R; Department of Anthropology, Istanbul University.
  • Batres C; North Star Alliance, Kampala, Uganda.
  • Bendixen M; Department of Psychology, Franklin and Marshall College.
  • Bensafia A; Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
  • Bizumic B; Laboratory Education-Formation-Travail (EFORT), Department of Sociology, University of Algiers.
  • Boussena M; Research School of Psychology, Australian National University.
  • Butovskaya M; Laboratory EFORT, Department of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Algiers.
  • Can S; Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences.
  • Cantarero K; Center for Social Anthropology, Russian State University for the Humanities.
  • Carrier A; Department of Psychology, Izmir University of Economics.
  • Cetinkaya H; Social Behavior Research Center, Faculty in Wroclaw, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities.
  • Croy I; Psychology Faculty (Center for the Study of Social Behavior), Université Catholique de Louvain.
  • Cueto RM; Department of Psychology, Ankara University.
  • Czub M; Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Technische Universität Dresden.
  • Dronova D; Grupo de Psicología Política y Social, Departamento de Psicología, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
  • Dural S; Institute of Psychology, University of Wroclaw.
  • Duyar I; Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences.
  • Ertugrul B; Department of Psychology, Izmir University of Economics.
  • Espinosa A; Department of Anthropology, Istanbul University.
  • Estevan I; Department of Anthropology, Sivas Cumhuriyet University.
  • Esteves CS; Grupo de Psicología Política y Social, Departamento de Psicología, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
  • Fang L; Facultad de Psicología, Universidad de la República.
  • Frackowiak T; Instituto Superior de Ciências do Trabalho e da Empresa, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Social, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (CIS-IUL).
  • Garduño JC; Department of Psychology, Chinese University of Hong Kong.
  • González KU; Institute of Psychology, University of Wroclaw.
  • Guemaz F; Escuela Nacional de Estudios Superiores, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Unidad Morelia.
  • Gyuris P; Psychology Department, Universidad Latina de Costa Rica.
  • Halamová M; Laboratory EFORT, Department of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Setif.
  • Herak I; Institute of Psychology, University of Pécs.
  • Horvat M; Faculty of Social Sciences and Health Care, Department of Psychological Sciences, Constantine the Philosopher University.
  • Hromatko I; Louvain Research Institute in Management and Organisations, Université Catholique de Louvain.
  • Hui CM; Faculty of Arts, Department of Psychology, University of Maribor.
  • Jaafar JL; Department of Psychology, Faculty for Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb.
  • Jiang F; Department of Psychology, Chinese University of Hong Kong.
  • Kafetsios K; Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling, University of Malaya.
  • Kavcic T; Organization and Human Resource Management, Central University of Finance and Economics.
Psychol Sci ; 31(4): 408-423, 2020 04.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32196435
ABSTRACT
Considerable research has examined human mate preferences across cultures, finding universal sex differences in preferences for attractiveness and resources as well as sources of systematic cultural variation. Two competing perspectives-an evolutionary psychological perspective and a biosocial role perspective-offer alternative explanations for these findings. However, the original data on which each perspective relies are decades old, and the literature is fraught with conflicting methods, analyses, results, and conclusions. Using a new 45-country sample (N = 14,399), we attempted to replicate classic studies and test both the evolutionary and biosocial role perspectives. Support for universal sex differences in preferences remains robust Men, more than women, prefer attractive, young mates, and women, more than men, prefer older mates with financial prospects. Cross-culturally, both sexes have mates closer to their own ages as gender equality increases. Beyond age of partner, neither pathogen prevalence nor gender equality robustly predicted sex differences or preferences across countries.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Casamento / Caracteres Sexuais Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Psychol Sci Assunto da revista: PSICOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Casamento / Caracteres Sexuais Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Psychol Sci Assunto da revista: PSICOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article