RESUMO
Female and male participants (in their early 20s) attributed the success of same-aged (Study 1A-1C) male and female stimulus persons of varying attractiveness to ability, effort, luck, and looks. Consistent with the evolutionary prediction that mating motivation and intrasexual competition determine achievement ascriptions, female participants explained the success of attractive women with luck more and with ability less (i.e., in a derogative way) than they explained the success of less attractive female stimulus persons. However, when the stimulus person was male, women attributed his success to ability more and to luck less (i.e., glorifying) when he was attractive than when he was unattractive. Male participants made derogative attributions for attractive male stimulus persons and unattractive female stimulus persons and glorifying ascriptions for unattractive male stimulus persons and attractive female stimulus persons. We label this pattern of findings sexual attribution bias. The bias disappeared when prepuberty stimulus persons were used as targets (Study 2) and reversed for gay men (Study 3).