Differences in male and female mating strategies.

1. Comparison of Male & Female Mating Strategies
Cassandra Jonas, Emily Edwards, Rochanda Jones, Lindsay
Indiana State University Department of Psychology
• Independent t-test to compare male and female Discussion
rankings was used.
• Physical Traits (mutual
• Males perceive physical characteristics as more
attraction, age, height, body
important than females.
structure, facial beauty, and body
beauty)
• Females prefer their mate to be financial secure while
males did not find it that important.
• Financial Prospects
(education, ambition, finance, and
Possible Confounds
similar education)
• Only college students were used. Education may not
• Personality (mood, empathy, desire for
be as important to non-college participants.
children, dependable, kind/caring)
• A questionnaire was the method in collecting the data.
• Similarity (similar interests, similar
There is a possibility of lying on a questionnaire. It is
religion, similar politics, and similar
also possible that males and females unconsciously
education)
pick certain traits.
Results
Future Research
Physical Traits:
Female Male • Men rated Physical Traits more important than • Survey participants with a more diverse background
females. and educational experience.
Financial Prospects: • Include a wider population.
Physical Financial Financial Physical • Females rates financial prospects more important
Traits Prospects Prospects Traits • Compare short-term and long-term relationships in
than males.
regards to the preferred traits.
Personality:
• Men and women rated personality traits the same.
Methods References
Participants Similarity:
• 48 college students (18-27 years old) • Men and women rated similar interests as the Buss, D. M. (2002). Human mating strategies. The
• 23 males, 25 females same. Socioeconomist, 4, 47-58.
• Average age = 21 years old Category Mean Std. Sig. t
• 30 participants in a Deviation (2-tail) Cofer, J.C., Perilloux, ., & Bus, D. M. (2012). More than
relationship, 28 single Physical M(54.6) M(11.3) .022 * -2.36 just a pretty face: men’s priority shifts toward bodily
Traits F(63.5) F(14.2) attractiveness in short-term versus long-term mating
Procedure Financial M(40.6) M(9.3) .040 * 2.12 contexts. Evolution & Human Behavior, 31, 348-353.
• 2 part questionnaire Prospects F(35.1) F(8.3)
• 1st part asked Personalit M(56.3) M(11.5) .92 -.10
y F(56.7) F(9.7) Stewart, S., Stinnett, H., Rosenfeld, L.B. (2000). Sex
gender, age, relationship differences in desired characteristics of short-term and
Similarity M(52.0) M(9.4) .26 1.15
status, sexual orientation, & F(48.2) F(9.2) long-term relationship partners. Journal of Social &
relationship type *Represents significance level of >.05 (significant) Personal Relationships, 17(6), 844-853.
• 2nd part asked participant to
rank 19 characteristics Tadinac, M., Hromatko, I. (2006). Strangers in the night
70
_____Facial Beauty or love forever: characteristics and preferences of short
_____Body Attractiveness 65
_____Education & Intelligent vs. long-term relationship seekers. Psychological
_____Dependable 60 Topics, 15(2), 261-276.
_____Kind/caring
_____Good financial prospects 55
_____Ambition Welling, L. M., Jones, C. B., DeBruine, L. M., Smith, F.
_____Chastity 50 G., Feinberg, D. R., Little, A. C., Al-Dujaili, E. A.
_____Similar education Females
_____Similar interest 45 (2008). Men report stronger attraction to femininity in
Males
_____Similar religious background
40 women’s faces when their testosterone levels are high.
_____Desire for children
_____Mutual attraction/love Hormones & Behavior, 54(5), 704-708.
_____Pleasing Disposition (mood) 35
_____Similar political views
_____Age
30 Widaman, K. F., Tucker, J.S., & Salinas, C. (1991).
_____Agreeableness (ability to empathize) Physical Financial Personality Similarity Beauty is more than skin deep: components of
_____Height
_____Body structure Traits Prospects attractiveness. Basic & Applied Social
Psychology, 12(4), 423-439.