Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T16:47:02.947Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Shifts in Partner Attractiveness

Evolutionary and Social Factors

from Part III - Postcopulatory Adaptations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2022

By
Rebecca L. Burch ,
Maryanne L. Fisher ,
James B. Moran ,
Catherine A. Salmon ,
T. Joel Wade  and
David R. Widman
Edited by
Todd K. Shackelford
Todd K. Shackelford
Affiliation:
Oakland University, Michigan
Get access

Summary

Researchers have spent decades investigating factors in attraction; biological variables, cultural norms, and social pressures have all had their time in the spotlight. Humans are complicated animals and each of these realms have shown measurable effects. However, evolutionary approaches provide a unifying theory that subsumes and explains each of these factors and how they interact to create intricate yet predictable patterns in human mating behavior. In this chapter, we give a brief summary of major factors influencing attractiveness as perceived by men, including biological factors such as age and ovulatory status but also social factors such as exposure to highly attractive, or simply novel, women. Understanding how attractiveness can vary over time and within relationships can be useful, not only to research but also in applied clinical fields such as couples’ and marital therapy.

Keywords

attractivenessbeautyrelationshipsocial comparisonmating preferences
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Psychology , pp. 363 - 390
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbey, A. (1982). Sex differences in attributions for friendly behavior: Do males misperceive females’ friendliness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 830–838.Google Scholar
Apicella, C. L., Little, A. C., & Marlowe, F. W. (2007). Facial averageness and attractiveness in an isolated population of hunter-gatherers. Perception, 36(12), 1813–1820.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S. (2018). Self-perceived mate value, facial attractiveness, and mate preferences: Do desirable men want it all? Evolutionary Psychology, 16(1). doi: 10.1177/1474704918763271Google Scholar
Baker, R., & Bellis, M. A. (1995). Human sperm competition: Copulation, masturbation and infidelity. Netherlands: Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
Barber, N. (1995). The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Evolution and Human Behavior, 16, 395–424.Google Scholar
Baudouin, J. Y., & Tiberghien, G. (2004). Symmetry, averageness, and feature size in the facial attractiveness of women. Acta Psychologica, 117(3), 313–332.Google Scholar
Bernstein, I. H., Lin, T., & McClellan, P. (1983). Cross- vs. within-racial judgements of attractiveness. Perception and Psychophysics, 32(6), 495–503.Google Scholar
Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1974). Physical attractiveness. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 157–215). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bobst, C., & Lobmaier, J. S. (2014). Is preference for ovulatory females’ faces associated with men’s testosterone levels? Hormones and Behavior, 66(3), 487–492.Google Scholar
Brand, R. J., Markey, C. M., Mills, A., & Hodges, S. D. (2007). Sex differences in self-reported infidelity and its correlates. Sex Roles, 57(1–2), 101–109.Google Scholar
Burch, R. L., Moran, J. B., & Wade, T. J. (2021). The reproductive priming effect revisited: Mate poaching, mate copying, or both? Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 15(3), 251–264. doi: 10.1037/ebs0000232Google Scholar
Burch, R. L., & Widman, D. R. (2021). The point of nipple erection 1: The experience and projection of perceived emotional states while viewing women with and without erect nipples. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 15(3), 305–311. doi: 10.1037/ebs0000244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire. New York, NY: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100(2), 204–232.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). From vigilance to violence: Mate retention tactics in married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(2), 346–361.Google Scholar
Byrne, D., Griffitt, W., & Stefaniak, D. (1967). Attraction and similarity of personality characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(1), 82–90.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. L. (2018). Sexuality now: Embracing diversity. New York, NY: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Cherney, E. F., & Bermant, G. (1970). The role of stimulus female novelty in the rearousal of copulation in male laboratory rats (Rattus norvegicus). Animal Behaviour, 18, 567–574.Google Scholar
Cobey, K. D., Buunk, A. P., Pollet, T. V., Klipping, C., & Roberts, S. C. (2013). Men perceive their female partners, and themselves, as more attractive around ovulation. Biological Psychology, 94(3), 513–516.Google Scholar
Conroy-Beam, D., & Buss, D. M. (2019). Why is age so important in human mating? Evolved age preferences and their influences on multiple mating behaviors. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 127–157.Google Scholar
Cunningham, M. R., Roberts, A. R., Wu, C., Barbee, A. P., & Druen, P. B. (1995). Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours: Consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(2), 261–279.Google Scholar
Dainton, M., & Gross, J. (2008). The use of negative behaviors to maintain relationships. Communication Research Reports, 25, 179–191.Google Scholar
Danel, D. P., Kalinowski, K., Nowak-Szczepanska, N., Ziomkiewicz-Wichary, A., Apanasewicz, A., Borysławski, K., … & Fedurek, P. (2020). Shifts in female facial attractiveness during pregnancy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(14), 5176. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17145176CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dewsbury, D. A. (1981). Effects of novelty on copulatory behavior: The Coolidge effect and related phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 89(3), 464–482.Google Scholar
Dion, K. K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285–290.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., Duncan, M., & Dixson, A. F. (2015). The role of breast size and areolar pigmentation in perceptions of women’s sexual attractiveness, reproductive health, sexual maturity, maternal nurturing abilities, and age. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(6), 1685–1695.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., Grimshaw, G. M., Linklater, W. L., & Dixson, A. F. (2011). Eye tracking of men’s preferences for female breast size and areola pigmentation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(1), 51–58.Google Scholar
Durante, K. M., Li, N. P., & Haselton, M. G. (2008). Changes in women’s choice of dress across the ovulatory cycle: Naturalistic and laboratory task-based evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(11), 1451–1460.Google Scholar
Eva, K. W., & Wood, T. J. (2006). Are all the taken men good? An indirect examination of mate-choice copying in humans. Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ), 175(12), 1573–1574.Google Scholar
Feinberg, D. R., Jones, B. C., Smith, M. L., Moore, F. R., DeBruine, L. M., Cornwell, R. E., … & Perrett, D. I. (2006). Menstrual cycle, trait estrogen level, and masculinity preferences in the human voice. Hormones and Behavior, 49(2), 215–222.Google Scholar
Feingold, A. (1990). Gender differences in effects of physical attractiveness on romantic attraction: A comparison across five research paradigms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 981–993.Google Scholar
Fernandes, H. B. F., Kennair, L. E. O., Hutz, C. S., Natividade, J. C., & Kruger, D. J. (2016). Are negative postcoital emotions a product of evolutionary adaptation? Multinational relationships with sexual strategies, reputation, and mate quality. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 10(4), 219–244.Google Scholar
Fink, B., Matts, P. J., Klingenberg, H., Kuntze, S., Weege, B., & Grammer, K. (2008). Visual attention to variation in female facial skin color distribution. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 7(2), 155–161.Google Scholar
Fink, B., Neave, N., Manning, J. T., & Grammer, K. (2006). Facial symmetry and judgements of attractiveness, health and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(3), 491–499.Google Scholar
Fink, B., Weege, B., Manning, J. T., & Trivers, R. (2014). Body symmetry and physical strength in human males. American Journal of Human Biology, 26(5), 697–700.Google Scholar
Fischer, J., Semple, S., Fickenscher, G., Jürgens, R., Kruse, E., Heistermann, M., & Amir, O. (2011). Do women’s voices provide cues of the likelihood of ovulation? The importance of sampling regime. PLoS One, 6(9), e24490. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024490Google Scholar
Fleischmann, A. A., Spitzberg, B. H., Anderson, P. A., & Roesch, S. C. (2005). Tickling the monster: Jealousy induction in relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(1), 49–73.Google Scholar
Foo, Y. Z., Simmons, L. W., & Rhodes, G. (2017). Predictors of facial attractiveness and health in humans. Scientific Reports, 7, 39731. doi: 10.1038/srep39731Google Scholar
Frevert, T. K., & Walker, L. S. (2014). Physical attractiveness and social status. Sociology Compass, 8(3), 313–323.Google Scholar
Frisby, B. N., & Booth-Butterfield, M. (2012). The “how” and “why” of flirtatious communication between marital partners. Communication Quarterly, 60(4), 465–480.Google Scholar
Furnham, A., & Swami, V. (2007). Perception of female buttocks and breast size in profile. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 35(1), 1–8.Google Scholar
Furnham, A., Dias, M., & McClelland, A. (1998). The role of body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, and breast size in judgments of female attractiveness. Sex Roles, 39(3–4), 311–326.Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1997a). The evolutionary psychology of extrapair sex: The role of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18, 69–88.Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1997b). Human sexual selection and developmental stability. In Simpson, J. A. & Kenrick, D. T. (Eds.), Evolutionary social psychology (pp. 169–195). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Yeo, R. A. (1994). Facial attractiveness, developmental stability, and fluctuating asymmetry. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15(2), 73–85.Google Scholar
Garza, R., Pazhoohi, F., & Byrd-Craven, J. (2020). Does ecological harshness influence men’s perceptions of women’s breast size, ptosis, and intermammary distance? Evolutionary Psychological Science, 7(2), 1–10.Google Scholar
Gildersleeve, K. A., Haselton, M. G., Larson, C. M., & Pillsworth, E. G. (2012). Body odor attractiveness as a cue of impending ovulation in women: Evidence from a study using hormone-confirmed ovulation. Hormones and Behavior, 61(2), 157–166.Google Scholar
Givens, D. B. (1978). The nonverbal basis of attraction: Flirtation, courtship, and seduction. Psychiatry, 41(4), 346–359.Google Scholar
Graham, C. A., Janssen, E., & Sanders, S. A. (2000). Effects of fragrance on female sexual arousal and mood across the menstrual cycle. Psychophysiology, 37(1), 76–84.Google Scholar
Grammer, K., & Thornhill, R. (1994). Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: The role of symmetry and averageness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 233–242.Google Scholar
Grammer, K., Renninger, L., & Fischer, B. (2004). Disco clothing, female sexual motivation, and relationship status: Is she dressed to impress? Journal of Sex Research, 41(1), 66–74.Google Scholar
Gray, P. B., & Frederick, D. A. (2012). Body image and body type preferences in St. Kitts, Caribbean: A cross-cultural comparison with US samples regarding attitudes towards muscularity, body fat, and breast size. Evolutionary Psychology, 10(3). doi: 10.1177/147470491201000319Google Scholar
Grillot, R. L., Simmons, Z. L., Lukaszewski, A. W., & Roney, J. R. (2014). Hormonal and morphological predictors of women’s body attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35(3), 176–183.Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G. (2003). The sexual overperception bias: Evidence of a systematic bias in men from a survey of naturally occurring events. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(1), 34–47.Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1), 81–91.Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2001). The affective shift hypothesis: The functions of emotional changes following sexual intercourse. Personal Relationships, 8(4), 357–369.Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G., Mortezaie, M., Pillsworth, E. G., Bleske-Rechek, A., & Frederick, D. A. (2007). Ovulatory shifts in human female ornamentation: Near ovulation, women dress to impress. Hormones and Behavior, 51(1), 40–45.Google Scholar
Havlíček, J., Dvořáková, R., Bartoš, L., & Flegr, J. (2006). Non‐advertised does not mean concealed: Body odour changes across the human menstrual cycle. Ethology, 112(1), 81–90.Google Scholar
Havlíček, J., Roberts, S. C., & Flegr, J. (2005). Women’s preference for dominant male odour: Effects of menstrual cycle and relationship status. Biology Letters, 1(3), 256–259.Google Scholar
Havlíček, J., Třebický, V., Valentova, J. V., Kleisner, K., Akoko, R. M., Fialová, J., … & Varella, M. A. C. (2017). Men’s preferences for women’s breast size and shape in four cultures. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38(2), 217–226.Google Scholar
Henningsen, D. D. (2004). Flirting with meaning: An examination of miscommunication in flirting interactions. Sex Roles, 50(7–8), 481–489.Google Scholar
Hill, S. E., & Buss, D. M. (2008). The mere presence of opposite-sex others on judgments of sexual and romantic desirability: Opposite effects for men and women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 635–647.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, H. (2019). The aroma of arousal: Effects of menstrual cycle phase and women’s sexual arousal state on men’s responsiveness to women’s body odor. Biological Psychology, 142, 54–61.Google Scholar
Hogan, P. C. (2015). The idiosyncrasy of beauty: Aesthetic universals and the diversity of taste. In Bundgaard, P. F. & Stjernfelt, F. (Eds.), Investigations into the phenomenology and the ontology of the work of art (pp. 109–127). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Hughes, S. M., Aung, T., Harrison, M. A., LaFayette, J. N., & Gallup, G. G. (2020). Experimental evidence for sex differences in sexual variety preferences: Support for the Coolidge effect in humans. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508-020-01730-xGoogle Scholar
Hughes, S. M., & Kruger, D. J. (2011). Sex differences in post-coital behaviors in long- and short-term mating: An evolutionary perspective. Journal of Sex Research, 48(5), 496–505.Google Scholar
Hunt, L. L., Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2015). Leveling the playing field: Longer acquaintance predicts reduced assortative mating on attractiveness. Psychological Science, 26(7), 1046–1053.Google Scholar
Johnston, V. S., Hagel, R., Franklin, M., Fink, B., & Grammer, K. (2001). Male facial attractiveness: Evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(4), 251–267.Google Scholar
Jones, D., & Hill, K. (1993). Criteria of facial attractiveness in five populations. Human Nature, 4(3), 271–296.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., Gutierres, S. E., & Goldberg, L. L. (1989). Influence of popular erotica on judgments of strangers and mates. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25(2), 159–167.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., & Keefe, R. C. (1992). Age preferences in mates reflect sex differences in human reproductive strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15(1), 75–91.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., Keefe, R. C., Gabrielidis, C., & Cornelius, J. S. (1996). Adolescents’ age preferences for dating partners: Support for an evolutionary model of life‐history strategies. Child Development, 67(4), 1499–1511.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Zierk, K. L., & Krones, J. M. (1994). Evolution and social cognition: Contrast effects as a function of sex, dominance, and physical attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(2), 210–217.Google Scholar
Kirchengast, S., & Gartner, M. (2002). Changes in fat distribution (WHR) and body weight across the menstrual cycle. Collegium Antropologicum, 26, 47–57.Google Scholar
Komori, M., Kawamura, S., & Ishihara, S. (2009). Averageness or symmetry: Which is more important for facial attractiveness? Acta Psychologica, 131(2), 136–142.Google Scholar
Kościński, K. (2019). Breast firmness is of greater importance for women’s attractiveness than breast size. American Journal of Human Biology, 31(5), e23287. doi: 10.1002/ajhb.23287Google Scholar
Koukounas, E., & Over, R. (2000). Changes in the magnitude of the eyeblink startle response during habituation of sexual arousal. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38(6), 573–584.Google Scholar
Kuukasjärvi, S., Eriksson, C. J., Koskela, E., Mappes, T., Nissinen, K., & Rantala, M. J. (2004). Attractiveness of women’s body odors over the menstrual cycle: the role of oral contraceptives and receiver sex. Behavioral Ecology, 15(4), 579–584.Google Scholar
Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(3), 390–423.Google Scholar
Lassek, W. D., & Gaulin, S. J. (2019). Evidence supporting nubility and reproductive value as the key to human female physical attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40(5), 408–419.Google Scholar
Li, N. P., Yong, J. C., Tov, W., Sng, O., Fletcher, G. J. O., Valentine, K. A., … & Balliet, D. (2013). Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(5), 757–776.Google Scholar
Little, A. C., Burriss, R. P., Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., & Caldwell, C. A. (2008). Social influence in human face preference: Men and women are influenced more for long-term than short-term attractiveness decisions. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 140–146.Google Scholar
Little, A. C., & Jones, B. C. (2003). Evidence against perceptual bias views for symmetry preferences in human faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 270(1526), 1759–1763.Google Scholar
Luscombe, B. (2008). Why we flirt. Time, 171(4), 62–65.Google Scholar
Lynn, M. (2009). Determinants and consequences of female attractiveness and sexiness: Realistic tests with restaurant waitresses. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38(5), 737–745.Google Scholar
Ma-Kellams, C., Wang, M. C., & Cardiel, H. (2017). Attractiveness and relationship longevity: Beauty is not what it is cracked up to be. Personal Relationships, 24(1), 146–161.Google Scholar
Manning, J. T., Scutt, D., Whitehouse, G. H., & Leinster, S. J. (1997). Breast asymmetry and phenotypic quality in women. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18(4), 223–236.Google Scholar
Marlowe, F. (1998). The nubility hypothesis. Human Nature, 9(3), 263–271.Google Scholar
McBurney, D. H., Zapp, D. J., & Streeter, S. A. (2005). Preferred number of sexual partners: Tails of distributions and tales of mating systems. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(3), 271–278.Google Scholar
McNulty, J. K., Baker, L. R., & Olson, M. A. (2014). Implicit self-evaluations predict changes in implicit partner evaluations. Psychological Science, 25(8), 1649–1657.Google Scholar
McNulty, J. K., O’Mara, E. M., & Karney, B. R. (2008). Benevolent cognitions as a strategy of relationship maintenance: “Don’t sweat the small stuff” … But it is not all small stuff. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 631–646.Google Scholar
Meltzer, A. L., Makhanova, A., Hicks, L. L., French, J. E., McNulty, J. K., & Bradbury, T. N. (2017). Quantifying the sexual afterglow: The lingering benefits of sex and their implications for pair-bonded relationships. Psychological Science, 28(5), 587–598.Google Scholar
Meltzer, A. L., & McNulty, J. K. (2010). Body image and marital satisfaction: Evidence for the mediating role of sexual frequency and sexual satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(2), 156–164.Google Scholar
Meltzer, A. L., & McNulty, J. K. (2019). Relationship formation and early romantic relationships. In Schoebi, D. & Campos, B. (Eds.), New directions in the psychology of close relationships: A brief introduction (pp. 9–27). Oxon: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Meltzer, A. L., McNulty, J. K., Jackson, G. L., & Karney, B. R. (2014). Sex differences in the implications of partner physical attractiveness for the trajectory of marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 418–428.Google Scholar
Messman, S. J., Canary, D. J., & Hause, K. S. (2000). Motives to remain platonic, equity, and the use of maintenance strategies in opposite-sex friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 67–94.Google Scholar
Møller, A. P., & Swaddle, J. P. (1997). Asymmetry, developmental stability and evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moran, J. B., Kuhle, B. X., Wade, T. J., & Seid, M. A. (2017). To poach or not to poach? Men are more willing to short-term poach mated women who are more attractive than their mates. EvoS Journal: The Journal of Evolutionary Studies Consortium, 8, 58–69.Google Scholar
Moran, J. B., & Wade, T. J. (2019). Self-perceived success in mate poaching: How a couple’s attractiveness and relationship duration impact men’s short-term poaching intentions. Human Ethology, 34, 26–40.Google Scholar
Moran, J. B., & Wade, T. J. (2022). Perceptions of a mismatched couple: The role of attractiveness on mate poaching and copying. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 16(1), 94–99. doi: 10.1037/ebs0000187Google Scholar
Morton, H., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2015). Role of partner novelty in sexual functioning: A review. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 41(6), 593–609.Google Scholar
Muise, A., Giang, E., & Impett, E. A. (2014). Post sex affectionate exchanges promote sexual and relationship satisfaction. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(7), 1391–1402.Google Scholar
O’Donohue, W., & Plaud, J. J. (1991). The long-term habituation of sexual arousal in the human male. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 22(2), 87–96.Google Scholar
Oliver‐Rodríguez, J. C., Guan, Z., & Johnston, V. S. (1999). Gender differences in late positive components evoked by human faces. Psychophysiology, 36(2), 176–185.Google Scholar
Pazhoohi, F., Arantes, J., Kingstone, A., & Pinal, D. (2020). Waist to hip ratio and breast size modulate the processing of female body silhouettes: An EEG study. Evolution and Human Behavior, 41(2), 150–169.Google Scholar
Penton-Voak, I. S., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Baker, S., Tiddeman, B., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2001). Symmetry, sexual dimorphism in facial proportions and male facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 268, 1617–1623.Google Scholar
Penton-Voak, I. S., & Perrett, D. I. (2000). Female preference for male faces changes cyclically: Further evidence. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21(1), 39–48.Google Scholar
Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., Castles, D. L., Kobayashi, T., Burt, D. M., Murray, L. K., & Minamisawa, R. (1999). Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature, 399(6738), 741–742.Google Scholar
Peters, M., Simmons, L. W., & Rhodes, G. (2009). Preferences across the menstrual cycle for masculinity and symmetry in photographs of male faces and bodies. PLoS One, 4(1), e4138. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004138Google Scholar
Pietruski, P., Paskal, W., Paskal, A. M., Jaworowski, J., Paluch, L., & Noszczyk, B. (2019). Analysis of the visual perception of female breast aesthetics and symmetry: An eye-tracking study. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 144(6), 1257–1266.Google Scholar
Pipitone, R. N., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2008). Women’s voice attractiveness varies across the menstrual cycle. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29(4), 268–274.Google Scholar
Pizzari, T., Cornwallis, C. K., Lovlie, H., Jakobssen, S., & Birkhead, T. R. (2003). Sophisticated sperm allocation in male fowl. Nature, 426, 70–74.Google Scholar
Platek, S. M., Burch, R. L., & Gallup, G. G. (2001). The reproductive priming effect. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 29, 245–248.Google Scholar
Plaud, J. J., Gaither, G. A., Henderson, S. A., & Devitt, M. K. (1997). The long-term habituation of sexual arousal in human males: A crossover design. The Psychological Record, 47(3), 385–398.Google Scholar
Pond, C. M. (1978). Morphological aspects and the ecological and mechanical consequences of fat deposition in wild vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 9, 519–570.Google Scholar
Probst, F., Bobst, C., & Lobmaier, J. S. (2016). Testosterone-to-oestradiol ratio is associated with female facial attractiveness. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(1). doi: 10.1080/17470218.2015.1024696Google Scholar
Prokop, P., Zvaríková, M., Zvarík, M., & Fedor, P. (2020). Cues of pregnancy decrease female physical attractiveness for males. Current Psychology, 1–8. doi: 10.1007/s12144–020-00608-4Google Scholar
Pruett-Jones, S. (1992). Independent versus nonindependent mate choice: Do females copy each other? American Naturalist, 140, 1000–1009.Google Scholar
Puts, D. A. (2005). Mating context and menstrual phase affect women’s preferences for male voice pitch. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(5), 388–397.Google Scholar
Rätsch, C. (1997). Plants of love: Aphrodisiacs in myth, history, and the present. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press.Google Scholar
Rhodes, G., Hickford, C., & Jeffery, L. (2000). Sex-typicality and attractiveness: Are supermale and superfemale faces super-attractive? British Journal of Psychology, 91, 125–140.Google Scholar
Rhodes, G., Simmons, L. W., & Peters, M. (2005). Attractiveness and sexual behavior: Does attractiveness enhance mating success? Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(2), 186–201.Google Scholar
Rhodes, G., Yoshikawa, S., Clark, A., Lee, K., McKay, R., & Akamatsu, S. (2001). Attractiveness of facial averageness and symmetry in non-Western cultures: In search of biologically based standards of beauty. Perception, 30(5), 611–625.Google Scholar
Rhodes, G., Yoshikawa, S., Palermo, R., Simmons, L. W., Peters, M., Lee, K., … & Crawford, J. R. (2007). Perceived health contributes to the attractiveness of facial symmetry, averageness, and sexual dimorphism. Perception, 36(8), 1244–1252.Google Scholar
Rhodes, G., Zebrowitz, L. A., Clark, A., Kalick, S. M., Hightower, A., & McKay, R. (2001). Do facial averageness and symmetry signal health? Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(1), 31–46.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. E., & Short, R. V. (1977). Changes in breast sensitivity at puberty, during the menstrual cycle, and at parturition. British Medical Journal, 1(6070), 1188–1191.Google Scholar
Rodeheffer, C. D., Proffitt Leyva, R. P., & Hill, S. E. (2016). Attractive female romantic partners provide a proxy for unobservable male qualities: The when and why behind human female mate choice copying. Evolutionary Psychology, 14(2). doi: 10.1177/1474704916652144Google Scholar
Roney, J. R., & Simmons, Z. L. (2012). Men smelling women: Null effects of exposure to ovulatory sweat on men’s testosterone. Evolutionary Psychology, 10(4). doi: 10.1177/147470491201000404Google Scholar
Samuels, C. A., Butterworth, G., Roberts, T., Graupner, L., & Hole, G. (1994). Facial aesthetics: Babies prefer attractiveness to symmetry. Perception, 23, 823–831.Google Scholar
Scheflen, A. E. (1965). Quasi-courtship behavior in psychotherapy. Psychiatry, 28(3), 245–257.Google Scholar
Schmalt, H. D. (2006). Waist-to-hip ratio and female physical attractiveness: The moderating role of power motivation and the mating context. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(3), 455–465.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2001). Human mate poaching: Tactics and temptations for infiltrating existing mateships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 894–917.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., & International Sexuality Description Project. (2003). Universal sex differences in the desire for sexual variety: Tests from 52 nations, 6 continents, and 13 islands. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(1), 85–104.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., Jonason, P. K., Byerley, G. J., Flores, S. D., Illbeck, B. E., O’Leary, K. N., & Qudrat, A. (2012). A reexamination of sex differences in sexuality: New studies reveal old truths. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(2), 135–139.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., Shackelford, T. K., Duntley, J., Tooke, W., & Buss, D. M. (2001). The desire for sexual variety as a key to understanding basic human mating strategies. Personal Relationships, 8(4), 425–455.Google Scholar
Schwarz, S., Klümper, L., & Hassebrauck, M. (2020). Are sex differences in mating preferences really “overrated”? The effects of sex and relationship orientation on long-term and short-term mate preferences. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 6(2), 174–187.Google Scholar
Scutt, D., & Manning, J. T. (1996). Ovary and ovulation: Symmetry and ovulation in women. Human Reproduction, 11(11), 2477–2480.Google Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., & Larsen, R. J. (1999). Facial attractiveness and physical health. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(1), 71–76.Google Scholar
Sheets, V. L., Fredendall, L. L., & Claypool, H. M. (1997). Jealousy evocation, partner reassurance, and relationship stability: An exploration of the potential benefits of jealousy. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18, 387–402.Google Scholar
Sigall, H., & Ostrove, N. (1975). Beautiful but dangerous: Effects of offender attractiveness and nature of the crime on juridic judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(3), 410–414.Google Scholar
Simmons, L. W., Firman, R. C., Rhodes, G., & Peters, M. (2004). Human sperm competition: Testis size, sperm production and rates of extrapair copulations. Animal Behaviour, 68(2), 297–302.Google Scholar
Singh, D. (1993). Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Role of waist-to-hip ratio. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 293–307.Google Scholar
Singh, D. (2004). Mating strategies of young women: Role of physical attractiveness. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 43–54.Google Scholar
Singh, D., & Bronstad, P. M. (2001). Female body odour is a potential cue to ovulation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 268(1469), 797–801.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singh, D., & Randall, P. K. (2007). Beauty is in the eye of the plastic surgeon: Waist-hip ratio (WHR) and women’s attractiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 329–340.Google Scholar
Singh, D., & Young, R. K. (1995). Body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, breast, and hips: roles in judgements of female attractiveness and desirability for relationships. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16, 483–507.Google Scholar
Spence, R., Reichard, M., & Smith, C. (2013). Strategic sperm allocation and a Coolidge effect in an externally fertilizing species. Behavioral Ecology, 24(1), 82–88.Google Scholar
Steiger, S., Franz, R., & Eggert, A.-K. (2008). The Coolidge effect, individual recognition and selection for distinctive cuticular signatures in a burying beetle. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 275, 1831–1838.Google Scholar
Stelzer, C., Desmond, S. M., & Price, J. H. (1987). Physical attractiveness and sexual activity of college students. Psychological Reports, 60, 567–573.Google Scholar
Stewart, D. N., & Szymanski, D. M. (2012). Young adult women’s reports of their male romantic partner’s pornography use as a correlate of their self-esteem, relationship quality, and sexual satisfaction. Sex Roles, 67(5–6), 257–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strock, J. M. (2003). Theodore Roosevelt on leadership: Executive lessons from the bully pulpit. New York, NY: Crown Forum.Google Scholar
Swami, V., Stieger, S., Haubner, T., Voracek, M., & Furnham, A. (2009). Evaluating the physical attractiveness of oneself and one’s romantic partner: Individual and relationship correlates of the love-is-blind bias. Journal of Individual Differences, 30(1), 35–43.Google Scholar
Swami, V., & Tovée, M. J. (2013). Men’s oppressive beliefs predict their breast size preferences in women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42(7), 1199–1207.Google Scholar
Symons, D. (1995). Beauty is in the adaptations of the beholder: The evolutionary psychology of human female sexual attractiveness. In Abramson, P. R. and Pinkerton, S. D. (Eds.), Sexual nature, sexual culture (pp. 80–118). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, H. N., Hamm, M., Borrero, S., Hess, R., & Thurston, R. C. (2019). Body image, attractiveness, and sexual satisfaction among midlife women: A qualitative study. Journal of Women’s Health, 28(1), 100–106.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999a). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(12), 452–460.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999b). The scent of symmetry: A human sex pheromone that signals fitness? Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(3), 175–201.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., Gangestad, S. W., Miller, R., Scheyd, G., McCollough, J. K., & Franklin, M. (2003). Major histocompatibility complex genes, symmetry, and body scent attractiveness in men and women. Behavioral Ecology, 14(5), 668–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Møller, A. P. (1997). Developmental stability, disease and medicine. Biological Reviews, 72(4), 497–548.Google Scholar
Tiggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social comparison in the effect of magazine advertisements on women’s mood and body dissatisfaction. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(1), 23–44.Google Scholar
Tovée, M. J., Maisey, D. S., Emery, J. L., & Cornelissen, P. L. (1999). Visual cues to female physical attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 266, 211–218.Google Scholar
Tovée, M. J., Reinhardt, S., Emery, J. L., & Cornelissen, P. L. (1998). Optimal BMI and maximal sexual attractiveness. Lancet, 352, 548.Google Scholar
Tovée, M. J., Swami, V., Furnham, A., & Mangalparsad, R. (2006). Changing perceptions of attractiveness as observers are exposed to a different culture. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27(6), 443–456.Google Scholar
Tovée, M. J., Tasker, K., & Benson, P. J. (2000). Is symmetry a visual cue to attractiveness in the human female body? Evolution and Human Behavior, 21(3), 191–200.Google Scholar
Træen, B., Holmen, K., & Stigum, H. (2007). Extradyadic sexual relationships in Norway. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36(1), 55–65.Google Scholar
Tylka, T. L., & Kroon Van Diest, A. M. (2015). You looking at her “hot” body may not be “cool” for me: Integrating male partners’ pornography use into objectification theory for women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 39(1), 67–84.Google Scholar
Valenzuela, S., Halpern, D., & Katz, J. E. (2014). Social network sites, marriage well-being and divorce: Survey and state-level evidence from the United States. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 94–101.Google Scholar
Vatsyayana, (1994). The complete Kama Sutra: The first unabridged modern translation of the classic Indian text by Vatsyayana (Danielou, A., Trans.). Rochester, VT: Park Street Press.Google Scholar
Wade, T. J. (2010). The relationships between symmetry and attractiveness and mating relevant decisions and behavior: A review. Symmetry, 2(2), 1081–1098.Google Scholar
Wade, T. J., Auer, G., & Roth, T. M. (2009). What is love: Further investigation of love acts. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 3(4), 290–304.Google Scholar
Wade, T. J., & Weinstein, A. B. (2011). Jealousy induction: Which tactics are perceived as most effective? Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 5(4), 231–238.Google Scholar
Wang, T. T., Wessels, L., Hussain, G., & Merten, S. (2017). Discriminative thresholds in facial asymmetry: A review of the literature. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 37(4), 375–385.Google Scholar
Weeden, J., & Sabini, J. (2005). Physical attractiveness and health in Western societies: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 131(5), 635–653.Google Scholar
White, G. L. (1980). Inducing jealousy: A power perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6(2), 222–227.Google Scholar
Yorzinski, J. L., & Platt, M. L. (2010). Same-sex gaze attraction influences mate-choice copying in humans. PLoS One, 5(2), e9115. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009115CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zelazniewicz, A. M., & Pawlowski, B. (2011). Female breast size attractiveness for men as a function of sociosexual orientation (restricted vs. unrestricted). Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(6), 1129–1135.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×