Gender Differences on Mate Preferences Essay Example

tall with light brown hair and green eyes weighing 185 lbs.

I am a professionally employed writer who is currently single but also has a wild side. I am searching for a woman who is practical yet sexy, intelligent, and fun in order to join me on exciting weekends. I have an appreciation for the finer aspects of life, including traveling, exercising, fine dining, and dancing all night long. Are you the one? Contact me at Box 6371.

Even if an ad does not specify gender, we can still identify the gender of the writer with a high accuracy based on distinct characteristics emphasized by males and females. This study explores the differences in mate selection preference between men and women. The topic of mate selection has fascinated biologists, as noted by Darwin's interest in 1871 (cited in Bailey J.M., Gaulin S.).

, According to Agyei Y. and Gladue B. A. (1994), males typically engage in combat for the purpose of winning over females, and they suggest that this competitive behavior is instrumental in boosting reproductive success rather than just ensuring basic survival. This aspect of sexual selection, famously explored by Darwin, continues to intrigue scholars today.

Before the 1980s, mate selection research was not extensively studied. Evolutionary psychology, which concentrates on human behavior, altered this situation. Darwin's sexual selection theory played a crucial role in shaping the evolutionary outlook on human mate preference. Several theories from evolutionists such as Buss & Barnes and Kenrick & Trost cited by Doosje B., Rojahn K. (1993) contributed to this perspective.

According to Fischer A. (1992), human mating strategies are influenced by biological inheritance and the challenges encountered in early human history. Evolutionary

theories propose variations in gender preferences for age, physical attractiveness, and financial status. Females tend to have a biological inclination to bear and nurture children. As a result, they seek partners who can provide the necessary resources to ensure a stable and secure home for their offspring.

According to research, females prioritize financial capability and social status, as well as preferring older mates due to their ability to control resources. In contrast, males focus on characteristics that lead to reproductive success and seek out signs of fertility, such as physical beauty and youth. This suggests that males place a higher emphasis on physical attractiveness than females. The socio-cultural theory also provides an alternative perspective on gender differences in mate selection preference (Eagly, 1987; Spence, Deaux, ; Helmreich, 1985 as cited in Doosje B).

The reason behind gender differences in mate selection, as identified by the socio-cultural theory, is societal pressure. Throughout history, traditional social differences in labor roles have established that males are involved publicly while females are private home-based. However, only in the last century have women moved into the workplace and taken professional jobs (et al., 1992).

Despite progress, men still hold most positions of power in the economy and professions such as law, medicine, and education. According to this theory, mate selection preferences vary depending on societal roles. For instance, men prioritize wives who excel in cooking and household management and possess a caring, nurturing nature conducive to child-rearing.

When it comes to choosing a partner, men and women have different priorities and are influenced by various factors. Women prioritize financial stability as it offers security and a comfortable life. The socio-cultural theory highlights the impact

of parental and peer group influence. Men, who tend to have dominant traits, seek a physically attractive partner to elevate their social status, while women often feel pressure from their families to marry someone who can provide them with adequate support.

Today, we face a constant barrage of flawless images dictating how to look and dress. Societal norms to conform are especially heavy on women, who are expected to adhere to fashion trends, achieve the ideal body shape, and enhance their appearance. The additional pressure comes from celebrities, who present themselves perfectly polished. Beauty is almost a requirement for social recognition, perpetuating the notion that physical attractiveness is paramount. Research has shown that women prioritize non-physical characteristics over men when selecting a mate, debunking the belief that physical attraction reigns supreme (Feingold A.).

According to Feingold A. (1992), women prioritize financial stability and ambition more than men do, as cited in studies conducted in 1989 and 1990 by Buss D. M., Kenrick, Sadalla, Groth, and Trost. Spreecher, Sullivan, and Hatfield (1994) also discovered similar results in their survey, which included a diverse sample of men and women aged 19-35 from various social backgrounds.

Studies on character values have yielded inconsistent results. Some studies (Nevid 1984; Roscoe, Diana, ; Brooks 1987 as cited in Feingold A. 1992) indicate a higher value placed on character by women compared to men. However, other studies (Kenrick et al. , 1990; Wakil, 1973 as cited in Feingold A. 992) did not discover any significant difference.

Although researchers acknowledge the existence of gender disparities in desiring physical attractiveness and financial security, there is considerable variation in their views on personal characteristics. There has been a

limited number of studies examining the influence of parents and peers. Nonetheless, several studies (Lewis 1973; Berger 1987; Parks ; Adelman, 1983 as cited in Spreecher S., Felmlee D., 1992) have demonstrated a positive correlation between perceived support from these social networks and the strength and consistency of a relationship.

Spreecher and Felmlee's (1992) longitudinal study examined the relationships of young adults at a large Midwestern university in the United States. The results supported previous studies on social influence, showing that couples were more likely to label themselves as a unit and become more romantically involved when others viewed them as a "good match." According to Spreecher et. al. (1992, p. 889), this study aims to test gender preferences in selecting a mate, specifically the hypothesis that males prioritize physical attractiveness more than females do.

The study found that women place a higher priority on financial stability in partner selection compared to men. However, both genders value societal support equally. Furthermore, there is no noticeable difference between genders regarding the importance of character. The study consisted of 82 participants who were male and female.

The study conducted at Help Institute Kuala Lumpur included single participants in the age range of 17 to 23 years (with an average age of 20.12). Majority of the participants were personal acquaintances of the freshmen involved in the study and none had been married before.

A convenience sample of individuals were provided with a survey titled "Life-Partner Preference Survey" (Appendix A) and instructed to rate their willingness on a scale of 1-7 to marry someone based on certain preferences. The materials used were a one-page survey and enclosed instructions.

The webpage featured

tags displaying a scale with seven points, ranging from "not willing" (1) to "very willing" (7). Thirteen articles were randomly displayed on the page and evaluated according to five categories: financial stability (Q1-Q5), social approval (Q12-Q13), physical attraction (Q5-Q7), similarity (Q9-Q10, Q12), and personality (Q8-Q11). The survey required participants to provide their age and gender by signing a consent statement at the top of the page while remaining anonymous. The survey included four positive attributes, such as having a good sense of humor, and five negative attributes.

Within the survey, there were four ambiguous statements and six non-ambiguous statements. The non-ambiguous statements included two related to attractiveness of a person's body and four general statements. The ambiguous statements were divided into two categories: earnings and education, each containing two contradictory statements. Participants completed the survey independently.

Experimenters aimed to recruit an equal number of male and female participants, who were asked to complete a survey rating their willingness to marry someone based on a given set of considerations. The survey instructions were printed and participants were instructed to circle their willingness on a 7-point scale. No additional oral instructions were given, and participants had sufficient time to complete the surveys before returning them. The experiment was not administered in a controlled environment.

47) 2.72 (1.75) * Gains an additional 4.32 (1.90) resulting in 5.90 (1.

The amount of increase in 5.24 (1.87) due to higher education is 4.35 (1.

The text within the reads: "57) 5.51 (1.52) 5.12 (1."

Individuals who earn below 4.79 (1.70) and 3.41 (1.) are categorized in group 63.

Individuals

with lower levels of education had an average score of 4.00 (with a standard deviation of 1.54), while those with higher levels of education had an average score of 4.02 (with a standard deviation of 1.85).

The face's physical attraction received a score of 3.32 (1.71) and 3.61 (1.68) in two evaluations, which is presented within paragraph tags in HTML format.

The body's total measurement is 3.29 and it is calculated by taking into account five distinctive values: 65 inches for the first, 4.21 for the second, 1.28 for the third, 3.90 for the fourth, and 1.50 for the fifth.

53) The sum of three instances of 90 (1.35) and three instances of 66 (1.

The personality trait of humor was measured and resulted in scores of 5.76 (with a standard deviation of 1.44), 5.97 (with a standard deviation of 1.20), and 5.94 (with a standard deviation of 1). These scores are represented within HTML paragraph tags.

The average level of respect is 6, with a range of 1.31 to 6.41 and an average of 1.16.

The theoretical variable of mate selection preference for males and females is similarity. The total percentage for no interest is 9, with males at 3.53 (1.93) and females at 3.51 (1.23).

64) 3. 51 (1. 77) Unawareness 1. 91 (1. 42) 2.

10 (1.37) and 2.02 (1.39) respectively represent the social approval and friends, with values of 5.74 (1.08) and 5.

< p >
The family numbers are 64 (1. 18), 5. 70 (1. 11), and 5. 88 (1. 20) for position 6.

Based on the data from participants, it was found that there were 82 people with an average age of 20.12 years and a standard deviation of

2. The values in parentheses indicate the specific standard deviations for certain numbers, while the significance level was p < .05.

The significance of the following comparisons is as follows: (1) achieving a consistent employment opportunity with t(71) = 2.868 and p ; .05, (2) obtaining higher earnings with t(71) = 3.819 and p ; .05, and (3) attaining advanced levels of education with t(71) = 3.199 and p ; .

The study found that both earning less (t(71)=3.343, p<.05) and having an unattractive face (t(71)=2.570, p<0.5) have a negative impact on mate selection. Additionally, across all 10 aspects of mate selection preference, females placed greater value on financial stability compared to males.

When it comes to positive traits, females outscored males with a score of 5.90 and 5.51, while males scored only 4.32 and 4.

Females ranked a partner's lack of a steady job, lower earnings, and lower education at positions 2. 18, 3. 41, and 3. 46 respectively. In contrast, males ranked these attributes as position 3. Additionally, females ranked higher earnings and more education as desirable qualities for a mate over males.

According to the survey results, males placed a greater emphasis on physical attraction compared to females. However, when it came to negative aspects under the physical attraction category, males ranked them lower with a value of 3. The relevant date of the survey was 29th April 1979 and the time was 4:00.

Males have lower ratings for attractiveness (32 for face and 3.29 for body) in comparison to females who have higher ratings (4.21 for face and 3.90 for body).

There were no notable variations in personality ratings between males and females. Both genders

assessed social endorsement similarly, with elevated mean ratings for both friends and family. Females scored 5.64 for friends and 6.15 for family, while males reported a score of 5.74 for friends and 5 for family.

The study found that both males and females had similar similarity rankings, except for their views on partner preferences. Women considered financial stability more important than men did, while men placed greater emphasis on physical attractiveness than women.

The study found no noteworthy discrepancies across personality, similarity, and social approval classifications. Additionally, the findings confirmed the first three hypotheses: 1) The male group assigned greater value to physical attractiveness in mate selection compared to the female group. 2) Financial stability mattered more to females than males. 3) Character was not a significantly different factor for both genders. Lastly, the fourth hypothesis presumed that males would consider peer support to be more crucial in choosing a partner while females would feel more obligated to obtain family approval.

Despite previous studies on gender differences in mate selection preference, the results revealed that both genders showed similar ratings. Additionally, the findings supported previous research regarding the relationship between physical attractiveness and ratings, as suggested by Feingold A. (1990, 1991 cited in Feingold A.).

According to a study from 1992, men prioritize good looks in their partners more than women do. This helps explain why men take pride in having an attractive spouse. Other men often view a man with a beautiful wife as successful, which aligns with predictions from evolutionary biology and socio-cultural theories.

The findings confirm the second hypothesis that females prioritize financial stability more than males in mate selection, which is consistent with

previous studies (Buss D. M. 1989, Kenrick, Sadalla, Groth, & Trost 1990 cited in Feingold A. 1992). This supports predictions from both evolutionary biology and socio-cognitive theories. Additionally, the results align with the third hypothesis, which found no significant difference in gender preference for mate selection, as observed in earlier research (Kenrick et al.).

The viewpoint that personality is perceived similarly by both genders is reinforced by the studies conducted in 1990 by Wakil and 1973 as cited in Feingold A. 1992. This casts uncertainty on research that discovered substantial variations, such as those conducted by Nevid 1984, Roscoe, Diana, and Brooks 1987 as cited in Feingold A. 1992. Research on the impact of family and friend authorization demonstrated that social support plays a critical role in partner selection, corroborating the results needed to confirm the fourth hypothesis; social approval is crucial.

We can speculate that while Mate Selection Preference 12 may hold true, the results of the fourth hypothesis could vary in different cultures. In Malaysia, for example, where family approval is required for marriage, strong cultural traditions may have contributed to the high ratings found. However, the experiment was not fully controlled as it was rushed and relied mostly on personal acquaintances who were mainly from an urban, upper-class background. Additionally, race was not controlled, which may have influenced both genders' preference for physical attraction and financial stability over other factors that may be more important in a wider demographic study.

The experiment suffers from design flaws such as the lack of honesty by participants and difficulty for the experimenters to maintain an objective ranking scale with levels ranging between 1 and 7. Participants

may feel compelled to provide expected or idealized responses that do not accurately reflect their willingness level. Additionally, the scale's meaning is subjective to an individual's interpretation of their real-life context. To minimize experimental errors, it is recommended that each point on the scale be individually defined, resulting in a more precise albeit imperfect scale. Furthermore, conducting the experiment more extensively and selecting participants that represent a general majority rather than just college students in the city can help reduce extraneous variable effects.

The internet could enable the preservation of personal factors by presenting the experiment in a way that fully incorporates the "anonymous" concept. Also, don't forget to read "Gender and optical illusions".