Main Article Content
Previous research on mate selection has primarily focused on long-term relationships, i.e. spouse selection. Literature suggests that factors and traits playing a significant role in choosing a short-term partner have been mostly overlooked in mate-selection research. The present study, with a sample of 115 Hispanic-American females attending a public university, attempts to determine if there are significant differences in reported preferences when looking for short-term partners versus when looking for a long-term partner. The subjects individually listed their preferences for short-term partners from a list of traits generated by previous research. The participants were then put into groups consisting of five females in each group. Group members discuss their preferences among themselves and generate a list of desirable traits in a long-term partner. This paper reports the findings of the survey in two specific categories. It separates the desired traits for short-term and long-term partners, and it presents the differences in preferences based on relational status, i.e., single or in a relationship.
Journal of Gender and Power is an Open Access Journal. Copyright of the article published in the Journal of Gender and Power is retained by the authors with first publication rights granted to the Adam Mickiewicz University Press.
- ARCHER, J. (1996) Sex Differences in Social Behavior: Are the Social Role and Evolutionary Explanations Compatible? American Psychologist. 51. Pp. 909–917.
- BOTWIN, M. D., BUSS, D. M. & SHACKELFORD, T. K. (1997) Personality and Mate Preferences: Five Factors in Mate Selection and Marital Satisfaction. Journal of Personality. 65:1. Pp. 107–136.
- BUSS, D. M. & KENRICK, D. T. (1998) Evolutionary Social Psychology. In: Gilbert, D.T., Fiske, S.T. & Linzey, G. (eds.) Handbook of social psychology. (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 982–1026.
- BUSS, D. M. (1989) Sex Differences in Human Mate Preferences: Evolutionary Hypotheses Tested in 37 Cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 12. Pp. 1–14. DOI:10.1017/S0140525X00023992.
- CLONINGER, C. (1980) Interpretation of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Structural Relations by Path Analysis: Theory and Applications to Assortative Mating. Genetical Research. 36 (2). Pp. 133–145. DOI:10.1017/S0016672300019765.
- EAGLY, A. H. & WOOD, W. (1999) The Origins of Sex Differences in Human Behavior: Evolved Dispositions Versus Social Roles. American Psychologist. 54. Pp. 408–423.
- EAGLY, A. H., WOOD, W. & JOHANNESEN-SCHMIDT, M. C. (2004) Social Role Theory of Sex Differences and Similarities: Implications for the Partner Preferences of Women and Men. In: Eagly, A. H., Beall, A. & Sternberg, R. S. (eds.) The psychology of gender. (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford. Pp. 269–295.
- FINN, D. & DONOVAN, A. (2013) PwC’s NextGen: A Global Generational Study 2013 Summary and Compendium of Findings. [Online] Available from: https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/hr-management-services/publications/assets/pwc-nextgen.pdf [Accessed: 23 June 2020].
- FISMAN, R. et al. (2005) Gender Differences in Mate Selection: Evidence From a Speed Dating Experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Volume 121, 2. Pp. 673–697. [Online] Available from: https://DOI.org/10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.673 [Accessed: 23 June 2020].
- HEATH, A. C. et al. (2014) Human Mate Selection and Addiction: A Conceptual Critique. Behavior Genetics. 44. Pp. 419–426. [Online] Available from: https://DOI.org/10.1007/s10519-014-9669-3 [Accessed: 23 June 2020].
- HOUTS, R., ROBINS, E. & HOUSTON, T. (1996) Compatibility and Development of Premarital Relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 58. Pp. 7–20.
- HOWARD, J. A., BLUMSTEIN, P. & SCHWARTZ, P. (1987) Social or Evolutionary Theories: Some Observations on Preferences in Human Mate Selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 53. Pp. 194–200.
- KAUTH, M. R. (2000) True Nature: A Theory of Sexual Attraction. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
- KAUTH, M. R. (2005) Revealing Assumptions: Explicating Sexual Orientation and Promoting Conceptual Integrity. Journal of Bisexuality. 5 (4). Pp. 79–105.
- KHAZAN, O. (2014) Why College Students Need a Class in Dating. The Atlantic. 2 July. [Online] Available from: https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/07/whytodays-college-students-need-a-class-on-dating/373823/ [Accessed: 23 June 2020].
- KNAPP, M. L. (1978) Social Intercourse: From Greeting to Goodbye. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
- LI, N. P., VALENTINE, K. A. & PATEL, L. (2010) Mate Preferences in the US and Singapore: A Cross-Cultural Test of the Mate Preference Priority Model. Personality and Individual Differences. 50 (2). Pp. 291–294. [Online] Available from: http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/1129 [Accessed: 23 June 2020].
- LOOY, H. (2001) Sex Differences: Evolved, Constructed and Designed. Journal of Psychology and Theology. 29. Pp. 301–313.
- REGAN, P. C. & BERSCHEID, E. (1997). Gender Differences in Characteristics Desired in a Potential Sexual and Marriage Partner. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality. 9. Pp. 25–37.
- SPRECHER, S. (1998) Social Exchange Theories and Sexuality. The Journal of Sex Research. 35. Pp. 32–43.
- SURRA, C. & HUGHES, D. (1997) Commitment Processes in Accounts of the Development of Premarital Relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 59. Pp. 5–21.
- SURRA, C. (1990) Research and Theory on Mate Selection and Premarital Relationships in the 1980s. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 52. Pp. 844–856.
- TWENGE, J. (2006) Generation Me. New York: Atria.
- WOOD, W. & EAGLEY, A. H. (2002) A Cross-Cultural Analysis of the Behavior of Women and Men: Implications for the Origins of Sex Difference. Psychological Bulletin. 128. Pp. 699–727.