CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 136Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorAcademic Freedom and Politics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

The Dating Preferences of Liberals and Conservatives

Klofstad, Casey A., McDermott, Rose, Hatemi, Peter K.·2013·Political Behavior
DOI 10.1007/s11109-012-9207-z
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11109-012-9207-z

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 50 · Cited by 136

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. Agrawal, A., Heath, A. C., Grant, J. D., Pergadia, M. L., Statham, D. J., Bucholz, K. K., et al. (2006). Assortative mating for cigarette smoking and for alcohol consumption in female Australian twins and their spouses. Behavioral Genetics, 36, 553–566. · DOI
  2. Alford, J. R., Funk, C. L., & Hibbing, J. R. (2005). Are political orientations genetically transmitted? American Political Science Review, 99, 153–167. · DOI
  3. Alford, J. R., Hatemi, P. K., Hibbing, J. R., Martin, N. G., & Eaves, L. J. (2011). The politics of mate choice. The Journal of Politics, 73, 1–19. · DOI
  4. Bereczkei, T., Voros, S., Gal, A., & Bernath, L. (1997). Resources, attractiveness, family commitment: Reproductive decisions in human mate choice. Ethology, 103, 681–699. · DOI
  5. Bobo, L., & Licari, F. C. (1989). Education and political tolerance: Testing the effects of cognitive sophistication and target group affect. Public Opinion Quarterly, 53, 285–308. · DOI · Paper page
  6. 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, 107–136. · DOI
  7. Bryan, A. D., Webster, G. D., & Mahaffey, A. L. (2011). The big, the rich, and the powerful: Physical, financial, and social dimensions of dominance in mating and attraction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 365–382. · DOI
  8. Byrne, D. (1961). Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 62, 713–715. · DOI
  9. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York, NY: Wiley.
  10. Cavior, N., Miller, K., & Cohen, S. H. (1975). Physical attractiveness, attitude similarity, and length of acquaintance as contributors to interpersonal attraction among adolescents. Social Behavior and Personality, 3, 133–142. · DOI
  11. Coffé, H., & Need, A. (2010). Similarity in husbands and wives party family preference in the Netherlands. Electoral Studies, 29, 259–268. · DOI
  12. Cowden, J. (2001). Southernization of the nation and nationalization of the South: Racial conservatism, social welfare and white partisans in the United States, 1956–92. British Journal of Political Science, 31, 277–301. · DOI
  13. Curry, T. J., & Kenny, D. A. (1974). The effects of perceived and actual similarity in values and personality in the process of interpersonal attraction. Quality & Quantity, 8, 27–44. · DOI
  14. Eaves, U., & Eysenck, H. J. (1974). Genetics and the development of social attitudes. Nature, 249, 288–289. · DOI
  15. Eaves, L. J., Eysenck, H. J., & Martin, N. G. (1989). Genes, culture and personality: An empirical approach. London: Academic Press.
  16. Eaves, L. J., & Hatemi, P. K. (2008). Transmission of attitudes toward abortion and gay rights: Parental socialization or parental mate selection? Behavior Genetics, 38, 247–256. · DOI
  17. Eaves, L. J., Heath, A. C., Martin, N. G., Maes, H. H., Neale, M. C., Kendler, K. S., et al. (1999). Comparing the biological and cultural inheritance of personality and social attitudes in the Virginia 30,000 study of twins and their relatives. Twin Research, 2, 62–80. · DOI
  18. Fiorina, M. P., & Abrams, S. J. (2008). Political polarization in the American public. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 563–588. · DOI · Paper page
  19. Fowler, J. H., Baker, L. A., & Dawes, C. T. (2008). Genetic variation in political participation. American Political Science Review, 102, 233–248. · DOI
  20. Greenlees, I. A., & McGrew, W. C. (1994). Sex and age differences in preferences and tactics of mate attraction: Analysis of published advertisements. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15, 59–72. · DOI
  21. Hatemi, P. K., Byrne, E., & McDermott, R. (2012). What is a “gene” and why does it matter for political science? Journal of Theoretical Politics, 24, 305–327. · DOI
  22. Hatemi, P. K., Hibbing, J. R., Medland, S. E., Keller, M. C., Alford, J. R., Smith, K. B., et al. (2010). Not by twins alone: Using the extended family design to investigate genetic influence on political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 54, 798–814. · DOI
  23. Heath, A. C., Kendler, K. S., Eaves, L. J., & Markell, D. (1985). The resolution of cultural and biological inheritance: Informativeness of different relationships. Behavioral Genetics, 15, 439–465. · DOI
  24. Hitsch, G. J., Hortaçsu, A., & Ariely, D. (2010). Matching and sorting in online dating. American Economics Review, 100, 130–163. · DOI
  25. Huckfeldt, R. (1983). Social contexts, social networks, and urban neighborhoods: Environmental constraints on friendship choice. American Journal of Sociology, 89, 651–669. · DOI
  26. Imai, K., King, G., & Lau, O. (2008). Toward a common framework for statistical analysis and development. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 17, 1–22. · DOI
  27. Jennings, M. K., & Niemi, R. (1968). The transmission of political values from parent to child. The American Political Science Review, 62, 169–184. · DOI
  28. Jost, T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–919. · DOI · Paper page
  29. Kanazawa, S. (2010). Why liberals and atheists are more intelligent. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73, 33–57. · DOI
  30. Klofstad, C. A., McDermott, R., & Hatemi, P. K. (2011). Do bedroom eyes wear political glasses?: The role of politics in human mate attraction. Evolution and Human Behavior. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.06.002 . · DOI
  31. Layman, G. C., Carsey, T. M., & Horowitz, J. M. (2006). Party polarization in American politics: Characteristics, causes, and consequences. Annual Review of Political Science, 9, 83–110. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Li, N. P., Bailey, J. M., Kenrick, D. T., & Linsenmeier, J. A. W. (2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 947–955. · DOI
  33. Mare, R. D. (1991). Five decades of educational assortative mating. American Sociological Review, 56, 15–32. · DOI
  34. Martin, N. G., Eaves, L. J., Heath, A. C., Jardine, R., Feingold, L. M., & Eysenck, H. J. (1986). Transmission of social attitudes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 83, 4364–4368. · DOI
  35. McGraw, K. J. (2002). Environmental predictors of geographic variation in human mating practices. Ethology, 108, 303–317. · DOI
  36. Pawlowski, B., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (1999). Withholding age as putative deception in mate search tactics. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 53–69. · DOI
  37. Stoker, L., & Jennings, M. K. (1989). Life-cycle transitions and political participation: the case of marriage. American Political Science Review, 89, 421–433. · DOI · Paper page
  38. Stoker, L., & Jennings, K. M. (2006). Political similarity and influence between husbands and wives. In A. S. Zuckerman (Ed.), The social logic of politics. Philadelphia: Temple.
  39. Todd, P., Penke, L., Fasolo, B., & Lenton, A. P. (2007). Different cognitive processes underlie human mate choices and mate preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 104(38), 15011–15016. · DOI
  40. Vandenberg, S. G. (1972). Assortative mating, or who marries whom? Behavior Genetics, 2, 127–157. · DOI
  41. Waynforth, D., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (1995). Conditional mate choice strategies in humans: Evidence from “lonely hearts” advertisements. Behaviour, 132, 755–779. · DOI
  42. Wiederman, M. W. (1993). Evolved gender differences in mate preferences: Evidence from personal advertisements. Ethology and Sociobiology, 14, 331–352. · DOI
  43. Zietsch, B. P., Verweij, K. J., Heath, A. C., & Martin, N. G. (2011). Variation in human mate choice: simultaneously investigating heritability, parental influence, sexual imprinting, and assortative mating. The American Naturalist, 177, 605–616. · DOI
  44. Zuckerman, A. S., Fitzgerald, J., & Dasovic, J. (2005). Do couples support the same political parties? In A. S. Zuckerman (Ed.), The social logic of politics. Philadelphia, PA: Temple.

Metadata

Authors
Klofstad, C. A., McDermott, R., & Hatemi, P. K.
Affiliations
  • University of Miami (US)
  • Brown University (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
Klofstad, Casey A.
ORCID
Venue
Political Behavior
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2012-07-06
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
519-538
ISSN
  • 0190-9320 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6687
DOI
10.1007/s11109-012-9207-z
OpenAlex
W2134628375
Cited by
136
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
24.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
Political Behavior (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Miami
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Academic Freedom and Politics
Keywords
political polarization, mate choice, assortative mating, liberals and conservatives, dating profiles, political preferences, ideological convergence, gene-environment interaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review