CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4,484Evolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorAnimal Behavior and ReproductionEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation

Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures

Open access
Buss, David M.·1989·Behavioral and Brain Sciences
DOI 10.1017/s0140525x00023992
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Contemporary mate preferences can provide important clues to human reproductive history. Little is known about which characteristics people value in potential mates. Five predictions were made about sex differences in human mate preferences based on evolutionary conceptions of parental investment, sexual selection, human reproductive capacity, and sexual asymmetries regarding certainty of paternity versus maternity. The predictions centered on how each sex valued earning capacity, ambition— industriousness, youth, physical attractiveness, and chastity. Predictions were tested in data from 37 samples drawn from 33 countries located on six continents and five islands (total N = 10,047). For 27 countries, demographic data on actual age at marriage provided a validity check on questionnaire data. Females were found to value cues to resource acquisition in potential mates more highly than males. Characteristics signaling reproductive capacity were valued more by males than by females. These sex differences may reflect different evolutionary selection pressures on human males and females; they provide powerful cross-cultural evidence of current sex differences in reproductive strategies. Discussion focuses on proximate mechanisms underlying mate preferences, consequences for human intrasexual competition, and the limitations of this study.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0140525x00023992

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Men place greater weight on physical attractiveness in potential mates, a more visible trait that requires less signaling.

    “By contrast, men place greater weight on physical attractiveness in potential mates, a more visible trait that requires less signaling (Buss, 1989; Fisman et al., 2006).”

    From Talking the talk, not walking the walk: The coevolution of overconfidence and loss aversion (2026) · cites this paper as Buss, 1989

    Section 3.4 reports that men valued physical attractiveness in potential mates more than women did across the 37 samples. Section 1.2 describes visible features of appearance as cues, but does not say that attractiveness requires less signaling than other traits. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 99

  1. Alexander. R. D. (1974) The evolution of social behavior. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematic* 5:325-83. [WI] (1979) Darwinism and human affairs. University of Washington Press. [WI, RWS] (1980) Darwinism and human affairs. Pitman.
  2. Alexander, R. D. & Noonan, K. M. (l979) Concealment of ovulation, parental care, and human social evolution. In: Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: An anthropological perspective, ed. N. A. Chagnon & E. C. Irons. Duxbury Press. [aDMB]
  3. Anderson, C. M. (1986) Female age: Male preference and reproductive success in primates. International Journal of Primatology 7:305-26.
  4. Badcock, C. R. (forthcoming) Is the Oedipus Complex a Darwinian adaptation? Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis.
  5. Bateson, P. (1983) Mate choice. Cambridge University Press.
  6. Baueom, D. H., Besch, P. K. & Callahan, S. (1985) Relation between testosterone concentration, sex role identity, and personality among females. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 48(5):1218-26.
  7. Berenstain, L. & Wade, T. (1983) Intrasexual selection and male mating strategies in baboons and macaques. International Journal of Primatology 4:201-35 [aDMB, RHBl
  8. Berscheid, E. (1985) Interpersonal attraction. In: Handbook of social psychology, vol. 2, ed. C. Lindzey & E. Aronson. Random House/Erlbaum.
  9. Berscheid, E. & Walster, E. (1974) Physical attractiveness. In: Advances in experimental social psychology, ed. L. Berkowitz. Academic Press.
  10. Betzig, L. L., Borgerhoff Mulder, M. & Turke, P. W. (1988) Human reproductive behavior. Cambridge University Press.
  11. Blumberg, R. L. & Winch, R. F. (1972) Societal complexity and familial complexity: Evidence for the curvilinear hypothesis. American Journal of Sociology 77:898-920.
  12. Borgerhoff Mulder, M. (1988) Kipsigis bridewealth payments. In: Human reproductive behavior: A Darwinian perspective, ed. L. L. Betzig, M. Borgerhoff Mulder & P. W. Turke. Cambridge University Press.
  13. Bradbury, J. W. & Anderson, M. (1987) Sexual selection: Testing the alternatives. Wiley.
  14. Burgess, E. W. & Wallin, P. (1953) Engagement and marriage. Lippincott.
  15. Burian, R. M. (1983) Adaptation. In: Dimensions of Darwinism, ed. M. Grene. Cambridge University Press.
  16. aDMB] (1988a) The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54:616-28. [arDMB, NWT] (1988b) From vigilance to violence: Tactics of mate retention in American undergraduates. Ethology and Sociobiology 9:291-317. [arDMB] (in press) Preference mechanisms in human mating. In: Evolved mechanisms, ed. J. Barkow, L. Cosmides & J. Tooby. Cambridge University Press. [rDMB] (in preparation) Short-and long-term mating: Tactics.
  17. Buss, D. M. & Barnes, M. F. (1986) Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50:559-70. [aDMB, AZ, RHB, LRC]
  18. Buss, D. M., et al. (in press) International preferences in selecting mates: A study of 37 cultures. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology.
  19. Chagnon, N. A. (1983) Yanomamo: The fierce people (3rd ed.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  20. Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. (1987) From evolution to behavior: Evolutionary psychology as the missing link. In: The latest on the best: Essays on evolution and optimality, ed. J. Dupre. MIT Press. [rDMB, CC, DS, JT]
  21. Cunningham, M. R. (1986) Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: Quasi-experiments on the sociobiology of female beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50:925-35. [rDMB] (1988) Sociobiological dynamics in facial attractiveness. Paper presented at the 96th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Atlanta.
  22. Daly, M. & Wilson, M. (1983) Sex, evolution, and behavior. Willard Crant Press. [aDMB, CJB, MD, DTK, RWS] (1988) Homicide. Aldine de Cruyter.
  23. Darwin, C. (1859) On the origin of the species by means of natural selection, or preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: Murray. [aDMB, MTC] (1859a) The origin of species by means of natural selection. Penguin Books. [RHB] (1871) The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: Murray. [aDMB] (1877) The descent of man and selection in relation to sex, second edition, revised and augmented. Murray.
  24. Darwin, E. (1794) T/mnomia; or, the laws of organic life, vol. 1. J. Johnson. [MTG]
  25. Dickemann, M. (1979a) Female infanticide, reproductive strategies and social References /Buss: Sex differences stratification: A preliminary model. In: Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: An anthropological perspective, ed. N. A. Chagnon & W. D. Irons. Duxbury Press. [MD] (1979b) The ecology of mating systems in hypergynous dowry societies. Social Science Information 18:163-75. [MD] (1981) Paternal confidence and dowry competition: A biocultural analysis of purdah. In: Natural selection and social behavior, ed. R. D. Alexander & D. W. Tinkle. Chiron Press. [aDMB, MD] (1985) Human sociobiology: The first decade. New Scientist 107:38-42.
  26. Dunbar, R. I. M. (1982) Intraspecific variations in mating strategy. In: Perspectives in ethology, vol. 5, ed. P. P. G. Bateson & P. H. Klopfer. Plenum. [NN]
  27. Eberhard, W. G. (1985) Sexual selection and animal gcnitalia. Harvard University Press.
  28. Elder, G. H., Jr. (1969) Appearance and education in marriage mobility. American Sociological Review 34:519-33.
  29. Ellis, B. J. (in press) The evolution of sexual attraction: Evaluative mechanisms in women. In: Evolved mechanisms in human behavior and culture, ed. J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides & J. Tooby. Oxford University Press.
  30. Duby, G. (1978) Medieval marriage: Two models from 12th-century France, trans. E. Forster. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  31. Fisher, R. A. (1930) The genetical theory of natural selection. Clarendon Press. [aDMB, CC, MTG]
  32. Flinn, M. (1981) Uterine vs. agnatic kinship variability and associated cousin marriage preferences: An evolutionary biological analysis. In: Natural selection and social behavior: Recent research and new theory, ed. R. D. Alexander & D. W. Tinkle. Chiron Press. [GB, WI] (1988) Mate guarding in a Caribbean village. Ethology and Sociobiology 9:1-28.
  33. Flinn, M. V. & Low, B. (1986) Resource distribution, social competition, and mating patterns in human societies. In: Ecological aspects of evolution: Birds and mammals, ed. D. I. Rubinstein & R. W. Wrangham. Princeton University Press.
  34. Foley, R. (1987) Another unique species: Patterns in human evolutionary ecology. John Wiley. [LRC]
  35. Freedman, D. G. (1979) Human sociobiology. Free Press.
  36. Gardner, E., Gray, D. J. & O'Rahilly, R. O. (1975) Anatomy. W. B. Saunders. [JLL]
  37. Chiselin, M. T. (1969) The triumph of the Darwinian method. University of California Press. [MTG] (1974) The economy of nature and the evolution of sex. University of California Press.
  38. Coodall, J. (1986) The chimpanzees of the Combe. Belknap Press.
  39. Goody, J. (1983) The development of the family and marriage in Europe. Cambridge University Press.
  40. Guttman, L. (1981) Efficacy coefficients for differences among averages. In: Multidimensional data representations: When ir why, ed. I. Borg. Mathesis Press. [AZ] (1988)
  41. Hamilton, W. D. (1964) The evolution of social behavior. Journal of Theoretical Biology 7:1-52.
  42. 1966) The moulding of senescence by natural selection. Journal of Theoretical Biology 12:12-45.
  43. Harding, S. & O'Barr, J. F. (1987) Sex and scientific inquiry. University of Chicago Press.
  44. Harris, R. J. (1975) A primer of multivariate statistics. Academic Press.
  45. Hays, W. L. (1981) Statistics, third edition.
  46. Hill, R. (1945) Campus values in mate selection. Journal of Home Economics 37:554-58.
  47. Hofstede, G. (1980) Culture's consequences: International differences in work- related values. Sage Publications.
  48. Hrdy, S. B. (1981) The woman that never evolved. Harvard University Press.
  49. Hudson, J. W. & Henze, L. F. (1969) Campus values in mate selection: A replication. Journal of Marriage and the Family 31:772-75.
  50. Irons, W. (1983) Human female reproductive strategies. In: Social behavior of female vertebrates, ed. S. K. Wasser. Academic Press. [MD, WI]
  51. Kenrick, D. T. (1987) Gender, genes, and the social environment: A biosocial interactionist perspective. In: Review of personality and social psychology: Sex and gender, vol. 7, ed. P. Shaver & C. Hendrick. Sage. [DTK]
  52. Kenrick, D. T., Sadalla, E. K., Groth, C. & Trost, M. R. (in press) Gender and trait requirements in a mate: An evolutionary bridge between personality and social psychology. Journal of Personality.
  53. Kenrick, D. T. & Trost, M. R. (1988) A reproductive exchange model of heterosexual relationships: Putting proximate economics in ultimate perspective. In: Review of personality and social psychology, vol. 10, ed.
  54. Kinsey, A. C , Pomeroy, W. B. & Martin, C. E. (1948) Sexual behavior in the human male. Saunders.
  55. Kitcher, P. (1985) Vaulting ambition: Sociobiology and the quest for human nature. MIT Press.
  56. Lambert, H. H. (1987) Biology and equality: A perspective on sex differences. In: Ser and scientific inquiry, ed. S. Harding & J. F. O'Barr. University of Chicago Press.
  57. Lee, G. R. (1982) Family structure and interaction: A comparative analysis. University of Minnesota Press.
  58. LeVi-Strauss, C. (1969) The elementary structures of kinship. Revised edition, trans. J. H. Bell, J. R. von Sturmer & R. Needham. Beacon Press. [MD]
  59. Littlefield, C. H. & Rushton, J. P. (1986) When a child dies: Tile sociobiology of bereavement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51:797- 802.
  60. Lumsden, C. J. & Wilson, E. O. (1981) Genes, mind, and culture. Harvard University Press. [RJHR] (1982) Precis of Genes, mind and culture. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:1-37.
  61. Maccoby, E. & Jacklin, C. (1974) The psychology of sex differences. Stanford University Press. [aDMB, LRC, WI]
  62. References/Buss: Sex differences (1982) Evolution and the theory of games. Cambridge University Press.
  63. Mayr, E. (1976) Behavior programs and evolutionary strategies. In: Evolution and the diversity of life: Selected essays, ed. E. Mayr. Harvard University Press. [JT] (1982) The growth of biological thought. Belknap Press. [RHB] (1983) How to carry out the adaptationist program. American Naturalist 121:324-34.
  64. Meyer-Bahlberg, H. F. L. (1984) Psychoneuroendocrine research on sexual ori- entation: Current status and future options. In: Sex differences in the brain: Progress in the brain research, vol. 61, ed. G. J. de Vries, J. P. C. de Bruin, H. B. M. Uylings & M. A. Corner. Elsevier Biomedical. [HN]
  65. Money, J. & Ehrhardt, A. A. (1972) Afan and woman, boy and girl. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  66. Murdock, G. P. (1949) Social structure. Macmillan. [MD] (1967) Ethnographic atlas. Pittsburgh University Press. [aDMB, SME]
  67. Murstein, B. I. (1986) Paths to marriage. Sage Publications.
  68. Nunally, J. (1978) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill. [aDMB, JH]
  69. Nyborg, H. (1979) Sex chromosome abnormalities and cognitive performance. V: Female sex hormone and discontinuous cognitive development. Paper presented at the symposium on Cognitive Studies at the fifth biennial meeting of the International Society for the Study of Behavioural Development, Lund, Sweden. [HN] (1983) Spatial ability in men and women: Review and new theory. In: Advances in human research and therapy, vol. 5 (whole number), Monography Series. Pergamon Press. [HN] (1984) Performance and intelligence in hormonally-different groups. In: Sex differences in the brain: Progress in the brain research, vol. 61, ed. G. J. de Vries, J. P. C. de Bruin, H. B. M. Uylings & M. A. Corner. Elsevier Biomedical Press. [HN] (1986) Sex chromosomes, sex hormones, and developmental disturbances: In search of a model. Paper presented at the 152nd annual national meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Philadelphia. [HN] (1987) Covariant trait development across species, race, and within individuals: Differential K-theory, genes, and hormones? Paper presented at the 3rd meeting of the International Society for the Study of Individual Differences, Toronto, Canada.
  70. Pomiankowski, A. (1987) Sexual selection: The handicap principle does work - sometimes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 231:123- 45.
  71. Purifoy, F. E. & Koopmans, L. H. (1981) Androstenedione, testosterone, and free testosterone concentration in women of various occupations. Social Biology 26(3):179-88.
  72. Richardson, H. (1939) Studies of mental resemblance between husbands and wives and between friends. Psychological Bulletin 36:104-42.
  73. Robinson, J. (1982) Intrasexual competition and mate choice in primates. American Journal of Primatology Suppl. 1:131-44.
  74. Rohde, V., Stahl, F., Goertz, F. & Domer, G. (1978) Neuroendoerine findings in subjects with sexual deviations. In: Hormones and brain development: Developments in endocrinology, vol. 3, ed. G. Domer 6c M. Kawakami. Elsevier/North-Holland Biomedical Press.
  75. Rowe, D. C. & Osgood, D. W. (1984) Heredity and sociological theories of delinquency: A reconsideration. American Sociological Review 49:526- 40.
  76. Rushton, J. P. & Bogaert, A. (1987) Race differences in sexual behavior: Testing an evolutionary hypothesis. Journal of Research in Personality 21:529-51.
  77. Rushton, J. P. & Chan, P. K. F. (in press) Genetic similarity in male friendships. Ethology and Sociobiology. [JPR]
  78. Segalen, M. (1986) Historical anthropology of the family, trans. J. C. Whitehouse & S. Matthews. Cambridge University Press.
  79. Shepard, R. N. (1987) Evolution of a mesh between principles of the minds and regularities of the world. In: The latest on the best: Essays on evolution and optimality, ed. J. Dupre. MIT Press.
  80. Sherwin, B. B., Gelfand, M. M. & Brender, W. (1985) Androgen enhances sexual motivation in females: A prospective, crossover study of sex steroid administration in the surgical menopause. Psychosomatic Medicine 47(4):339-51.
  81. Short, R. (1976) The evolution of human reproduction. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 195:3-24.
  82. Smuts, B. (1987) Sexual competition and mate choice. In: Primate societies, ed. B. Smuts et al. University of Chicago Press.
  83. Soma, H., Takayama, M., Takashi, K., Akaeda, T. & Takoro, K. (1975) Serum gonadotropin levels in Japanese women. Obstetrics and Gynecology 46(3):3U-12.
  84. Spuhler, J. N. (1968) Assortative mating with respect to physical characteristics. Eugenics Quarterly 15:128-40.
  85. Symons, D. (1979) The evolution of human sexuality. Oxford University Press. [aDMB, DS] (1980) Precis of The evolution of human sexuality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3:171-214. [JPR] (1987a) Can Darwin's view of life shed light on human sexuality? In: Approaches and paradigms in human sexuality, ed. J. H. Geer & W. T. O'Donohue. Plenum. [aDMB] (1987b) If we're all Darwinians, what's the fuss about? In: Sociobiology and psychology: Ideas, issues, and applications, ed. C. Crawford, M. Smith & D. Krebs. Erlbaum. [arDMB, DS, JT] (1989) A critique of Darwinian anthropology. Ethology and Sodohiology 9(5). [rDMB, JT, DS]
  86. Taylor, P. A. & Glenn, N. D. (1976) The utility of education and attractiveness for femles' status attainment through marriage. American Sociological Review 41:484-98.
  87. Tellegen, A., Lykken, D. T., Bouchard, T. J., Jr., Wilcox, K., Segal, N. & Rich, S. (1988) Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54:1031-39.
  88. Townsend, J. M. (in press) Mate selection criteria: A pilot study. Ethology and Sociobiology. [rDMB]
  89. Uddenberg, N. (1974) Psychological aspects of sexual inadequacy in women. Journal of Psychosomatic research 18:33-47.
  90. Vining, D. R. (1984) Subfertility among the very intelligent: An examination of the American Mensa. Personality and Individual Differences 5(6):725- 33.
  91. Weismann, A. (1891-92) Essays upon heredity and kindred subjects, 2nd ed., 2 vols. Clarendon Press.
  92. West-Eberhard, M. J. (1983) Sexual selection, social competition and speciation. Quarterly Review of Biology 58:155-83.
  93. It6, Y., Brown, J. L. & Kikkawa, J. Japan Science Society Press.
  94. 1975) Sex and evolution. Princeton University Press.
  95. Williams, J. E. & Best, D. L. (1982) Measuring sex stereotypes: A thirty- nation study. Sage Publications.
  96. Wilson, E. O. (1975) Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Harvard University Press. [CJB] (1978) On human nature. Harvard University Press.
  97. Winer, B. J. (1971) Statistical principles in experimental design (2nd edition). McGraw-Hill.
  98. Wittenburger, J. L. (1981) Animal social behavior. Duxbury Press.
  99. Whyte, M. K. (1978) The status of women in preindustrial societies. Princeton University Press. [MD) BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (1989) 12:1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buss, D. M.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Buss, David M.
ORCID
Buss, David M.
Venue
Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
1989-03
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
1-14
ISSN
  • 0140-525X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1825
DOI
10.1017/s0140525x00023992
OpenAlex
W2157338817
Cited by
4,484
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 115 · 2025: 146 · 2024: 120 · 2023: 170 · 2022: 140 · 2021: 265 · 2020: 281 · 2019: 216 · 2018: 228 · 2017: 159 · 2016: 185 · 2015: 217 · 2014: 177 · 2013: 159 · 2012: 173
FWCI
82.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 7645 d)
Locations
Behavioral and Brain Sciences (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Sundhed og Sygdom, Det Frie Forskningsråd
  • Department of Biology, University of New Mexico
  • Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Keywords
mate preferences, sex differences, evolutionary psychology, parental investment, sexual selection, reproductive strategies, earning capacity, physical attractiveness, chastity, age at marriage, cross-cultural comparison, intrasexual competition, paternity certainty

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