The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Major histocompatibility complex genes, symmetry, and body scent attractiveness in men and women
Abstract
Previous research indicates that the scent of developmental stability (low fluctuating asymmetry, FA) is attractive to women who are fertile (at high-conception risk points in their menstrual cycles), but not to other women or men. Prior research also indicates that the scent of dissimilarity in major histocompatibility complex (MHC) genes may play a role in human mate choice. We studied the scent attractiveness to the opposite sex of t-shirts worn for 2 nights' sleep. Our results indicate that the two olfactory systems are independent. We repeated previous results from studies of the scent of symmetry. We repeated previous results from MHC research in part; men, but not women, showed a preference for t-shirts with the scent of MHC dissimilarity. Women's scent ratings of t-shirts were uncorrelated with the wearer's MHC dissimilarity and allele frequency, but positively correlated with the wearer's MHC heterozygosity. Fertile women did not exhibit any MHC trait preferences. Women's preference for the scent of men who were heterozygous for MHC alleles may be stronger in women who are at infertile cycle points. Men preferred the scent of common MHC alleles, which may function to avoid mates with rare alleles that exhibit gestational drive. Men also preferred the scent of women at fertile cycle points. The scent of facially attractive women, but not men, was preferred. Neither FA nor facial attractiveness in either sex correlated with MHC dissimilarity to others, MHC heterozygosity, or MHC allelic rarity.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1979) · Cited by 2,524
The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x0000337x · Cited by 1,819
The evolution of desire: strategies of human mating
(1994) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.32-1010 · Cited by 1,545
Asymmetry, Developmental Stability, and Evolution
Møller, A. P., & Swaddle, J. P. (1997) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198548959.001.0001 · Cited by 1,272
Male, female: The evolution of human sex differences.
Geary, D. C. (1998) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/10370-000 · Cited by 974
MHC-dependent mate preferences in humans
(1995) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0087 · Cited by 953
Menstrual cycle alters face preference
Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., Castles, D. L., Kobayashi, T., Burt, D. M., Murray, L. K., & Minamisawa, R. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/21557 · Cited by 835
The Evolution of Mating Preferences and Major Histocompatibility Complex Genes
Penn, D. J., & Potts, W. K. (1999) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/303166 · Cited by 752
MHC heterozygosity confers a selective advantage against multiple-strain infections
Penn, D. J., Damjanovich, K., & Potts, W. K. (2002) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.162006499 · Cited by 668
Human facial beauty: Averageness, symmetry, and parasite resistance
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1993) · Human Nature · doi:10.1007/bf02692201 · Cited by 611
Self-citation
Cited by
The Evolutionary Psychology of Facial Beauty
Rhodes, G. (2006) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208 · Cited by 1,750
The Paranoid Optimist: An Integrative Evolutionary Model of Cognitive Biases
Haselton, M. G., & Nettle, D. (2006) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1001_3 · Cited by 838
Online Dating: A Critical Analysis From the Perspective of Psychological Science
Finkel, E. J., Eastwick, P. W., Karney, B. R., Reis, H. T., & Sprecher, S. (2012) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612436522 · Cited by 812
Disgust: evolved function and structure
Tybur, J. M., Lieberman, D., Kurzban, R., & DeScioli, P. (2013) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0030778 · Cited by 810
An initial evaluation of the functions of human olfaction
Stevenson, R. J. (2010) · Chemical Senses · doi:10.1093/chemse/bjp083 · Cited by 689
Metadata
- Authors
- Thornhill, R.
- Venue
- Behavioral Ecology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-09-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 668-678
- ISSN
- 1045-2249 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-7279
- OpenAlex
- W2004327627
- Cited by
- 368
- References
- 64
- FWCI
- 18.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Major histocompatibility complex genes, symmetry, and body scent attractiveness in men and women. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/beheco/arg043
- The paper
- Thornhill, R. (2003). Major histocompatibility complex genes, symmetry, and body scent attractiveness in men and women. Behavioral Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arg043
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.