The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 34 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
What Leads to Romantic Attraction: Similarity, Reciprocity, Security, or Beauty? Evidence From a Speed‐Dating Study
Abstract
ABSTRACT Years of attraction research have established several “principles” of attraction with robust evidence. However, a major limitation of previous attraction studies is that they have almost exclusively relied on well‐controlled experiments, which are often criticized for lacking ecological validity. The current research was designed to examine initial attraction in a real‐life setting—speed‐dating. Social Relations Model analyses demonstrated that initial attraction was a function of the actor, the partner, and the unique dyadic relationship between these two. Meta‐analyses showed intriguing sex differences and similarities. Self characteristics better predicted women's attraction than they did for men, whereas partner characteristics predicted men's attraction far better than they did for women. The strongest predictor of attraction for both sexes was partners' physical attractiveness. Finally, there was some support for the reciprocity principle but no evidence for the similarity principle.
Overview
CoChat Summary
TL;DR
In a speed-dating study, initial romantic attraction was shaped by actor, partner, and unique dyadic effects, with partner physical attractiveness the strongest predictor for both sexes. Similarity showed no evidence, while reciprocity appeared mainly after participants learned their partners’ reactions.
Key findings
- Social Relations Model variance partitioning showed attraction was substantially explained by actor, partner, and relationship effects: for men, averages were 34% actor, 21% partner, and 46% relationship; for women, 35% actor, 25% partner, and 39% relationship.
- Partner physical attractiveness was the strongest and most consistent predictor for both sexes (men r = .80, women r = .88, both p < .01); no other partner characteristic replicated across gender.
- Self characteristics predicted women’s attraction better than men’s (7 of 22 significant for women vs. 3 of 22 for men), whereas partner characteristics predicted men’s attraction far better than women’s (12 of 22 significant for men vs. 2 of 22 for women).
- Similarity showed no support: none of the 44 correlations between couple dissimilarity and attraction reached significance, with a maximum magnitude of .13. At-event dyadic reciprocity was weak and nonsignificant (r = .18), but postevent dyadic reciprocity was significant (r = .45, p < .01).
Methods
- One hundred eight heterosexual college students (54 men, 54 women; average age 19.5 years) participated in six speed-dating events; each date lasted 5 minutes, with pre-event, at-event, and postevent assessments.
- Measures included demographics, physical attractiveness rated by eight research team members (interrater agreement .86), political attitudes, values, interests, Big Five personality, affectivity, self-esteem, and adult attachment; attraction was measured with three items after each date.
- Data were analyzed with Kenny’s Social Relations Model using BLOCKO to partition actor, partner, and relationship variance, followed by meta-analyses across the six groups to pool correlations and test sex differences.
Limitations
- The paper states that participants were college students at a fairly large public university in the southeast, so findings may differ from non-college adults in commercial speed-dating services who are seriously looking for life partners.
- The paper also states that speed-dating is not the only or most common situation in which people first meet future partners.
- Evident in the text: the sample was modest (108 participants across six groups), the design was correlational rather than experimental, attraction was self-reported, and the dyadic relationship effect was not fully explained by the similarity and reciprocity variables tested.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
40 Own result · 33 Own interpretation · 10 Own method · 8 Not checked yet · 6 Sources not found · 6 No full text of the sources · 2 Check pending · 2 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All three components contributed to a substantial amount of variance in romantic attraction.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“there was some support for the reciprocity principle”
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For women, seven characteristics showed a significant correlation with attraction: age, weight, art and social activities, extroversion, openness, and positive affect.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Meta-analyses of sex differences show that five characteristics had statistically significant sex differences: age, fun, habitual activity, conservatism, and positive affect.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The average effect size of sex difference was negligent ( o .05).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
43 more claims
Create a free account to see all 107 claims and to verify the 4 references still open.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 44
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
- Probably not a substantial claim. 23
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“| Group 6 | .24 | .32 | .46 | .26 | .25 | .39 |”
Reported 1 · recomputed 0.9
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Personal Values
“One factor was labeled ''Extrinsic Values'' and had 10 values, including power, wealth, social recognition, and such.”
§ Political attitudes
“| Extrinsic value | .71 (9) | 3.80 | .49 | 3.88 | .51 |”
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).
Lachenbruch, P. A., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290095 · Cited by 37,420
Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 · Cited by 32,433
Society and the Adolescent Self-Image
Rosenberg, M. (1965) · doi:10.1515/9781400876136 · Cited by 30,126
The psychology of interpersonal relations
Heider, F. (1958) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089062 · Cited by 17,189
The psychology of interpersonal relations.
Heider, F. (1958) · doi:10.1037/10628-000 · Cited by 13,457
Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511 · Cited by 6,247 · cited 2×
“This is a less widely recognized principle because it was developed after attachment theories were used as a framework to study romantic relationships (see Hazan & Shaver, 1987).”
BackgroundMethodAttachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model.
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.61.2.226 · Cited by 6,009
(2004) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.41-3182 · Cited by 4,739
Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures
Buss, D. M. (1989) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00023992 · Cited by 4,484
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Bowlby J., 1973, Attachment and loss: Vol.II. Separation: Anxiety and anger
- John O. P., 1999, Handbook of personality, 102
- Kenny D. A., 1994, Interpersonal perceptions
- Kenny D. A., 2006, Dyadic data analysis
Cited by
Political homophily in social relationships: evidence from online dating behavior
Huber, G. A., & Malhotra, N. (2017) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1086/687533 · Cited by 664
The predictive validity of ideal partner preferences: A review and meta-analysis.
Eastwick, P. W., Luchies, L. B., Finkel, E. J., & Hunt, L. L. (2013) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0032432 · Cited by 359
The Home as a Political Fortress: Family Agreement in an Era of Polarization
Iyengar, S., Konitzer, T., & Tedin, K. L. (2018) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1086/698929 · Cited by 262
Asendorpf, J. B., Penke, L., & Back, M. D. (2010) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.768 · Cited by 249
Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection.
Li, N. P., Yong, J. C., Tov, W., Sng, O., Fletcher, G. J. O., Valentine, K. A., Jiang, Y. F., & Balliet, D. P. (2013) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0033777 · Cited by 229
Tidwell, N., Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2012) · Personal Relationships · doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2012.01405.x · Cited by 227
Women and Suicidal Behavior: Paradigm-Shift Lessons from China
Canetto, S. S., & Chen, J. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108561716.042 · Cited by 194
Is Romantic Desire Predictable? Machine Learning Applied to Initial Romantic Attraction
Joel, S., Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2017) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797617714580 · Cited by 147
Eastwick, P. W., Finkel, E. J., & Eagly, A. H. (2011) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0024062 · Cited by 131
Beauty and Status: The Illusion of Exchange in Partner Selection?
McClintock, E. A. (2014) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122414536391 · Cited by 106
Back, M. D., Penke, L., Schmukle, S. C., Sachse, K. A., Borkenau, P., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2010) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.806 · Cited by 104
How Alluring Are Dark Personalities? the Dark Triad and Attractiveness in Speed Dating
Jauk, E., Neubauer, A. C., Mairunteregger, T., Pemp, S., Sieber, K. P., & Rauthmann, J. F. (2016) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2040 · Cited by 99
Couple similarity on stimulus characteristics and marital satisfaction
George, D., Luo, S., Webb, J., Pugh, J., Martinez, A., & Foulston, J. (2015) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.06.005 · Cited by 97
Self-citationFletcher, G. J. O., Kerr, P. S. G., Li, N. P., & Valentine, K. A. (2014) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167213519481 · Cited by 94
Is Love (Color) Blind? The Economy of Race among Gay and Straight Daters
Lundquist, J. H., & Lin, K.-H. (2015) · Social Forces · doi:10.1093/sf/sov008 · Cited by 82
Valentine, K. A., Li, N. P., Meltzer, A. L., & Tsai, M. (2019) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167219855048 · Cited by 81
Stokoe, E. H. (2010) · Research on Language and Social Interaction · doi:10.1080/08351813.2010.497988 · Cited by 76
“He Loves Me, He Loves Me Not . . . ”: Uncertainty Can Increase Romantic Attraction
Whitchurch, E. R., Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2011) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797610393745 · Cited by 71
Happy Wife, Happy Life: Food Choices in Romantic Relationships
Hasford, J., Kidwell, B., & Lopez‐Kidwell, V. (2017) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1093/jcr/ucx093 · Cited by 69
Antheunis, M. L., Schouten, A. P., & Walther, J. B. (2019) · Media Psychology · doi:10.1080/15213269.2019.1648217 · Cited by 69
Women’s physical attractiveness and short-term mating strategies
Perilloux, C., Cloud, J. M., & Buss, D. M. (2012) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.028 · Cited by 66
Hatemi, P., & McDermott, R. (2016) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-103113-034929 · Cited by 64
We’re Not That Choosy: Emerging Evidence of a Progression Bias in Romantic Relationships
Joel, S., & MacDonald, G. (2021) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/10888683211025860 · Cited by 59
Activation of the Behavioral Immune System: Putting the Brakes on Affiliation
Sawada, N., Auger, É., & Lydon, J. E. (2017) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167217736046 · Cited by 58
Henningsen, D. D., & Henningsen, M. L. M. (2010) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01391.x · Cited by 54
Towards a Comprehensive Theory of Love: The Quadruple Theory
Tobore, T. O. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00862 · Cited by 53
Body image and the role of romantic relationships
Laus, M. F., Almeida, S. S., & Klos, L. A. (2018) · Cogent Psychology · doi:10.1080/23311908.2018.1496986 · Cited by 49
Are “Equals” Happier Than “Less Equals”? A Couple Analysis of Similarity and Well‐being
Keizer, R., & Komter, A. E. (2015) · Journal of Marriage and the Family · doi:10.1111/jomf.12194 · Cited by 46
Personality and Social Relationships: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go
Back, M. D., Branje, S., Eastwick, P. W., Human, L. J., Penke, L., Sadikaj, G., Slatcher, R. B., Thielmann, I., van Zalk, M. H. W., & Wrzus, C. (2023) · Personality Science · doi:10.5964/ps.7505 · Cited by 44
Stulp, G., Buunk, A. P., Kurzban, R., & Verhulst, S. (2013) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.03.038 · Cited by 43
How gender role stereotypes affect attraction in an online dating scenario
Chappetta, K. C., & Barth, J. M. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.006 · Cited by 40
Spielmann, S. S., Maxwell, J. A., MacDonald, G., Peragine, D. E., & Impett, E. A. (2019) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/0265407519856701 · Cited by 40
A Longitudinal Analysis of Romantic Relationship Formation: The Effect of Prosocial Behavior
Stavrova, O., & Ehlebracht, D. (2015) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550614568867 · Cited by 40
Eastwick, P. W., Joel, S., Carswell, K. L., Molden, D. C., Finkel, E. J., & Blozis, S. A. (2022) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1177/08902070221085877 · Cited by 37
Möri, M., & Fahr, A. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1297687 · Cited by 33
An exchange orientation results in an instrumental approach in intimate relationships
Wang, X., Chen, H., Chen, Z., & Luo, S. (2022) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjso.12530 · Cited by 33
Self-citationAcquaintanceships (weak ties): Their role in people's web of relationships and their formation
Sprecher, S. (2022) · Personal Relationships · doi:10.1111/pere.12430 · Cited by 32
Zytko, D., Regalado, V., Furlo, N., Grandhi, S. A., & Jones, Q. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3415208 · Cited by 31
Sexual Experiences and Attachment Styles in Online and Offline Dating Contexts
Coffey, J. K., Bond, D. K., Stern, J. A., & Why, N. V. (2022) · International Journal of Sexual Health · doi:10.1080/19317611.2022.2110349 · Cited by 31
A tutorial on analyzing data from speed‐dating studies with heterosexual dyads
Ackerman, R. A., Kashy, D. A., & Corretti, C. A. (2014) · Personal Relationships · doi:10.1111/pere.12065 · Cited by 30
Agthe, M., Strobel, M., Spörrle, M., Pfundmair, M., & Maner, J. K. (2016) · Evolutionary Psychology · doi:10.1177/1474704916653968 · Cited by 29
O’Sullivan, L. F., & Ronis, S. T. (2013) · Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · doi:10.1037/a0031683 · Cited by 29
Rodrigues, D. L., Lopes, D., Alexopoulos, T., & Goldenberg, L. (2017) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.009 · Cited by 27
Why do partners often prefer the same political parties? Evidence from couples in Germany
Hudde, A., & Grunow, D. (2024) · Social Forces · doi:10.1093/sf/soae133 · Cited by 26
Li, N. P., Yong, J. C., Tsai, M., Lai, M. H. C., Lim, A. J. Y., & Ackerman, J. M. (2020) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12568 · Cited by 26
Consistency and inconsistency among romantic partners over time.
Eastwick, P. W., Harden, K. P., Shukusky, J. A., Morgan, T. A., & Joel, S. (2017) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspi0000087 · Cited by 26
When does playing hard to get increase romantic attraction?
Dai, X., Dong, P., & Jia, J. S. (2013) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/a0032989 · Cited by 26
Is she the one? Personality judgments from online personal advertisements
Weidman, A. C., Cheng, J. T., CHISHOLM, C., & Tracy, J. L. (2015) · Personal Relationships · doi:10.1111/pere.12097 · Cited by 25
The Cambridge Handbook of the International Psychology of Women
Cheung, F. M., & Halpern, D. F. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108561716 · Cited by 25
The Label of Looks: Physical Attractiveness, Stigma, and Deviant Behavior
Mowen, T. J., & Heitkamp, A. (2023) · Sociological Focus · doi:10.1080/00380237.2023.2239733 · Cited by 24
Olderbak, S. G., Malter, F., Wolf, P. S. A., Jones, D. N., & Figueredo, A. J. (2017) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2087 · Cited by 24
Chopik, W. J., & Johnson, D. J. (2021) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104076 · Cited by 24
Karraker, A., Sicinski, K., & Moynihan, D. P. (2015) · The Journals of Gerontology Series B · doi:10.1093/geronb/gbv112 · Cited by 22
Preferences for Sexually Dimorphic Body Characteristics Revealed in a Large Sample of Speed Daters
Sidari, M. J., Lee, A. J., Murphy, S. C., Sherlock, J. M., Dixson, B. J. W., & Zietsch, B. P. (2020) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550619882925 · Cited by 22
Attitude similarity and interpersonal liking: A dominance of positive over negative attitudes
Zorn, T. J., Mata, A., & Alves, H. (2022) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104281 · Cited by 22
Attraction to attachment insecurity: Flattery, appearance, and status's role in mate preferences
Brumbaugh, C. C., Baren, A., & Agishtein, P. (2014) · Personal Relationships · doi:10.1111/pere.12032 · Cited by 22
Bevan, J. L., Galvan, J., Villasenor, J., & Henkin, J. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.050 · Cited by 21
McClintock, E. A. (2011) · Biodemography and Social Biology · doi:10.1080/19485565.2011.615172 · Cited by 21
Roth, T. S., Samara, I., & Kret, M. E. (2021) · Evolution and Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2021.04.004 · Cited by 20
Humberg, S., Gerlach, T. M., Franke-Prasse, T., Geukes, K., & Back, M. D. (2023) · Personality Science · doi:10.5964/ps.7551 · Cited by 19
Interpersonal neural synchronization could predict the outcome of mate choice
Yuan, D., Zhang, R., Liu, J., Feng, D., Hu, Y., Li, X., Wang, Y., & Zhou, X. (2021) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2021.108112 · Cited by 19
Schröder–Abé, M., Rentzsch, K., Asendorpf, J. B., & Penke, L. (2015) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2029 · Cited by 18
Cross-Cultural Comparison of Sensory Preferences in Romantic Attraction
Karandashev, V. N., Zarubko, E., Artemeva, V., Evans, M., Morgan, K. A. D., Neto, F. F. M., Feybesse, C., Surmanidze, L., & Purvis, J. (2019) · Sexuality & Culture · doi:10.1007/s12119-019-09628-0 · Cited by 18
Nyúl, B., Ksenofontov, I., Fleischmann, A., & Kahalon, R. (2024) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104680 · Cited by 17
Horgan, T. G., Broadbent, J., McKibbin, W. F., & Duehring, A. J. (2015) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/0265407515590279 · Cited by 17
Sex and Gender as Factors in in Romantic Partnerships and Best Friendships
Machin, A., & Dunbar, R. (2013) · Journal of Relationships Research · doi:10.1017/jrr.2013.8 · Cited by 17
Hoffmann, A., Schiestl, S., Sinske, P., Gondan, M., Sachse, P., & Maran, T. K. (2024) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10508-023-02806-0 · Cited by 16
Is It Bad to Prefer Attractive Partners?
D’Alessandro, W. (2022) · Journal of the American Philosophical Association · doi:10.1017/apa.2022.3 · Cited by 14
Wu, K. L., Chen, C., Moyzis, R. K., Greenberger, E., & Yu, Z. (2016) · Human Nature · doi:10.1007/s12110-016-9257-8 · Cited by 14
Detectability and desirability of fear of being single in online dating profiles
Spielmann, S. S., & Gahman, K. P. (2020) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12597 · Cited by 13
Selterman, D. F., Chagnon, E., & Mackinnon, S. P. (2015) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/2158244015605160 · Cited by 13
Ma, S., & Koike, M. (2025) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2481211 · Cited by 12
Driebe, J. C., Stern, J., Penke, L., & Gerlach, T. M. (2023) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1177/08902070231213797 · Cited by 12
Sex Differences in Early Life: A Cross-Cultural Perspective
Wong, W. I., & VanderLaan, D. P. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108561716.009 · Cited by 12
Yuan, G., & Liu, G. (2021) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.25681 · Cited by 12
Roles of P300 and Late Positive Potential in Initial Romantic Attraction
Yuan, G., Liu, G., & Wei, D. (2021) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2021.718847 · Cited by 12
FURTHER EXPLORING THE RELATION BETWEEN UNCERTAINTY AND ATTRACTION
Montoya, R. M., Faiella, C. M., Lynch, B. P., THOMAS, S., & Bishop, H. K. D. (2015) · PSYCHOLOGIA · doi:10.2117/psysoc.2015.84 · Cited by 12
Janz, P., Pepping, C. A., & Halford, W. K. (2015) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.025 · Cited by 11
O’Sullivan, L. F., & Vannier, S. A. (2013) · Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · doi:10.1037/a0031826 · Cited by 11
Attraction during the service encounter: examining the other side of the coin
Kuppelwieser, V. G., & Touzani, M. (2016) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-06-2015-0211 · Cited by 11
Personality and Romantic Attraction
Gerlach, T. M., & Reinhard, S. K. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_717-1 · Cited by 11
The Not So Subtle and Status Quo Maintaining Nature of Everyday Sexism
Vescio, T. K., & Kosakowska‐Berezecka, N. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108561716.019 · Cited by 10
Tissera, H., & Lydon, J. E. (2022) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12702 · Cited by 9
The Impact of Gender and Culture in Consumer Behavior
Ng, S., Bharti, M., & Faust, N. T. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108561716.021 · Cited by 9
Attachment, culture and initial romantic attraction: A speed-dating study
Pepping, C. A., Taylor, R., Koh, K., & Halford, W. K. (2016) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.11.056 · Cited by 9
Norwegian Men and Women Value Similar Mate Traits in Short-Term Relationships
Mehmetoglu, M., & Määttänen, I. (2020) · Evolutionary Psychology · doi:10.1177/1474704920979623 · Cited by 9
Individual attractiveness preferences differentially modulate immediate and voluntary attention
Roth, T. S., Samara, I., Perea‐García, J. O., & Kret, M. E. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-29240-5 · Cited by 9
Simons, L. G., Sutton, T. E., Landor, A. M., Barr, A. B., Bryant, C. M., & Granberg, E. M. (2019) · Youth & Society · doi:10.1177/0044118x19828097 · Cited by 9
Nice guys and gals can finish first: Personality and speed-dating success among Asian Americans
Wu, K. L., Chen, C., & Greenberger, E. (2018) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/0265407518790103 · Cited by 8
The role of humour production and humour receptivity in perceived romantic interest
Tornquist, M., & Chiappe, D. L. (2019) · Psychology and Sexuality · doi:10.1080/19419899.2019.1668464 · Cited by 8
Cultural Influences on Body Image and Body Esteem
Sotiriou, E. G., & Awad, G. H. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108561716.018 · Cited by 8
Yong, J. C., Tan, Y. W., Li, N. P., & Meltzer, A. L. (2021) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12699 · Cited by 7
Choy, B. K. C., Li, N. P., & Tan, K. (2022) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12734 · Cited by 7
Quiros, J. V., Kapcak, Ö., Hung, H., & Cabrera-Quirós, L. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing · doi:10.1109/taffc.2021.3138349 · Cited by 7
Chappetta, K. C., & Barth, J. M. (2022) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/02654075221090494 · Cited by 7
Mozafari, A. R., & Xu, X. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108561716.029 · Cited by 7
French, J. E., Bolton, L. J., & Meltzer, A. L. (2024) · Personal Relationships · doi:10.1111/pere.12548 · Cited by 6
Marici, M. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1646458 · Cited by 6
Integrating Personality/Character Neuroscience with Network Analysis
Bolt, T., Hampton, R. S., Furr, R. M., Fleeson, W., Laurienti, P. J., & Dagenbach, D. (2016) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-800935-2.00003-8 · Cited by 6
Initial validation of a self-report measure of perceptions of interpersonal attraction
Riggio, H. R., Lui, P. P., Garcia, A. L., Matthies, B. K., Culbert, G., & Bailey, J. M. (2014) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.10.030 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Luo, S., & Zhang, G.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina Wilmington (US)
- University of Notre Dame (US)
- Corresponding author
- Luo, Shanhong
- Venue
- Journal of Personality
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-07
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 933-964
- ISSN
- 0022-3506 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6494
- OpenAlex
- W1994100281
- Cited by
- 246
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 4.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Keywords
- romantic attraction, speed dating, similarity laws, reciprocity, physical attractiveness, social security, sex differences, partner characteristics, dyads, social relations model
- MeSH terms
- Beauty, Courtship, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sex Factors, Social Desirability, Students, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-12, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-12 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
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.
