CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 503Evolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorAnimal Behavior and ReproductionMarriage and Sexual Relationships

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mate Preferences and Their Behavioral Manifestations

Open access
Buss, David M., Schmitt, David P.·2019·Annual Review of Psychology
DOI 10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103408
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Evolved mate preferences comprise a central causal process in Darwin's theory of sexual selection. Their powerful influences have been documented in all sexually reproducing species, including in sexual strategies in humans. This article reviews the science of human mate preferences and their myriad behavioral manifestations. We discuss sex differences and sex similarities in human sexual psychology, which vary according to short-term and long-term mating contexts. We review context-specific shifts in mating strategy depending on individual, social, and ecological qualities such as mate value, life history strategy, sex ratio, gender economic inequality, and cultural norms. We review the empirical evidence for the impact of mate preferences on actual mating decisions. Mate preferences also dramatically influence tactics of mate attraction, tactics of mate retention, patterns of deception, causes of sexual regret, attraction to cues to sexual exploitability, attraction to cues to fertility, attraction to cues to resources and protection, derogation of competitors, causes of breakups, and patterns of remarriage. We conclude by articulating unresolved issues and offer a future agenda for the science of human mating, including how humans invent novel cultural technologies to better implement ancient sexual strategies and how cultural evolution may be dramatically influencing our evolved mating psychology.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103408

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

  • Evolutionary psychology theory predicts that a heterosexual individual will have an accurate idea of what the opposite gender considers attractive, to allow them to judge their own relative attractiveness with respect to their peer group, and match this with the attractiveness of a potential partner.

    “Evolutionary psychology theory predicts that a heterosexual individual will have an accurate idea of what the opposite gender considers attractive, to allow them to judge their own relative attractiveness with respect to their peer group, and match this with the attractiveness of a potential partner (Buss and Schmitt, 2019).”

    From The degree to which the cultural ideal is internalized predicts judgments of male and female physical attractiveness (2022) · cites this paper as Buss and Schmitt, 2019

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Regarding partner preferences, men and women tend to value somewhat different capacities in their partners (rs = .48-.84).

    “Regarding partner preferences, men and women tend to value somewhat different capacities in their partners (rs = .48–.84; Buss & Schmitt, 2019; Conroy-Beam et al., 2015; Zentner & Mitura, 2012).”

    From A Systematic Review and New Analyses of the Gender-Equality Paradox (2025) · cites this paper as Buss & Schmitt, 2019

    The Women’s Long-Term Mating Strategy section says women prioritize economic resources, ambition, and status more than men; the Men’s Long-Term Mating Strategy section describes men’s priority for youth and beauty. These passages support a difference in partner preferences, but our copy does not report the stated correlation range of rs = .48–.84. No page numbers were available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 154

  1. Alexander RD, 1979, Evolutionary Biology and Human Social Behaviour: An Anthropological Perspective, 436
  2. 10.1086/504167 · DOI
  3. Andersson MB, 1994, Sexual Selection, 10.1515/9780691207278 · DOI
  4. Ardener E, 1960, Plantation and Village in the Cameroons: Some Economic and Social Studies
  5. Arnqvist G, 2013, Sexual Conflict
  6. Arslan RC, Schilling KM, Gerlach TM, Penke L. 2017. Using 26 thousand diary entries to show ovulatory changes in sexual desire and behaviour. PsyArXiv. http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JP2YM · DOI
  7. 10.1002/per.768 · DOI
  8. 10.1037/0022-3514.91.3.513 · DOI
  9. 10.1007/s12115-012-9596-y · DOI
  10. 10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.054 · DOI
  11. Berscheid E, 1974, Psychol, 7, 157
  12. 10.1016/0162-3095(92)90008-R · DOI
  13. 10.1037/h0099356 · DOI
  14. Borgerhoff Mulder M, 1988, Human Reproductive Behaviour: A Darwinian Perspective, 65
  15. Borgerhoff Mulder MB, 1990, Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 27, 255
  16. 10.1556/JEP.2007.1002 · DOI
  17. 10.1177/147470490900700310 · DOI
  18. 10.2307/3773308 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/j.paid.2011.08.018 · DOI
  20. Buss DM, 1987, Sociobiology and Psychology: Ideas, Issues, and Applications, 335
  21. 10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.616 · DOI
  22. Buss DM, 1988, The Psychology of Love, 100
  23. 10.1037/0022-3514.56.5.735 · DOI
  24. 10.1017/S0140525X00071107 · DOI
  25. 10.1037/0003-066X.50.3.164 · DOI
  26. 10.4324/9781315663319 · DOI
  27. 10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_1863-1 · DOI
  28. 10.1017/9781108658225.004 · DOI
  29. 10.1177/0022022190211001 · DOI
  30. 10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.559 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 10.1016/j.paid.2016.07.022 · DOI
  32. 10.1016/j.tics.2005.09.006 · DOI
  33. 10.1007/s11199-011-9987-3 · DOI
  34. 10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.346 · DOI
  35. 10.1177/147470490800600116 · DOI
  36. 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00491.x · DOI
  37. 10.1037/h0025248 · DOI
  38. 10.1016/j.paid.2010.12.016 · DOI
  39. 10.1016/j.paid.2006.05.006 · DOI
  40. 10.1146/annurev.ps.39.020188.003141 · DOI
  41. 10.1300/J056v02n01_04 · DOI
  42. Conroy-Beam D, Buss DM. 2018. Why is age so important in human mating? Evolved age preferences and their influence on multiple mating behaviors. Evol. Behav. Sci. In press · DOI
  43. Courtiol A, 2010, Evolution, 64, 2189
  44. 10.1007/s12110-007-9018-9 · DOI
  45. Darwin C, 1859, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection
  46. 10.1037/12293-000 · DOI
  47. 10.1017/S0140525X00032325 · DOI
  48. 10.1037/0003-066X.54.6.408 · DOI · Paper page
  49. Eagly AH, 2004, The Psychology of Gender, AH Eagly, AE Beal, RJ Sternberg, 269
  50. 10.1037/a0032432 · DOI
  51. 10.1016/bs.aesp.2016.10.004 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.paid.2015.08.041 · DOI
  53. 10.1098/rsbl.2007.0324 · DOI
  54. Frank RH, 1988, Passions Within Reason: The Strategic Role of the Emotions
  55. Frayser S, 1985, Varieties of Sexual Experience: An Anthropological Perspective
  56. Freud S, 1964, The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud
  57. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.07.001 · DOI
  58. 10.1007/s10508-012-0019-3 · DOI · Paper page
  59. Gangestad SW, 1993, Evol. Hum. Behav., 14, 89
  60. 10.1207/s15327965pli1702_1 · DOI
  61. 10.1098/rspb.2007.1425 · DOI
  62. 10.1098/rspb.2005.3112 · DOI
  63. 10.1177/1474704916631614 · DOI
  64. 10.1177/147470490800600301 · DOI
  65. 10.1007/s12110-002-1005-6 · DOI
  66. 10.1037/a0035438 · DOI
  67. 10.1080/00224499209551654 · DOI · Paper page
  68. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.12.004 · DOI
  69. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.11.003 · DOI
  70. 10.1017/S0140525X00067704 · DOI
  71. 10.1002/ajpa.22394 · DOI
  72. Gray PB, Garcia JR, Gesselman AN. 2018. Age-related patterns in sexual behaviors and attitudes among single US adults: an evolutionary approach. Evol. Behav. Sci. In press · DOI
  73. 10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00151-8 · DOI
  74. Guttentag M, 1983, Too Many Women? The Sex Ratio Question
  75. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.07.004 · DOI
  76. 10.1177/0146167204271303 · DOI
  77. 10.1098/rstb.2011.0290 · DOI
  78. 10.4324/9781351329248 · DOI
  79. 10.1007/s11129-010-9088-6 · DOI
  80. 10.1016/0162-3095(79)90004-9 · DOI
  81. 10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00149-6 · DOI
  82. Jankowiak W, 1997, Romantic Passion: A Universal Experience?
  83. 10.1016/j.paid.2011.12.015 · DOI
  84. 10.1016/j.paid.2012.03.007 · DOI
  85. 10.1177/0956797618760197 · DOI
  86. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.03.007 · DOI
  87. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.10.001 · DOI
  88. 10.1177/1474704916682903 · DOI
  89. 10.1016/j.paid.2018.01.044 · DOI
  90. 10.1037/0022-3514.64.6.951 · DOI
  91. 10.1017/S0140525X00067595 · DOI
  92. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1990.tb00909.x · DOI · Paper page
  93. 10.1177/0265407505050940 · DOI
  94. 10.1016/0162-3095(94)00012-V · DOI
  95. 10.1016/j.paid.2011.09.017 · DOI
  96. Li NP, 2007, Acta Psychol. Sin., 39, 528
  97. 10.1037/ebs0000036 · DOI
  98. 10.1007/s10508-007-9242-8 · DOI
  99. 10.1098/rspb.2002.1984 · DOI
  100. Low BS, 1991, Evol. Hum. Behav., 12, 411
  101. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.06.008 · DOI
  102. 10.1177/1069397103254008 · DOI
  103. 10.1007/s12110-004-1014-8 · DOI
  104. 10.1007/s10508-015-0658-2 · DOI
  105. 10.1016/S1090-5138(98)00045-2 · DOI
  106. Miller G, 2000, Novartis Found. Symp., 233, 260, 10.1002/0470870850.ch16 · DOI
  107. 10.1177/1069397105277237 · DOI
  108. 10.1177/0146167215612744 · DOI
  109. 10.1016/j.paid.2017.01.054 · DOI
  110. 10.1086/591690 · DOI
  111. O'Connor M, 2008, J. Law Med., 16, 161
  112. 10.1016/S1090-5138(98)00038-5 · DOI
  113. 10.1016/S1090-5138(01)00092-7 · DOI
  114. 10.1007/BF02692189 · DOI
  115. 10.1017/S0140525X00029939 · DOI
  116. 10.1371/journal.pone.0000606 · DOI
  117. 10.2224/sbp.1996.24.2.143 · DOI
  118. 10.1177/1069397112471806 · DOI
  119. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.07.011 · DOI
  120. 10.1177/01461672982412004 · DOI
  121. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.014 · DOI
  122. 10.1016/0162-3095(92)90012-S · DOI
  123. 10.1098/rsbl.2011.0478 · DOI
  124. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.12.005 · DOI
  125. 10.1098/rspb.1999.0866 · DOI
  126. 10.1017/S0140525X05000051 · DOI · Paper page
  127. 10.1177/147470491201000406 · DOI
  128. 10.1037/a0036225 · DOI
  129. Schmitt DP, 2014, The Evolution of Sexuality, 221
  130. Schmitt DP, 2017, Psychol. Top., 26, 89
  131. 10.1037/0022-3514.70.6.1185 · DOI
  132. 10.1002/ijop.12265 · DOI
  133. 10.1177/147470490800600204 · DOI
  134. 10.1007/s12110-009-9067-3 · DOI
  135. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00264.x · DOI
  136. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.06.007 · DOI
  137. 10.1007/s12110-012-9144-x · DOI
  138. 10.1177/0956797617741719 · DOI · Paper page
  139. Sugiyama LS, 2005, The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, 292
  140. Symons D, 1979, The Evolution of Human Sexuality
  141. Tadinac M, 2007, Stud. Psychol., 49, 251
  142. 10.1073/pnas.0705290104 · DOI
  143. 10.1177/147470490300100108 · DOI
  144. 10.1177/0956797613511823 · DOI
  145. 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2007.01.002 · DOI
  146. 10.1111/j.1439-0310.1990.tb00791.x · DOI
  147. 10.1098/rspb.2010.2145 · DOI
  148. 10.2466/pr0.103.3.799-811 · DOI
  149. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.12.008 · DOI
  150. Waynforth D, 1995, Behaviour, 132, 755, 10.1163/156853995X00135 · DOI
  151. Williams GC, 1975, Sex and Evolution
  152. Winch R, 1958, Mate Selection
  153. 10.1007/s12110-012-9143-y · DOI
  154. 10.1080/10463283.2015.1111599 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • Brunel University of London (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Annual Review of Psychology
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
2019-01-04
Volume
70
Issue
1
Pages
77-110
ISSN
  • 0066-4308 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-2085
DOI
10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103408
OpenAlex
W2890839560
Cited by
503
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 75 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 77 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 29
FWCI
6.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annual Review of Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) (Brunel University London) (submittedVersion)
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 › Marriage and Sexual Relationships
Keywords
mate preferences, human mating strategies, sexual selection, mate value, life history strategies, sex ratio, cultural norms, mate retention, sexual deception, sexual regret, fertility cues, breakup, remarriage
MeSH terms
Choice Behavior, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Sexual Behavior, Sex Characteristics

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