The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evolution and Social Cognition: Contrast Effects as a Function of Sex, Dominance, and Physical Attractiveness
Abstract
Previous research indicates that males, compared with females, evaluate their relationships less favorably after exposure to physically attractive members of the other sex. An evolutionary model predicts a converse effect after exposure to opposite-sex individuals high in dominance, which should lead females to evaluate their current relationships less favorably than males. Women and men rated their current relationships after being exposed to opposite-sex targets varying in both dominance and physical attractiveness. Consistent with earlier research, males exposed to physically attractive, as compared with average, targets rated their current relationships less favorably. Males' relationship evaluations were not directly influenced by the targets' dominance, although the effect of physical attractiveness was significant only for men exposed to women low in dominance. However; females' evaluations of their relationships were unaffected by exposure to physically attractive males but were lower after exposure to targets high in dominance. These data support predictions derived from an evolutionary model and suggest that such models can be used to generate testable hypotheses about ongoing social cognition.
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
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
Cited by
Fredrickson, B. L., Roberts, T.-A., Noll, S. M., Quinn, D. M., & Twenge, J. M. (1998) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.269 · Cited by 1,129
Dynamical evolutionary psychology: Individual decision rules and emergent social norms.
Kenrick, D. T., Li, N. P., & Butner, J. (2003) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.110.1.3 · Cited by 358
Self-citationCan't take my eyes off you: Attentional adhesion to mates and rivals.
Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., Rouby, D. A., & Miller, S. L. (2007) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.3.389 · Cited by 300
Forbidden Fruit: Inattention to Attractive Alternatives Provokes Implicit Relationship Reactance
DeWall, C. N., Maner, J. K., Deckman, T., & Rouby, D. A. (2011) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0021749 · Cited by 41
Metadata
- Authors
- Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Zierk, K. L., & Krones, J. M.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1994-04
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 210-217
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2169410283
- Cited by
- 223
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.07
- 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: Evolution and Social Cognition: Contrast Effects as a Function of Sex, Dominance, and Physical Attractiveness. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0146167294202008
- The paper
- Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Zierk, K. L., & Krones, J. M. (1994). Evolution and Social Cognition: Contrast Effects as a Function of Sex, Dominance, and Physical Attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294202008
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.