The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Beauty, Dominance, and the Mating Game: Contrast Effects in Self-Assessment Reflect Gender Differences in Mate Selection
Abstract
An experimental study examined the effects of exposure to physically attractive and dominant same-sex individuals on self-assessments. Consistent with prior findings on mate selection, it was predicted that women’s self-assessments of their mate value would be adversely affected by exposure to highly physically attractive women and would be relatively unaffected by exposure to socially dominant women. Conversely, men’s self-assessments of their mate value were expected to be more affected by the social dominance than by the physical attractiveness of the men to whom they were exposed. Findings for self-assessed judgments of desirability as a marriage partner were in line with hypotheses. Results fit with earlier findings suggesting that such effects may be caused by changes in the perceived population of competitors rather than direct changes in self-perceptions of physical appearance or dominance. Overall, findings are supportive of models assuming domain-specific rather than domain-general cognitive processes.
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
Evolutionary Psychology: A New Paradigm for Psychological Science
Buss, D. M. (1995) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0601_1 · Cited by 1,198
Research works printed but not linked: 29
- 10.1037/0022-3514.62.5.717 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.62.5.717 · Paper page
- 10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.559 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0146167283093004 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.925 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.925 · Paper page
- Cunningham, P. B., 1997, Evolutionary social psychology
- Daly, M., 1983, Sex, evolution, and behavior
- Dijkstra, P., meetings of Human Behavior and Evolution Society
- Guttentag, M., 1983, Too many women? The sex ratio question
- 10.1016/0162-3095(84)90011-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0022-3514.64.6.951 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.64.6.951 · Paper page
- 10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.131 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.131 · Paper page
- 10.1016/0022-1031(89)90010-3 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1017/S0140525X00067595 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1166 · DOI
- 10.1177/0146167294202008 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1990.tb00909.x · DOI · Paper page
- Kenrick, D. T., Evolutionary psychology: Theories and issues
- Kenrick, D. T., 1989, Review of personality and social psychology: 10 close relationships, 92
- Keppel, G., 1991, Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook
- 10.1016/0162-3095(85)90017-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/01461672982412004 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1086/209242 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.730 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.730 · Paper page
- Symons, D., 1979, The evolution of human sexuality
- Tooby, J., 1992, The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture, 19, 10.1093/oso/9780195060232.003.0002 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/0162-3095(89)90002-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/BF01542229 · DOI · Paper page
- Trivers, R. L., 1972, Sexual selection and the descent of man, 136
- 10.1016/0162-3095(85)90001-9 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Renovating the Pyramid of Needs: Contemporary Extensions Built Upon Ancient Foundations
Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Neuberg, S. L., & Schaller, M. (2010) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691610369469 · Cited by 1,132
Self-citationSex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: What, whether, and why.
Li, N. P., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.468 · Cited by 699
Self-citationMindfulness and self-acceptance.
Carson, S. H., & Langer, E. J. (2006) · Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy · doi:10.1007/s10942-006-0022-5 · Cited by 460
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-citationSherlock, M., & Wagstaff, D. L. (2019) · Psychology of Popular Media Culture · doi:10.1037/ppm0000182 · Cited by 324
Metadata
- Authors
- Gutierres, S. E., Kenrick, D. T., & Partch, J. J.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-09
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1126-1134
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2126360028
- Cited by
- 171
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
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: Beauty, Dominance, and the Mating Game: Contrast Effects in Self-Assessment Reflect Gender Differences in Mate Selection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/01461672992512006
- The paper
- Gutierres, S. E., Kenrick, D. T., & Partch, J. J. (1999). Beauty, Dominance, and the Mating Game: Contrast Effects in Self-Assessment Reflect Gender Differences in Mate Selection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672992512006
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.