Stepping Out of the Caveman’s Shadow: Nations’ Gender Gap Predicts Degree of Sex Differentiation in Mate Preferences
Abstract
An influential explanation for gender differences in mating strategies is that the sex-specific reproductive constraints faced by human ancestors shaped these differences. Other theorists have emphasized the role of societal factors, hypothesizing, for example, that gender differences in mate preferences should wane in gender-equal societies. However, findings have been ambiguous. Using recent data and a novel measure of gender equality, we revisited the role of gender parity in gender differentiation for mate preferences. In the first study, 3,177 participants from 10 nations with a gradually decreasing Global Gender Gap Index (GGI) provided online ratings of the desirability of mate attributes with reportedly evolutionary origins. In the second study, GGI scores were related to gender differences in mate preferences previously reported for 8,953 participants from 31 nations (Buss, 1989). Both studies show that gender differences in mate preferences with presumed evolutionary roots decline proportionally to increases in nations' gender parity.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
For objective measures such as mathematics performance or ratings of others such as mate preferences, the gender gap is smaller in more equitable nations.
“For objective measures such as mathematics performance, or for ratings of others such as mate preferences, the gender gap is smaller in more equitable nations (e.g., Else-Quest et al., 2010; Zentner & Mitura, 2012).”
From Gender Differences in Depression in Representative National Samples: Meta-Analyses of Diagnoses and Symptoms (2017) · cites this paper as Zentner & Mitura, 2012
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 Zentner & Mitura, 2012
Cites
Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.100.2.204 · Cited by 4,253 · see citing works
Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.59.2.93 · Cited by 2,932 · see citing works
Principles and Practice of Behavioral Assessment
Haynes, S. N., & O’Brien, W. H. (2000) · Applied Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1007/978-0-306-47469-9 · Cited by 272 · see citing works
The Distance Between Mars and Venus: Measuring Global Sex Differences in Personality
Del Giudice, M., Booth, T., & Irwing, P. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029265 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Salk, R. H., Hyde, J. S., & Abramson, L. Y. (2017) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000102 · Cited by 2,622 · see citing works
“Evidence for this theory exists for several psychological gender differences, including mate preferences, mathematics performance, and some aspects of sexuality (Eagly & Wood, 1999; Else-Quest, Hyde, & Linn, 2010; Petersen & Hyde, 2010; Zentner & Mitura, 2012).”
Biosocial construction of sex differences and similarities in behavior
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2012) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-394281-4.00002-7 · Cited by 770 · see citing works
The reality and evolutionary significance of human psychological sex differences
Archer, J. (2019) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12507 · Cited by 291 · see citing works
Sex differences in academic achievement are not related to political, economic, or social equality
Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2015) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2014.11.006 · Cited by 227 · see citing works
A Systematic Review and New Analyses of the Gender-Equality Paradox
Herlitz, A., Hönig, I., Hedebrant, K., & Asperholm, M. (2025) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/17456916231202685 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
“Data collected by Buss (1989) were analyzed by Eagly and Wood (1999), Conroy-Beam et al. (2015), and Zentner and Mitura (2012).”
InfluentialZhang, L., Lee, A. J., DeBruine, L. M., & Jones, B. C. (2019) · Evolutionary Psychology · doi:10.1177/1474704919852921 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Simpson’s gender-equality paradox
Berggren, M., & Bergh, R. (2025) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2422247122 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
- Authors
- Zentner, M., & Mitura, K.
- Affiliations
- University of York (GB)
- ORCID
- Zentner, Marcel
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-08-29
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1176-1185
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2130314828
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 16.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- 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 › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
- Keywords
- gender differences in mate preferences, gender equality, Global Gender Gap Index, evolutionary psychology, reproductive constraints, mating strategies, cross-national comparison
- MeSH terms
- Asia, Canada, Choice Behavior, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Europe, Biological Evolution, Female, Humans, Male, Mexico, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sexual Behavior, Sexual Partners, Social Desirability, South Africa, United States, Sex Distribution, Sexism
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
