Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T08:44:42.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

It is not all about mating: Attractiveness predicts partner value across multiple relationship domains

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 March 2017

Adar B. Eisenbruch ,
Aaron W. Lukaszewski  and
James R. Roney
Adar B. Eisenbruch
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9660Eisenbruch@psych.ucsb.edujames.roney@psych.ucsb.eduhttp://www.adareisenbruch.comhttps://www.psych.ucsb.edu/people/faculty/roney
Aaron W. Lukaszewski
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, California State University, Fullerton, Fullerton, CA 92834. alukaszewski@fullerton.eduhttp://www.aaronlukaszewski.com
James R. Roney
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9660Eisenbruch@psych.ucsb.edujames.roney@psych.ucsb.eduhttp://www.adareisenbruch.comhttps://www.psych.ucsb.edu/people/faculty/roney
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An account of the “beauty premium” based only on mating motivations overlooks adaptationist models of social valuation that have broader explanatory power. We suggest a broader approach based on evolved preferences for attractive partners in multiple cooperative domains (not just mating), which accounts for many observations of attractiveness-based preferential treatment more comfortably than does the target article's mating-specific account.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e26
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D. & Kring, A. M. (2001) Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81:116–32.Google Scholar
Apicella, C. L. (2014) Upper-body strength predicts hunting reputation and reproductive success in Hadza hunter–gatherers. Evolution and Human Behavior 35(6):508–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barclay, P. (2016) Biological markets and the effects of partner choice on cooperation and friendship. Current Opinion in Psychology 7:33–38.Google Scholar
Eisenbruch, A. B., Grillot, R. L., Maestripieri, D. & Roney, J. R. (in press) Evidence of partner choice heuristics in a one-shot bargaining game. Evolution and Human Behavior 37(6):429–39.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A. & Cable, D. M. (2004) The effect of physical height on workplace success and income: Preliminary test of a theoretical model. Journal of Applied Psychology 89:428–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurzban, R. & Leary, M. R. (2001) Evolutionary origins of stigmatization: The functions of social exclusion. Psychological Bulletin 127:187–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M. & Smoot, M. (2000) Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin 126(3):390–423.Google Scholar
Little, A. C., Jones, B. C. & DeBruine, L. M. (2011) Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary based research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 366(1571):1638–59.Google Scholar
Little, A. C. & Roberts, C. S. (2012) Evolution, appearance, and occupational success. Evolutionary Psychology 10:782–801.Google Scholar
Lukaszewski, A. W., Simmons, Z. L., Anderson, C. & Roney, J. R. (2016) The role of physical formidability in human social status allocation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 110(3):385–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sell, A., Tooby, J. & Cosmides, L. (2009) Formidability and the logic of human anger. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106(35):15073–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sugiyama, L. S. (2015) Physical attractiveness: An adaptationist perspective. In: The handbook of evolutionary psychology, ed. Buss, D. M., pp. 317–384. Wiley.Google Scholar
Tooby, J. & Cosmides, L. (1996) Friendship and the banker's paradox: Other pathways to the evolution of adaptations for altruism. In: Evolution of social behaviour patterns in primates and man. Proceedings of the British Academy, vol. 88, ed. Runciman, W. G., Smith, J. Maynard & Dunbar, R. I. M., pp. 119–43. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tooby, J., Cosmides, L. & Price, M. E. (2006) Cognitive adaptations for n-person exchange: The evolutionary roots of organizational behavior. Managerial & Decision Economics 27:103–29.Google Scholar
Tyrrell, J., Jones, S. E., Beaumont, R., Astley, C. M., Lovell, R., Yaghootkar, H., Tuke, M., Ruth, K. S., Freathy, R. M., Hirschhorn, J. N., Wood, A. R., Murray, A., Weedon, M. N. & Frayling, T. M. (2016) Height, body mass index, and socioeconomic status: Mendelian randomisation study in UK Biobank. BMJ 352:i582.Google Scholar