Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sexual selection and physical attractiveness

Implications for mating dynamics

  • Published:
Human Nature Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sexual selection processes have received much attention in recent years, attention reflected in interest in human mate preferences. Among these mate preferences are preferences for physical attractiveness. Preferences in and of themselves, however, do not fully explain the nature of the relationships that individuals attain. A tacit negotiation process underlies relationship formation and maintenance. The notion that preferences for physical attractiveness evolved under parasite-driven “good genes” sexual selection leads to predictions about the nature of trade-offs that individuals make between mates’ physical attractiveness and investment potential. These predictions and relevant data are explored, with a primary emphasis on women’s preferences for men’s qualities. In addition, further implications of trade-offs are examined, most notably (a) the impact of environmental variations on the nature of mating and (b) some effects of trade-offs on infidelity and male attempts to control women.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, R. M., and R. M. May 1978 Regulation and Stability of Host-parasite Population Interactions, I: Regulatory Processes.Journal of Animal Ecology 47:219–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1982 Coevolution of Hosts and Parasites.Parasitology 85:411–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. 1981A Treatise on the Family. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, I. H., T. Lin, and P. McClelland 1982 Cross-and Within-racial Judgments of Attractiveness.Perception and Psychophysics 32:495–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berscheid, E., and E. Walster 1974 Physical Attractiveness. InAdvances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 7, L. Berkowitz, ed. Pp. 157–215. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. 1964Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. L., S. J. Asher, and S. W. White 1978 Marital Disruption as a Stressor: A Review and Analysis.Psychological Bulletin 85:867–894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, J. W., and M. B. Andersson, eds. 1987Sexual Selection: Testing the Alternatives. Chichester, England: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W., and S. A. Lewis 1968 Dating and Physical Attractiveness: A Replication.Psychological Reports 22:976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burley, N. 1977 Parental Investment, Mate Choice, and Mate Quality.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 74:3476–3479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1981 Sex-ratio Manipulation and Selection for Attractiveness.Science 211:721–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1986a Sex-ratio Manipulation in Color-banded Populations of Zebra Finches.Evolution 40:1191–1206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1986b Sexual Selection for Aesthetic Traits in Species with Biparental Care.American Naturalist 127:415–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. 1988 From Vigilance to Violence: Mate-guarding Tactics.Ethology and Sociobiology 9:291–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1989 Sex Differences in Human Mate Preferences: Evolutionary Hypotheses Tested in 37 Cultures.Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12:1–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., and D. P. Schmitt 1993 Sexual Strategies Theory: A Contextual Evolutionary Analysis of Human Mating.Psychological Review 100:204–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., et al. 1990 International Preferences in Selecting Mates: A Study of 37 Cultures.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 21:5–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., P. E. Converse, and W. L. Rodgers 1976The Quality of American Life. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cashdan, E. 1993 Attracting Mates: Effects of Paternal Investment on Mate Attraction Strategies.Ethology and Sociobiology 14:1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Critelli, J. W., and L. R. Waid 1980 Physical Attractiveness, Romantic Love, and Equity Restoration in Dating Relationships.Journal of Personality Assessment 44:624–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, M. R., A. P. Barbee, and C. L. Pike 1990 What Do Women Want? Facialmetric Assessment of Multiple Motives in the Perception of Male Facial Physical Attractiveness.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59:61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daitzman, R. J., and M. Zuckerman 1980 Disinhibitory Sensation Seeking, Personality, and Gonadal Hormones.Personality and Individual Differences 1:103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, M., and M. Wilson 1983Sex, Evolution, and Behavior. Boston: Willard Grant Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1988Homicide. Hawthorne, New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, M., M. Wilson, and S. J. Weghorst 1982 Male Sexual Jealousy.Ethology and Sociobiology 3:11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. 1859The Origin of the Species. London: Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1871The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. New York: Appleton.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Lope, F., and A. P. Møller In press Female Reproductive Effort Depends upon the Degree of Ornamentation of Their Mates.Evolution.

  • Demarest, J., and L. Schoch-Ciuffreda 1992 Sex Differences in Mate Preferences across the Lifespan. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society, July 22–26, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feingold, A. 1990 Gender Differences in Effects of Physical Attractiveness on Romantic Attraction: A Comparison across Five Research Paradigms.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59:981–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A. 1930The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, R. H. 1988Passions within Reason. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., and D. M. Buss In press Pathogen Prevalence and Human Mate Preferences.Ethology and Sociobiology.

  • Gangestad, S. W., and J. A. Simpson 1990 Toward an Evolutionary History of Female Sociosexual Variation.Journal of Personality 58:69–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1992 On Human Sociosexual Variation: An Evolutionary View of Female Mating Propensities. Unpublished manuscript in authors’ possession. Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., R. Thornhill, and R. A. Yeo In press Facial Attractiveness, Developmental Stability, and Fluctuating Asymmetry.Ethology and Sociobiology.

  • Gowaty, P. 1992 Evolutionary Biology and Feminism.Human Nature 3:217–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grafen, A. 1990 Biological Signals as Handicaps.Journal of Theoretical Biology 144:517–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haldane, J. B. S. 1949 Disease and Evolution.La Ricerca Scientifica (Supplement) 19:68–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W. D. 1980 Sex versus Non-sex versus Parasite.Oikos 35:282–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1982 Pathogen as Causes of Genetic Diversity in Their Host Populations. InPopulation Biology of Infectious Diseases, R. M. Anderson and R. M. May, eds. Pp. 269–296. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W. D., and M. Zuk 1982 Heritable True Fitness and Bright Birds: A Role for Parasites?Science 218:384–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatfield, E., and S. Sprecher 1986Mirror, Mirror: The Importance of Looks in Everyday Life. Albany, New York: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heywood, J. S. 1989 Sexual Selection by the Handicap Principle.Evolution 43:1387–1397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hite, S. 1987Women and Love: A Cultural Revolution in Progress. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iwasa, Y., A. Pomiankowski, and S. Nee 1991 The Evolution of Costly Mate Preferences, II: The “Handicap” Principle.Evolution 45:1431–1442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenrick, D. T., E. K. Sadalla, G. Groth, and M. Trost 1990 Evolution, Traits, and the Stages of Human Courtship: Qualifying the Parental Investment Model.Journal of Personality 58:97–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinsey, A. C., W. B. Pomeroy, and C. E. Martin 1948Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia: Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinsey, A. C., W. B. Pomeroy, C. E. Martin, and P. H. Gebhard 1953Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. Philadelphia: Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, M. 1982 Sexual Selection and the Evolution of Female Choice.Evolution 36:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1985 Evolution of Female Choice and Male Parental Investment in Polygynous Species: The Demise of the “Sexy Son”.American Naturalist 125:788–810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1986 Sexual Selection and Cycling Parasites: A Simulation Study of Hamilton’s Hypothesis.Journal of Theoretical Biology 119:263–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, M., and M. J. Ryan 1991 The Evolution of Mating Preferences and the Paradox of the Lek.Nature 350:33–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lande, R. 1981 Models of Speciation by Sexual Selection on Polygenic Characters.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 70:3721–3725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Low, B. S. 1988 Pathogen Stress and Polygyny in Humans. InHuman Reproductive Behavior: A Darwinian Perspective, L. Betzig, M. Borgerhoff Mulder, and P. Turke, eds. Pp. 115–127. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1990a Marriage Systems and Pathogen Stress in Human Societies.American Zoologist 30:325–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1990b Sex, Power, and Resources: Male and Female Strategies of Resource Acquisition.International Journal of Contemporary Sociology 27:49–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maret, S. M. 1983 Attractiveness Ratings of Photographs of Blacks by Cruzans and Americans.Journal of Psychology 115:113–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maret, S. M., and G. A. Harling 1985 Cross-cultural Perceptions of Physical Attractiveness: Ratings of Photos of Whites by Cruzans and Americans.Perceptual and Motor Skills 60:163–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathes, E. W. 1975 The Effects of Physical Attractiveness and Anxiety on Heterosexual Attraction over a Series of Five Encounters.Journal of Marriage and the Family 37:769–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Møller, A. P. 1988a Female Choice Selects for Male Sexual Tail Ornaments in the Monogamous Swallow.Nature 332:640–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1988b Paternity and Paternal Care in the Swallow,Hirundo rustica.Animal Behaviour 36:996–1005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1990a Effects of a Haematophagus Mite on the Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica): A Test of the Hamilton and Zuk Hypothesis.Evolution 44:771–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1990b Fluctuating Asymmetry in Male Sexual Ornaments May Reliably Reveal Male Quality.Animal Behaviour 40:1185–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1990c Male Tail Length and Female Mate Choice in the Monogamous SwallowHirundo rustica.Animal Behaviour 39:458–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1990d Parasites and Sexual Selection: Current Status of the Hamilton and Zuk Hypothesis.Journal of Evolutionary Biology 3:319–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1992a Female Swallow Preference for Symmetrical Male Sexual Ornaments.Nature 357:238–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1992b Parasites Differentially Increase the Degree of Fluctuating Asymmetry in Secondary Sexual Characters.Journal of Evolutionary Biology 5:691–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1992c Sexual Selection in the Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica), II: Mechanisms of Intersexual Selection.Journal of Evolutionary Biology 5:603–624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • In press Patterns of Fluctuating Asymmetry in Sexual Ornaments Predict Female Choice.Journal of Evolutionary Biology.

  • Møller, A. P., and J. Höglund 1991 Patterns of Fluctuating Asymmetry in Avian Feather Ornaments: Implications for Models of Sexual Selection.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 245:1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdock, G. P, and D. R. White 1969 Standard Cross-cultural Sample.Ethnology 8:329–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murstein, B. I. 1976Who Will Marry Whom? Theories and Research in Marital Choice. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donald, P. 1962 The Theory of Sexual Selection.Heredity 17:541–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perusse, D. 1993 Cultural and Reproductive Success in Industrial Societies: Testing the Relationship at Proximate and Ultimate Levels.Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16:267–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomiankowski, A. 1987 Sexual Selection: The Handicap Principle Does Work—Sometimes.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 231:123–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Read, A. F. 1990 Parasites and the Evolution of Host Sexual Behaviour. InParasitism and Host Behaviour, C. J. Barnard and J. M. Behnke, eds. Pp. 117–157. London: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, A. R., and A. Mukherjee 1992 Quantitative Genetics of Sexual Dimorphism in Human Body Size.Evolution 46:226–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohwer, S. 1982 The Evolution of Reliable and Unreliable Badges of Fighting Ability.American Zoologist 22:531–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohwer, S., and P. W. Ewald 1981 The Cost of Dominance and Advantages of Subordination in a Badge Signalling System.Evolution 35:441–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J. A., and S. W. Gangestad 1991a Individual Differences in Sociosexuality: Convergent and Discriminant Validity.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60:870–883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 1991b Personality and Sexuality: Empirical Relations and an Integrative Theoretical Model. InSexuality in Close Relationships, K. McKinney and S. Sprecher, eds. Pp. 71–92. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1992 Sociosexuality and Romantic Partner Choice.Journal of Personality 60:31–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H. G., and R. D. Montgomerie 1991 Sexual Selection and the Tail Ornaments of North American Barn Swallows.Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 28:195–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. L. 1984 Human Sperm Competition. InSperm Competition and the Evolution of Animal Mating Systems, R. L. Smith, ed. Pp. 601–659. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, M. S., P. A. Robertson, and N. A. Aebischer 1993 Fluctuating Asymmetry Measurement.Nature 361:409–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Symons, D. 1979The Evolution of Human Sexuality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesser, A., and M. Brodie 1971 A Note on the Evaluation of a “Computer Date.”Psychonomic Science 23:300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thanakar, J. N., and S. Iwakawi 1979 Cross-cultural Comparisons in Interpersonal Attraction of Females Toward Males.Journal of Social Psychology 108:121–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R. 1979 Male and Female Sexual Selection and the Evolution of Mating Strategies in Insects. InSexual Selection and Reproductive Competition in Insects, M. S. Blum and N. A. Blum, eds. Pp. 81–122. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, J. M. 1989 Mate Selection Criteria: A Pilot Study.Ethology and Sociobiology 10:241–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. L. 1972 Parental Investment and Sexual Selection. InSexual Selection and the Descent of Man 1871–1971, B. Campbell, ed. Pp. 136–179. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1985Social Evolution. Menlo Park, California: Benjamin/Cummings.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations 1991Compendium of Social Statistics and Indicators 1991. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E., V. Aronson, P. Abrahams, and L. Rottman 1966 Importance of Physical Attractiveness in Dating Behavior.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4:508–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherhead, P. J., and R. J. Robertson 1979 Offspring Quality and the Polygyny Threshold: The “Sexy Son” Hypothesis.American Naturalist 113:201–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiderman, M. W., and E. R. Allgeier 1993 Gender Differences in Mate Selection Criteria: Sociobiological or Socioeconomic Explanation?Ethology and Sociobiology 13:115–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, G. L. 1980 Physical Attractiveness and Courtship Progress.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39:660–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, G. C. 1966Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E. O. 1978On Human Nature. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuk, M. 1992 The Role of Parasites in Sexual Selection: Current Evidence and Future Directions.Advances in the Study of Behavior 21:39–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, 87131, Albuquerque, NM

    Steven W. Gangestad

Authors
  1. Steven W. Gangestad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The ideas in this paper were substantially influenced by discussions with Kim Hill and Hilly Kaplan following a preliminary presentation of work contained herein at a UNM Human Evolutionary Ecology Program colloquium.

Steven W. Gangestad is an associate professor of psychology at the University of New Mexico. His recent research includes work focused on sexual selection in humans and its implications for general relationship phenomena. His other recent research concerns the impact of developmental instability on functional asymmetries, interpersonal orientations, and individual differences in the control of emotional expression.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gangestad, S.W. Sexual selection and physical attractiveness. Human Nature 4, 205–235 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02692200

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02692200

Key words

Search

Navigation