Review of Economics of the Household

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 273–291 | Cite as

Positive and negative preferences in human mate selection

  • Nicolas Gérard Vaillant
  • François-Charles Wolff
Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

This paper focuses on preferences for specific characteristics in a potential partner using data from 1993 to 1999 provided by a French marriage bureau. We perform an econometric analysis of the various traits either sought or rejected in a potential partner, respectively by men and women. Our results are consistent with investment in marriage. On the one hand, men tend to reject vulgar and unfaithful women, meaning that they are likely to suffer serious fitness costs from infidelity. On the other hand, women dread meeting potential partners who are alcoholic, selfish or violent.

Keywords

Human mate selection Marriage bureau Gender differences 

JEL Classification

C91 D13 D83 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are indebted to two anonymous reviewers and the Editor, Shoshana Grossbard, for their valuable comments on previous drafts of this paper. The usual disclaimer applies.

References

  1. Ahuvia, A., & Adelman, M. (1992). Formal intermediaries in the marriage market: A typology and review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 452–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baize, H., & Schroeder, J. E. (1995). Personality and mate selection in personal ads: Evolutionary preferences in a public mate selection process. Journal of Social Behavior Personality, 10, 517–536.Google Scholar
  3. Batabyal, A. A. (2001). On the likelihood of finding the right partner in an arranged marriage. Journal of Socio-Economics, 33, 273–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker, G. S. (1973). A theory of marriage: Part one. Journal of Political Economy, 81(4), 813–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becker, G. S. (1974). A theory of marriage: Part two. Journal of Political Economy, 82(2), S11–S26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergstrom, T. C. (1996). Economics in a family way. Journal of Economic Literature, 34(4), 1903–1934.Google Scholar
  7. Bergstrom, T. C., & Bagnoli, M. (1993). Courtship as a waiting game. Journal of Political Economy, 101(1), 185–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boulier, B., & Rosenzweig, M. (1984). Schooling, search and spouse selection: Testing the economic theories of marriage and household behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 92(4), 712–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burdett, K., & Coles, M. G. (1997). Marriage and class. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(1), 141–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  11. Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Buunk, B. P., Dijkstra, P., Kenrick, D. T., & Warntjes, A. (2001). Age preferences for mates as related to gender, own age, and involvement level. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cameron, S., & Collins, A. (1997). Estimates of a hedonic ageing equation for partner search. Kyklos, 40, 409–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cameron, S., & Collins, A. (1999). Looks unimportant? A demand function for male attractiveness by female personal advertisers. Applied Economics Letters, 6, 381–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cameron, S., & Collins, A. (2000a). Random utility maximizer seeks similar: An economic analysis of commitment level in personal relationships. Journal of Economic Psychology, 21, 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cameron, S., & Collins, A. (2000b). Playing the love market: Dating, romance and the real world. London: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
  17. Choo, E., & Siow, A. (2006). Who marries whom and why. Journal of Political Economy, 114, 175–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1983). Sex: Evolution and behavior. Boston, MA: Willard Grant.Google Scholar
  19. Danziger, L., & Neuman, S. (1999). On the age at marriage: Theory and evidence from Jews and Moslems in Israel. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 40, 179–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Deaux, K., & Hanna, R. (1984). Courtship in the personals column: The influence of gender and sexual orientation. Sex roles, 11(5–6), 363–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Feingold, A. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 125–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fisman, R., Iyengar, S., Kamenica, E., & Simonson, I. (2006). Gender differences in mate selection: Evidence from a speed dating experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121, 673–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fisman, R., Iyengar, S., Kamenica, E., & Simonson, I. (2008). Racial preferences in dating. Review of Economic Studies, 75, 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ford, K., Schmitt, N., Shechtman, S., Hults, B. M., & Doherty, M. L. (1989). Process tracing methods: Contributions, problems, and neglected research questions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43(1), 75–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grossbard-Shechtman, S. (1995). Marriage market models. In M. Tomassi & K. Ierulli (Eds.), The new economics of human behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Grossbard-Shechtman, S. (2003). A consumer theory with competitive markets for work in marriage. Journal of Socio-Economics, 31, 609–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harrison, A. A., & Saeed, L. (1977). Let’s make a deal: An analysis of revelations and stipulations in lonely hearts advertisements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 257–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Herpin, N. (2005). Love, careers, and heights in France, 2001. Economics and Human Biology, 3(3), 420–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hirschman, E. (1987). People as products: Analysis of a complex marketing exchange. Journal of Marketing, 51, 98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Koziel, S., & Pawlowski, B. (2003). Comparison between primary and secondary mate markets: An analysis of data from lonely hearts columns. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1849–1857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lancaster, K. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy, 74(2), 132–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Le Guirriec, G., & Vaillant, N. (2005). From libertinism to marital commitment: The economics of marital research with heterogeneous agents. Journal of Bioeconomics, 7(1), 84–94.Google Scholar
  33. Lemennicier, B. (1988). Le marché du mariage et de la famille. Presses universitaires de France, coll. Libre échange.Google Scholar
  34. Mukhopadhyay, S. (2008). Do women value marriage more? The effect of obesity on cohabitation and marriage in the USA. Review of Economics of the Household, 6(2), 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ongena, Y. P., & Dijkstra, W. (2007). A model of cognitive processes and conversational principles in survey interview interaction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 145–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pawlowski, B. (2000). The biological meaning of preferences on the human mate market. Anthropological Review, 63, 39–72.Google Scholar
  37. Pawlowski, B., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (1999). Withholding age as putative deception in mate search tactics. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pawlowski, B., & Koziel, S. (2002). The impact of traits in personal advertisements on response rate. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 139–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Posner, R. (1992). Sex and reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Prioux, F. (1999). La conjoncture démographique en France. Population, 54(3), 446–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rajecki, D. W., Bledsoe, S. B., & Rasmussen, J. L. (1991). Successful personal ads: Gender differences and similarities in offers, stipulations and outcomes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 457–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Roodman, D. (2009). Estimating fully observed recursive mixed-process models with cmp. Mimeo, Working Papers 168, Center for Global Development.Google Scholar
  43. Salska, I., Frederick, D. A., Pawlowski, B., Reilly, A. H., Laird, K. T., & Rudd, N. A. (2008). Conditional mate preferences: Factors influencing preferences for height. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 203–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sarlio-Lähteenkorva, S., & Lahelma, E. (2001). Food insecurity is associated with past and present economic disadvantage and body mass index. Journal of Nutrition, 131, 2880–2884.Google Scholar
  45. Sitton, S., & Rippee, E. T. (1986). Women still want marriage: Sex differences in lonely hearts advertisements. Psychological Reports, 58, 119–123.Google Scholar
  46. Spivey, C. (2009). Desperation or desire? The role of risk aversion in marriage. Economic Inquiry (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  47. Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Thiessen, D., Young, R. K., & Burroughs, R. (1993). Lonely hearts advertisements reflect sexually dimorphic mating strategies. Ethology and Sociobiology, 14, 209–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vaillant, N. G. (2004). Discrimination in matchmaking: Evidence from the price policy of a French marriage bureau. Applied Economics, 36, 723–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vaillant, N. G. (2006). Sex differences in stipulated preferences and mate search efforts by clients of a French marriage bureau. Psychological Reports, 98, 285–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vaillant, N. G., & Harrant, V. (2008). On the likelihood of finding the right partner in an arranged marriage: Evidence from a French marriage bureau. Journal of Socio-Economics, 32, 657–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Waynforth, D., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (1995). Conditional mate choice strategies in humans: Evidence from “lonely hearts” advertisements. Behaviour, 132, 755–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicolas Gérard Vaillant
    • 1
  • François-Charles Wolff
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.LEM (UMR 8179 CNRS) and Université Catholique de Lille (Faculté Libre de Sciences Economiques et de Gestion)Lille CedexFrance
  2. 2.LEMNAUniversité de NantesNantes CedexFrance
  3. 3.CNAV and INEDParisFrance

Personalised recommendations