Human Nature

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 365–376 | Cite as

Mate preferences among Hadza hunter-gatherers

Article

Abstract

The literature on human mate preferences is vast but most data come from studies on college students in complex societies, who represent a thin slice of cultural variation in an evolutionarily novel environment. Here, I present data on the mate preferences of men and women in a society of hunter-gatherers, the Hadza of Tanzania. Hadza men value fertility in a mate more than women do, and women value intelligence more than men do. Women place great importance on men’s foraging, and both sexes rate character as important. Unlike college students, Hadza men place considerable importance on women being hard-working, and Hadza women cite looks about as often as men do.

Key words

Evolutionary psychology Hadza Hunter-gatherers Mate preferences 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blurton Jones, Nicholas G., Kristen Hawkes, and James F. O’Connell 2004 Hadza Fathers and Grandmothers as Helpers: Residence Data. In Culture, Ecology and Psychology of Hunter-Gatherer Children, B. S. Hewlett and M. E. Lamb, eds. In press. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine-Transaction.Google Scholar
  2. Blurton Jones, Nicholas G., Frank W. Marlowe, Kristen Hawkes, James F. O’Connell 2000 Paternal Investment and Hunter-Gatherer Divorce Rates. In Adaptation and Human Behavior: An Anthropological Perspective, L. Cronk, N. Chagnon, and W. Irons, eds. Pp. 69–90. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  3. Buss, David M. 1989 Sex Differences in Human Mate Preferences: Evolutionary Hypotheses Tested in 37 Cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12:1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 1999 Evolutionary Psychology: The New Science of Mind. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  5. Buunk, Bram P., P. Dijkstra, D. Fetchenhauer, D. T. Kenrick 2002 Age and Gender Differences in Mate Selection Criteria for Various Involvement Levels. Personal Relationships 9:271–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ellis, Bruce 1992 The Evolution of Sexual Attraction: Evaluative Mechanisms in Women. In The Adapted Mind, J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, and J. Tooby, eds. Pp. 267–288. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Hawkes, Kristen, and Rebecca Bliege Bird 2002 Showing Off, Handicap Signaling, and the Evolution of Men’s Work. Evolutionary Anthropology 11:58–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hawkes, Kristen, James O’Connell, and Nicholas G. Blurton Jones 2001a Hunting and Nuclear Families: Some Lessons from the Hadza about Men’s Work. Current Anthropology 42:681–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 2001b Hadza Meat Sharing. Evolution and Human Behavior 22:113–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jones, Doug 1996 An Evolutionary Perspective on Physical Attractiveness. Evolutionary Anthropology 5:97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jones, Doug, and Kim Hill 1993 Criteria of Physical Attractiveness in Five Populations. Human Nature 4:271–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kenrick, D. T., and R. C. Keefe 1992 Age Preferences in Mates Reflect Sex Differences in Human Reproductive Strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 15:75–133.Google Scholar
  13. Li, N. P., J. M. Bailey, D. T. Kenrick, J. A. W. Linsenmeier 2002 The Necessities and Luxuries of Mate Preferences: Testing the Tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82:947–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Marlowe, Frank W. 1998 The Nubility Hypothesis. Human Nature 9:263–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 2000 The Patriarch Hypothesis. Human Nature 11:27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 2003 A Critical Period for Provisioning by Hadza Men: Implications for Pair Bonding. Evolution and Human Behavior 24:217–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 2004 Marital Residence among Foragers. Current Anthropology 45:277–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Marlowe, Frank W., and Adam Wetsman 2001 Preferred Waist-to-hip Ratio and Ecology. Personality and Individual Differences 30:481–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Perrett, David, D. Burt, I. Penton-Voak, K. Lee, D. Rowland, R. Edwards 1999 Symmetry and Human Facial Attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior 20:295–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Perusse, Daniel 1994 Mate Choice in Modern Societies: Testing Evolutionary Hypotheses with Behavioral Data. Human Nature 5:255–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Singh, Devendra 1993 Adaptive Significance of Waist-to-hip Ratio and Female Physical Attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65:293–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sprecher, S., Q. Sullivan, and E. Hatfield 1994 Mate Selection Preferences: Gender Differences Examined in a National Sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66:1074–1080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Townsend, J. M., and T. Wasserman 1998 Sexual Attractiveness: Sex Differences in Assessment and Criteria. Evolution and Human Behavior 19:171–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wood, James W. 1994 Dynamics of Human Reproduction: Biology, Biometry, Demography. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  25. Woodburn, James 1968 Stability and Flexibility in Hadza Residential Groupings. In Man the Hunter, R. B. Lee and I. DeVore, eds. Pp. 103–110. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Aldine Transaction 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations