Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why do blue-eyed men prefer women with the same eye color?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The human eye color blue reflects a simple, predictable, and reliable genetic mechanism of inheritance. Blue-eyed individuals represent a unique condition, as in their case there is always direct concordance between the genotype and phenotype. On the other hand, heterozygous brown-eyed individuals carry an allele that is not concordant with the observed eye color. Hence, eye color can provide a highly visible and salient cue to the child’s heredity. If men choose women with characteristics that promote the assurance of paternity, then blue-eyed men should prefer and feel more attracted towards women with blue eyes. To test these predictions, close-up photos of young women and adult men with either blue or brown eyes were rated for their attractiveness by young women and men observers with either blue or brown eyes (N=88). The eye color in the photographs of each model was manipulated so that a same face would be shown with either the natural eye color (e.g., blue) or with the other color (e.g., brown). Both blue-eyed and brown-eyed female participants showed no difference in their attractiveness ratings for male models of either eye color. Similarly, brown-eyed men showed no preference for either blue-eyed or brown-eyed female models. However, blue-eyed men rated as more attractive the blue-eyed women than the brown-eyed ones. We interpret the latter preference in terms of specific mate selective choice of blue-eyed men, reflecting strategies for reducing paternity uncertainty. In a second study, a group of young adults (N=443) of both sexes and different eye colors (blue, brown, and green) were asked to report the eye and hair color of their romantic partners. Their responses indicated the presence of assortative mating by eye color as well as, to a less degree, for hair color. Most importantly, blue-eyed male respondents were the group with the largest proportion of partners of same eye color. These findings 1) indicate that blue-eyed men do prefer women with the same eye color and 2) specifically suggest the presence of a male adaptation for the detection of extra-pair paternity based on eye color, as a phenotypically based assurance of paternity (i.e., when the father’s and offspring’s phenotypes match) as well as a defense against cuckoldry (i.e., when the phenotypes do not match).

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander RD (1979) Darwinism and human affairs. University of Washington, Seattle, WA

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander RD, Noonan KM (1979) Concealment of ovulation, parental care, and human social evolution. In: Chagnon NA, Irons W (eds) Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: an anthropological perspective. Suxbury, North Scituate, MA, pp 402–435

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson KG (2006) How well does paternity confidence match actual paternity? Evidence from worldwide nonpaternity rates. Curr Anthropol 48:511–518

    Google Scholar 

  • Apicella CL, Marlowe FW (2004) Perceived mate fidelity and paternal resemblance predict men’s investment in children. Evol Hum Behav 25:371-378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton GC (1980) Mismatches in genetic markers in a large family study. Am J Hum Genet 32:601–613

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Baker RR, Bellis MA (1995) Human sperm competition: copulation, masturbation and infidelity. Chapman & Hall, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister RF (2000) Gender differences in erotic plasticity: the female sex drive as socially flexible and responsive. Psychol Bull 126:347–374

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beals RL, Hoijer H (1965) An introduction to anthropology (3rd edn) MacMillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckman L (1962) Assortative mating in man. Eugen Rev 54:63–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Betzig L (1989) Causes of conjugal dissolution: a cross-cultural study. Curr Anthropol 30:654–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bito LZ, Matheny A, Cruickshanks KJ, Nondahl DM, Carino OB (1997) Eye color changes past early childhood. The Louisville twin study. Arch Ophthalmol 115:659–663

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boas F (1928) Materials for the study of inheritance in man. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bornstein MH (1973) Color vision and color naming: a psychophysiological hypothesis of cultural difference. Psychol Bull 80:257–285

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bryn H (1920) Researches into anthropological heredity: I. On the inheritance of eye-colour in man; II. The genetical relation of index cephalicus. Hereditas 1:186–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burks BS (1938) Objectivity of report in family studies of heredity: a preliminary analysis. J Heredity 29:505–509

    Google Scholar 

  • Burley N (1982) The meaning of assortative mating. Ethol Sociobiol 4:191–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss DM, Schmitt DP (1993) Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychol Rev 100:204–232

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cavalli-Sforza LL, Menozzi P, Piazza A (1994) The history and geography of human gene. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerda-Flores RM, Barton SA, Marty-Gonzales LF, Rivas F, Chakrborty R (1999) Estimation of nonpaternity in the Mexican population of Nuevo Leon: a validation study with blood group markers. Am Journal Phys Anthropol 109:281–293

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Daly M, Wilson M (1982) Whom are newborn babies said to resemble? Ethol Sociobiol 3:69–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine LM (2005) Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: context-specific effects of facial resemblance. Proc R Soc Edinb Sect B Biol Sci 272:919–922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolin PJ (1994) Ultraviolet radiation and cataract: a review of the epidemiological evidence. Br J Ophthalmol 78:478–482

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eiberg H, Mohr J (1996) Assignment of genes coding for brown eye colour (BEY2) and brown hair colour (HCL3) on Chromosome 15q. Eur J Hum Genet 4:237–241

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elston R (1961) Assortative mating in man. Transactions of the second international congress of human genetics, Rome

  • Feinman S, Gill GW (1978) Sex differences in physical attractiveness preferences. J Soc Psychol 105:43–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher ML (2004) Female intrasexual competition decreases female facial attractiveness. Biol Lett 271:283–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forgaard TS, Dzamarjia MT (2004) Innvandrerbefolkningen. In: Tronstad KR (ed) Innvandring og invandrere 2004, Statistisk Sentralbyrå, Oslo, Norway, pp 17–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Frost P (2006) European hair and eye color: a case of frequency-dependent sexual selection? Evol Hum Behav 27:85–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuster V (1984) Extramarital reproduction and infant mortality in rural Galicia (Spain). J Hum Evol 13:457–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad SW, Simpson JA (2000). The evolution of human mating: trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behav Brain Sci 23:573–644

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad SW, Thornhill R, Garver CE (2002) Changes in women’s sexual interests and their partners’ mate-retention tactics across the menstrual cycle: evidence for shifting conflicts of interest. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:975–982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaulin SJC, Schlegel A (1980) Paternity confidence and paternal investment: a cross-cultural test of a sociobiological hypothesis. Ethology and Sociobiology 1:301–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gergen KJ (1967) The significance of skin color in human relations. Daedalus 96:390–406

    Google Scholar 

  • Gladwell M (1999) True colors: hair dye and the hidden history of postwar America. New Yorker 3/22/99:70–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Gloor PA, Houdaille J, Menk R (1981) Taille et couleur des yeux: 10’064 élèves de l’Ecole Polytechnique de Paris, 1794–1874. Archives Suisses d’anthropologie générale 45:17–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiling H, Buss DM (2000) Women’s sexual strategies: the hidden dimension of extra-pair mating. Pers Individ Differ 28:929–963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasstedt SJ (1995) Phenotypic assortative mating in segregation analysis. Genet Epidemiol 12:109–127

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hrdy SB (1992) Fitness trade-offs in the history and evolution of delegated mothering with special references to wet-nursing, abandonment, and infanticide. Ethol Sociobiol 13:409–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hrdy SB (2000) Mother nature. Random House, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurst CC (1908) On the inheritance of eye-colour in man. Proc Roy Soc B 85–96

  • Jablonski NG (2004) The evolution of human skin and skin color. Annu Rev Anthropol 33:585–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jablonski NG, Chaplin G (2000) Skin deep. The Scientific American, October 2002, pp 74–81

  • Javitt JC, Taylor HR (1995) Cataract and latitude. Documenta Ophthamologica 88(3–4):307–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorjani H, Engstrõm G, Liljedahl LE (1997) Genetic studies of assortative mating: a simulation study. I. Characteristics of the control populations. Acta Agric Scand 47:65–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinsey AC, Pomeroy AB, Martin CE, Gebhard PH (1953) Sexual behavior in the human female. Saunders, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Koeslag JH, Koeslag PD (1994) Koinophilia. J Theor Biol 167:55–65

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Laumann EO, Gagnon JH, Michael RT, Michaels S (1994) The social organization of sexuality. University of Chicago, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Little AC, Penton-Voak IS, Burt DM, Perrett DI (2003) Investigating an imprinting-like phenomenon in humans: partners and opposite-sex parents have similar hair and eye colour. Evol Hum Behav 24:43–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lock-Andersen J, Wulf HC, Knudstorp ND (1998) Interdependence of eye and hair colour, skin type and skin pigmentation in a Caucasian population. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockholm) 78:214–219

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lykken DT, Tellegen A (1993) Is human mating adventitious or the result of lawful choice? J Pers Soc Psychol 65:56–58

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maddox KB (2004) Perspectives on racial phenotypicality bias. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 8:383–401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J (1977) Parental investment: a prospective analysis. Anim Behav 25:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McBurney DH, Simon J, Gaulin SJC, Geliebter A (2002) Matrilineal biases in the investment of aunts and uncles: replication in a population presumed to have high paternity certainty. Hum Nat 13:391–402

    Google Scholar 

  • McLain DK, Setters D, Moulton MP, Pratt AE (2000) Ascription of resemblance of newborns by parents and nonrelatives. Evol Hum Behav 21:11–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller GF, Todd PM (1998) Mate choice turns cognitive. Trends Cogn Sci 2:190–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neale MC, Neale BM, Sullivan PF (2002) Nonpaternity in linkage studies of extremely discordant sib pairs. Am J Hum Genet 70:526–529

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pagel M (1997) Desperately concealing father: a theory of parent–infant resemblance. Anim Behav 53:973–981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson K (1907) Reply to certain criticisms of G.U. Yule. Biometrika 8:159–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson K, Lee A (1903) On the laws of inheritance in man: I. Inheritance of physical characters. Biometrika 2:357–462

    Google Scholar 

  • Pena SDJ, Chakraborty R (1994) Paternity testing in the DNA era. Trends Genet 10:204–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrett DI, Penton-Voak IS, Little AC, Tiddeman BP, Burt DM, Schmidt N, Oxley R, Barrett L (2002) Facial attractiveness judgments reflect learning of parental age characteristics. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:873–880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Platek SM, Burch RL, Panyavin IS, Wasserman BH, Gallup GG Jr (2002) Reactions to children’s faces: resemblance affects males more than females. Evol Hum Behav 23:159–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Platek SM, Raines DM, Gallup GG Jr, Mohamed FB, Thomson JW, Myers TE, Panyavin IS, Levin SL, Davis JA, Fonteyn LCM, Arigo DR (2004) Reactions to children’s faces: males are more affected by resemblance than females are, and so are their brains. Evol Hum Behav 25:394–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post PW (1975) Cold injury and the evolution of “white” skin. Hum Biol 47:65–80

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Price RA, Vanderberg SG (1980) Spouse similarity in American and Swedish couples. Behav Genet 10:59–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Regalski JM, Gaulin SJC (1993) Whom are Mexican infants said to resemble? Monitoring and fostering paternal confidence in the Yucatan. Ethol Sociobiol 14:97–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regan S, Judge HE, Gragoudas ES, Egan KM (1999) Iris color as a prognostic factor in ocular melanoma. Arch Ophthalmol 117:811–814

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Relethford JH, Lees FC, Byard PJ (1985) Sex and age variation in the skin color of Irish children. Curr Anthropol 26:396–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rife DC (1933) Genetic studies of monozygotic twins. J Heredity 24:407–414

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritgers-Aris CAE (1973) A reflectance study of the skin in Dutch families. J Hum Evol 2:123–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sasse G, Muller H, Chakrborty R, Ott J (1994) Estimating the frequency of nonpaternity in Switzerland. Hum Hered 44:337–343

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schiefenhovel W (1989) Reproduction and sex-ratio manipulation through preferential female infanticide among the Eipo, in the highlands of western New Guinea. In: Rasa AE, Vogel C, Voland E (eds) The sociobiology of sexual and reproductive strategies. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 170–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt DP (2005) Fundamentals of human mating strategies. In: Buss DM (ed) The handbook of evolutionary psychology. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp 258–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt DP, Alcalay L, Allik J, Angleitner A, Ault L, Austers I et al (2004) Patterns and universals of mate poaching across 53 nations: the effects of sex, culture, and personality on romantically attracting another person’s partner. J Pers Soc Psychol 86:560–584

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford TK (2003) Preventing, correcting, and anticipating female infidelity: three problems of sperm competition. Evolution and Cognition 9:90–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford TK, LeBlanc GJ, Drass E (2000) Emotional reactions to infidelity. Cogn Emot 14:643–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigusch V, Schmidt G (1971) Lower-class sexuality: some emotional and social aspects in West German males and females. Arch Sex Behav 1:29–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh AD, Rennie IG, Seregard S, Giblin M, McKenzie J (2004) Sunlight exposure and pathogenesis of uveal melanoma. Surv Ophthalmol 49:419–428

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon GEA, Johnson SC, Zaitchik D, Carey S (1996) Like father, like son: young children’s understanding of how and why offspring resemble their parents. Child Dev 67:151–171

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sykes B, Irven C (2000) Surnames and the Y chromosome. Am J Hum Genet 66:1417–1419

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Symons D (1995) Beauty is in the adaptations of the beholder: the evolutionary psychology of human female sexual attractiveness. In: Abramson PR, Pinkerton SD (eds) Sexual nature, sexual culture. The University of Chicago, Chicago, pp. 80–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiessen D, Young RK, Delgado M (1997) Social pressures for assortative mating. Pers Individ Differ 22:157–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers R (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man: 1871–1971. Aldine, Chicago, pp. 136–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Berghe PL, Frost P (1986) Skin color preferences, sexual dimorphism, and sexual selection: a case of gene-culture co-evolution? Ethn Racial Stud 9:87–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vinding T (1990) Pigmentation of the eye and hair in relation to age-related macular degeneration. An epidemiological study of 1000 aged individuals. Acta Ophthalmol 68(1):53–58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walster E, Aronson V, Abrahams D, Rottman L (1966) Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behaviour. J Pers Soc Psychol 4:508–516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiederman MW (1997) Extramarital sex: prevalence and correlates in a national survey. J Sex Res 34:167–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widemo F, Sæther SA (1999) Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: causes and consequences of variation in mating preferences. Trends Ecol Evol 14:26–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Williams GC (1975) Sex and evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Willoughby RR (1933) Somatic homogamy in man. Hum Biol 5:690–705

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson GD, Barrett PT (1987) Parental characteristics and partner choice: Some evidence for oedipal imprinting. J Biosoc Sci 19:157–161

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zanetti R, Rosso S, Martinez C, Navarro C, Scraub S, Sancho-Garnier H et al (1996) The multicentre south European study “helios” I: skin characteristics and sunburns in basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas of the skin. Br J Cancer 73:1440–1446

    Google Scholar 

  • Zei GP, Astolfi P, Jayakar SD (1981) Correlation between father’s age and husband’s age: a case of imprinting. J Biosoc Sci 13:409–418

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Dick Alexander and Ivar Folstad for their comments on drafts of this article and Raul Primicerio for introducing us to the “evolutionary games”. Thanks also go to many students and friends for lending their faces to the camera and disclosing to us their romantic lives. The participants were treated in accordance with the ‘Ethical Principles of Psychologists and code of Conduct’ (American Psychological Association, 1992).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Tromsø, 9037, Tromsø, Norway

    Bruno Laeng, Ronny Mathisen & Jan-Are Johnsen

Authors
  1. Bruno Laeng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ronny Mathisen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan-Are Johnsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruno Laeng.

Additional information

Communicated by T. Czeschlik

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

S1

Evolutionary games (XLS 914 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Laeng, B., Mathisen, R. & Johnsen, JA. Why do blue-eyed men prefer women with the same eye color?. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61, 371–384 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-006-0266-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-006-0266-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation