Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Physical attractiveness influences reproductive success of modern men

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of Ethology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Theory suggests that reproductive success is positively associated with an individual’s genetic quality. However, the association between physical attractiveness and reproductive success (i.e., number of offspring) in modern humans remains less clear. Here we examined associations between men’s reproductive success and physical attractiveness from retrospective data obtained from married, divorced, and single samples of Slovakian men. As predicted, facially more attractive and taller men were more likely to engage in marriage. In turn, married men had higher reproductive success than single men. Even when men’s marital status was considered, facially more attractive men had higher reproductive success than their less attractive counterparts. This supports the importance of physical attractiveness in sexual selection in modern humans.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgerhoff Mulder M (2009) Serial monogamy as polygyny or polyandry? Marriage in the Tanzanian Pimbwe. Hum Nat 20:130–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buston PM, Emlen ST (2004) Cognitive processes underlying human mate choice: the relationship between self-perception and mate preference in Western society. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:8805–8810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers ML, Hewitt JK, Schmitz S, Corley RP, Fulker DW (2001) Height, weight, and body mass index. In: Hewitt JK, Emde RN (eds) Infancy to early childhood: Genetic and environmental influences on developmental change. Oxford University Press, London, pp 292–306

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornwell RE, Perrett DI (2008) Sexy sons and sexy daughters: the influence of parents’ facial characteristics on offspring. Anim Behav 76:1843–1853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C (1871) The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. John Murray, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • De Pergola G, Maldera S, Tartagni M, Pannacciulli N, Loverro G, Giorgino R (2006) Inhibitory effect of obesity on gonadotropin, estradiol, and inhibin B levels in fertile women. Obesity 14:1954–1960

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Crawford JR, Welling LLM, Little AC (2010) The health of a nation predicts their mate preferences: cross-cultural variation in women’s preferences for masculinized male faces. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:2405–2410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Draper P, Hames R (2000) Birth order, sibling investment, and fertility among Ju/’hoansi (!Kung). Hum Nat 11:117–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad SW, Buss DM (1993) Pathogen prevalence and human mate preferences. Ethol Sociobiol 14:89–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad SW, Thornhill R (1997) The evolutionary psychology of extrapair sex: the role of fluctuating asymmetry. Evol Hum Behav 18:69–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad SW, Thornhill R (2008) Human oestrus. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:991–1000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad SW, Garver-Apgar CE, Simpson JA, Cousins AJ (2007) Changes in women’s mate preferences across the ovulatory cycle. J Pers Soc Psychol 92:151–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman A, Koupil I (2010) The effect of school performance upon marriage and long-term reproductive success in 10,000 Swedish males and females born 1915–1929. Evol Hum Behav 31:425–435

    Google Scholar 

  • Grammer K, Fink B, Møller AP, Manning JT (2005) Physical attractiveness and health: comment on Weeden and Sabini (2005). Psychol Bull 131:658–661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton WD, Zuk M (1982) Heritable true fitness and bright birds: a role for parasites? Science 218:384–387

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson JA, Anglin JM (2003) Facial attractiveness predicts longevity. Evol Hum Behav 24:351–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hensley WE (1994) Height as a basis for interpersonal attraction. Adolescence 29:469–474

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hume DK, Montgomerie R (2001) Facial attractiveness signals different aspects of quality in men and women. Evol Hum Behav 22:93–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Inwood K, Roberts E (2010) Longitudinal studies of human growth and health: a review of recent historical research. J Econ Surv 24:801–840

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennions MD, Petrie M (2000) Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol Rev 75:21–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jokela M (2009) Physical attractiveness and reproductive success in humans: evidence from the late 20th century United States. Evol Hum Behav 30:342–350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jones BC, DeBruine LM, Perrett DI, Little AC, Feinberg DR, Law Smith MJ (2008) Effects of menstrual cycle on face preferences. Arch Sex Behav 37:78–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalick SM, Zebrowitz LA, Langlois JH, Johnson RM (1998) Does facial attractiveness honestly advertise health? Longitudinal data on an evolutionary question. Psychol Sci 9:8–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanazawa S (2007) Big and tall soldiers are more likely to survive battle: a possible explanation for the “Returning Soldier Effect” on the secondary sex ratio. Hum Reprod 22:3002–3008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan HJ, Lancaster B (2000) The evolutionary economics and psychology of the demographic transition to low fertility. In: Cronk L, Chagnon N, Irons W (eds) Evolutionary biology and human behavior: 20 years later. Aldine de Gruyter, Hawthorne, pp 283–322

  • Koziel S, Pawlowski B (2003) Comparison between primary and secondary mate markets: an analysis of data from lonely hearts columns. Pers Individ Differ 35:1849–1857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lie HC, Rhodes G, Simmons LW (2008) Genetic diversity revealed in human faces. Evolution 62:2473–2486

    Google Scholar 

  • Lie HC, Simmons LW, Rhodes G (2010) Genetic dissimilarity, genetic diversity, and mate preferences in humans. Evol Hum Behav 31:48–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manfredini M, Breschi M, Mazzoni S (2010) Spouse selection by health status and physical traits. Sardinia, 1856–1925. Am J Phys Anthropol 141:290–296

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Manning JT, Scutt D, Whitehouse GH, Leinster SJ (1997) Breast asymmetry and phenotypic quality in women. Evol Hum Behav 18:223–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalski RL, Shackelford TK (2002) Birth order and sexual strategy. Pers Individ Differ 33:661–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milne F, Judge D (2009) Birth order influences reproductive measures in Australians. Hum Nat 20:294–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller U, Mazur A (2001) Evidence of unconstrained directional selection for male tallness. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:302–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nettle D (2002) Height and reproductive success in a cohort of British men. Hum Nat 13:473–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nettle D, Pollet TV (2008) Natural selection on male wealth in humans. Am Nat 172:658–666

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnaly J (1978) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberzaucher E, Grammer K (2010) Immune reactivity and attractiveness. Gerontology 56:521–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira A, Ramos E, Lopes C, Barros H (2009) Self-reporting weight and height: misclassification effect on the risk estimates for acute myocardial infarction. Eur J Pub Health 19:548–553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowski B, Koziel S (2002) The impact of traits offered in personal advertisements on response rates. Evol Hum Behav 23:139–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowski B, Dunbar RIM, Lipowicz A (2000) Evolutionary fitness: tall men have more reproductive success. Nature 403:156

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowski B, Boothroyd LG, Perrett DI, Kluska S (2008) Is female attractiveness related to final reproductive success? Coll Antropol 32:457–460

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Penton-Voak IS, Jacobson A, Trivers R (2004) Populational differences in attractiveness judgements of male and female faces: Comparing British and Jamaican samples. Evol Hum Behav 25:355–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce CA (1996) Body height and romantic attraction: a meta-analytic test of the male-taller norm. Soc Behav Pers 24:143–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piñón R Jr (2002) Biology of human reproduction. University Science Books, Sausalito

    Google Scholar 

  • Prokop P, Obertová Z, Fedor P (2010) Paternity cues and mating opportunities: what makes fathers good? Acta Ethol 13:101–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes G (2006) The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annu Rev Psychol 57:199–226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes G, Chan J, Zebrowitz LA, Simmons LW (2003) Does sexual dimorphism in human faces signal health? Proc R Soc Lond B 270:S93–S95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes G, Simmons LW, Peters M (2005) Attractiveness and sexual behavior: does attractiveness enhance mating success? Evol Hum Behav 26:186–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts SC, Little AC, Gosling LM, Jones BC, Perret DI, Carter V, Petrie M (2005) MHC-assortative facial preferences in humans. Biol Lett 1:400–403

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rolf C, Nieschlag E (1997) Senescence. In: Nieschlag E, Behere HM (eds) Andrology. Springer, Berlin, pp 397–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolf C, Nieschlag E (2001) Reproductive functions, fertility and genetic risks of ageing men. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diab 109:68–74

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sequoia JSP, Wright ME, McCarron P, Pietinen P, Taylor PR, Virtamo J, Albanes D (2006) A prospective investigation of height and prostate cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15:2174–2178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford TK, Larsen RJ (1999) Facial attractiveness and physical health. Evol Hum Behav 20:71–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford TK, Weekes VA, LeBlanc GJ, Bleske AL, Euler HA, Hoier S (2000) Female coital orgasm and male attractiveness. Hum Nat 11:299–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silventoinen K, Kaprio J, Lahelma E, Viken RJ, Rose RJ (2001) Sex differences in genetic and environmental factors contributing to body-height. Twin Res 4:25–29

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Silventoinen K, Zdravkovic S, Skytthe A, McCarron P, Herskind AM, Koskenvuo M, de Faire U, Pedersen N, Christensen K, Kaprio J (2006) Association between height and coronary heart disease mortality: a prospective study of 35,000 twin pairs. Am J Epidemiol 163:615–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Soler C, Nunez M, Gutierrez R, Nunez J, Medina P, Sancho M, Alvarez J, Nunez A (2003) Facial attractiveness in men provides clues to semen quality. Evol Hum Behav 24:199–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song Y, Davey Smith G, Sung J (2003) Adult height and cause-specific mortality: a large prospective study of South Korean Men. Am J Epidemiol 158:479–485

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sorkin JD, Muller DC, Andres R (1999) Longitudinal change in height of men and women: implications for interpretation of the body mass index. Am J Epidemiol 150:969–977

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stearns SC, Byars SG, Govindaraju DR, Ewbank D (2010) Measuring selection in contemporary human populations. Nat Rev Genet 11:611–622

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Symons D (1979) The evolution of human sexuality. Oxford University Press, New York

  • Thornhill R, Gangestad SW (1994) Human fluctuating asymmetry and sexual behavior. Psychol Sci 5:297–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill R, Gangestad SW (1999) Facial attractiveness. Trends Cogn Sci 3:452–460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill R, Gangestad SW (2006) Facial sexual dimorphism, developmental stability, and susceptibility to disease in men and women. Evol Hum Behav 27:131–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill R, Gangestad SW, Corner R (1995) Human female orgasm and male fluctuating asymmetry. Anim Behav 50:1601–1615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuvemo T, Jonsson B, Persson I (1999) Intellectual and physical performance and morbidity in relation to height in a cohort of 18-year-old Swedish conscripts. Horm Res 52:186–191

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weeden J, Sabini J (2007) Subjective and objective measures of attractiveness and their relation to sexual behavior and sexual attitudes in university students. Arch Sex Behav 36:79–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weeden J, Abrams MJ, Green MC, Sabini J (2006) Do high-status people really have fewer children? Hum Nat 17:377–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox A, Dunson D, Weinberg C, Trussell J, Day Baird D (2001) Likelihood of conception with a single act of intercourse: providing benchmark rates for assessment of post-coital contraceptives. Contraception 63:211–215

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zaadstra BM, Seidell JC, Van Noord PAH, Velde ER, Habbema JDF, Vrieswijk B, Karbaat J (1993) Fat and fecundity: prospective study of effect of body fat distribution on conception rates. Br Med J 306:484–487

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zahavi A (1975) Mate selection—a selection for a handicap. J Theor Biol 53:205–214

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank two anonymous referees for constructive comments on earlier version of the manuscript. Eva Fedor kindly improved the English. This study was partly supported by grant KEGA no. 3/7454/09 and VEGA 1/0137/11.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of Trnava, Priemyselná 4, P.O. Box 9, 91843, Trnava, Slovakia

    P. Prokop

  2. Department of Ecosozology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, 84215, Bratislava, Slovakia

    Peter Fedor

  3. Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 84506, Bratislava, Slovakia

    P. Prokop & Peter Fedor

Authors
  1. P. Prokop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Fedor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Prokop.

About this article

Cite this article

Prokop, P., Fedor, P. Physical attractiveness influences reproductive success of modern men. J Ethol 29, 453–458 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-011-0274-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-011-0274-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation