Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mating Strategies and the Masculinity Paradox: How Relationship Context, Relationship Status, and Sociosexuality Shape Women’s Preferences for Facial Masculinity and Beardedness

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to the dual mating strategy model, in short-term mating contexts women should forego paternal investment qualities in favor of mates with well-developed secondary sexual characteristics and dominant behavioral displays. We tested whether this model explains variation in women’s preferences for facial masculinity and beardedness in male faces. Computer-generated composites that had been morphed to appear ± 50% masculine were rated by 671 heterosexual women (M age = 31.72 years, SD = 6.43) for attractiveness when considering them as a short-term partner, long-term partner, a co-parent, or a friend. They then completed the Revised Sociosexual Inventory (SOI-R) to determine their sexual openness on dimensions of desire, behavior, and attitudes. Results showed that women’s preferences were strongest for average facial masculinity, followed by masculinized faces, with feminized faces being least attractive. In contrast to past research, facial masculinity preferences were stronger when judging for co-parenting partners than for short-term mates. Facial masculinity preferences were also positively associated with behavioral SOI, negatively with desire, and were unrelated to global or attitudinal SOI. Women gave higher ratings for full beards than clean-shaven faces. Preferences for beards were higher for co-parenting and long-term relationships than short-term relationships, although these differences were not statistically significant. Preferences for facial hair were positively associated with global and attitudinal SOI, but were unrelated to behavioral SOI and desire. Although further replication is necessary, our findings indicate that sexual openness is associated with women’s preferences for men’s facial hair and suggest variation in the association between sociosexuality and women’s facial masculinity preferences.

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
$34.99 /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 excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Addison, W. E. (1989). Beardedness as a factor in perceived masculinity. Perceptual and Motor Skills,68, 921–922.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, J. (2009). Does sexual selection explain human sex differences in aggression? Behavioral and Brain Sciences,32, 249–266.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Arnocky, S., Carré, J. M., Bird, B. M., Moreau, B. J., Vaillancourt, T., Ortiz, T., & Marley, N. (2018). The facial width-to-height ratio predicts sex drive, sociosexuality, and intended infidelity. Archives of Sexual Behavior,47, 1375–1385.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, N. (2001). Mustache fashion covaries with a good marriage market for women. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior,25, 261–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, P. J., & Perrett, D. I. (1993). Extracting prototypical facial images from exemplars. Perception,22, 257–262.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bleske-Rechek, A., Remiker, M. W., Swanson, M. R., & Zeug, N. M. (2006). Women more than men attend to indicators of good character: Two experimental demonstrations. Evolutionary Psychology,4, 248–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boothroyd, L. G., & Brewer, G. (2014). Self-reported impulsivity, rather than sociosexuality, predicts women’s preferences for masculine features in male faces. Archives of Sexual Behavior,43, 983–988.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boothroyd, L. G., Jones, B. C., Burt, D. M., DeBruine, L. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2008). Facial correlates of sociosexuality. Evolution and Human Behavior,29, 211–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borras-Guevara, M. L., Batres, C., & Perrett, D. I. (2017). Aggressor or protector? Experiences and perceptions of violence predict preferences for masculinity. Evolution and Human Behavior,38, 481–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, D. M., Kentridge, R. W., Good, J. M. M., Perrett, D. I., Tiddeman, B. P., & Boothroyd, L. G. (2007). Q-cgi: New techniques to assess variation in perception applied to facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B,274, 2779–2784.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, B. M., Nelson, N. L., & Dixson B. J. W. (2019). Sexual selection, agonistic signalling, and the effect of beards on men’s anger displays. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619834876.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L. M. (2014). Women’s preferences for male facial features. In V. A. Weekes-Shackelford & T. K. Shackelford (Eds.), Evolutionary perspectives on human sexual psychology and behavior (pp. 261–275). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Boothroyd, L. G., Perrett, D. I., Penton-Voak, I. S., & Tiddeman, B. P. (2006). Correlated preferences for facial masculinity and ideal or actual partner’s masculinity. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B,273, 1355–1360.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L. M., & Tiddeman, B. P. (2016). Webmorph. http://webmorph.org.

  • Dixson, A. F., Dixson, B. J., & Anderson, M. J. (2005). Sexual selection and the evolution of visually conspicuous sexually dimorphic traits in male monkeys, apes, and human beings. Annual Review of Sex Research,16, 1–19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J., Blake, K. R., Denson, T. F., Gooda-Vossos, A., O’Dean, S. M., Sulikowski, D., … Brooks, R. C. (2018a). The role of mating context and fecundability in women’s preferences for men’s facial masculinity and beardedness. Psychoneuroendocrinology,93, 90–102.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J., & Brooks, R. C. (2013). The role of facial hair in women’s perceptions of men’s attractiveness, health, masculinity and parenting abilities. Evolution and Human Behavior,34, 236–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J. W. (2018). Is male facial width-to-height ratio the target of sexual selection? [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior,47, 827–828.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J. W., Lee, A. J., Blake, K. R., Jasienska, G., & Marcinkowska, U. M. (2018b). Women’s preferences for men’s beards show no relation to their ovarian cycle phase and sex hormone levels. Hormones and Behavior,97, 137–144.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J. W., Lee, A. J., Sherlock, J. M., & Talamas, S. N. (2017a). Beneath the beard: Do facial morphometrics influence the strength of judgments of men’s beardedness? Evolution and Human Behavior,38, 164–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J. W., Little, A. C., Dixson, H. G. W., & Brooks, R. C. (2017b). Do prevailing environmental factors influence human preferences for facial morphology? Behavioral Ecology,28, 1217–1227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J. W., & Rantala, M. J. (2016). The role of facial and body hair distribution in women’s judgments of men’s sexual attractiveness. Archives of Sexual Behavior,45, 877–889.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J. W., & Rantala, M. J. (2017). Further evidence using a continuous measure of conception probability that women’s preferences for male facial and body hair may not change with fecundability [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior,46, 1159–1160.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J. W., Rantala, M. J., & Brooks, R. C. (2019). Cross-cultural variation in women’s preferences for men’s body hair. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40750-019-0107-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J. W., Rantala, M. J., Melo, E. F., & Brooks, R. C. (2017c). Beards and the big city: Displays of masculinity may be amplified under crowded conditions. Evolution and Human Behavior,38, 259–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J., Sherlock, J. M., Cornwell, W. K., & Kasumovic, M. M. (2018c). Contest competition and men’s facial hair: Beards may not provide advantages in combat. Evolution and Human Behavior,39, 147–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J. W., Sulikowski, D., Gouda-Vossos, A., Rantala, M. J., & Brooks, R. C. (2016). The masculinity paradox: Facial masculinity and beardedness interact to determine women’s ratings of men’s facial attractiveness. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 29, 2311–2320.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J., Tam, J. C., & Awasthy, M. (2013). Do women’s preferences for men’s facial hair change with reproductive status? Behavioral Ecology,24, 708–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixson, B. J., & Vasey, P. L. (2012). Beards augment perceptions of men’s age, social status, and aggressiveness, but not attractiveness. Behavioral Ecology,23, 481–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farthing, M. J. G., Mattei, A. M., Edwards, C. R. W., & Dawson, A. M. (1982). Relationship between plasma testosterone and dihydrotestosterone concentrations and male facial hair growth. British Journal of Dermatology,107(5), 559–564.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fink, B., Neave, N., & Seydel, H. (2007). Male facial appearance signals physical strength to women. American Journal of Human Biology,19, 82–87.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, R. G., & Adams, R. B. (2009). A dual-process account of female facial attractiveness preferences: Sexual and nonsexual routes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,45, 1156–1159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., & Scheyd, G. J. (2005). The evolution of human physical attractiveness. Annual Review of Anthropology,34, 523–548.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,23, 573–587.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (2008). Human oestrus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B,275, 991–1000.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Garver-Apgar, C. E. (2010). Men’s facial masculinity predicts changes in their female partners’ sexual interests across the ovulatory cycle, whereas men’s intelligence does not. Evolution and Human Behavior,31, 412–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geniole, S. N., Denson, T. F., Dixson, B. J., Carré, J. M., & McCormick, C. M. (2015). Evidence from eta-analyses of the facial width-to-height ratio as an evolved cue of threat. PLoS ONE,10(7), e0132726.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Geniole, S. N., & McCormick, C. M. (2015). Facing our ancestors: Judgments of aggression are consistent and related to the facial width-to-height ratio in men irrespective of beards. Evolution and Human Behavior,36, 279–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gettler, L. T. (2016). Becoming DADS: Considering the role of cultural context and developmental plasticity for paternal socioendocrinology. Current Anthropology,57(S13), S38–S51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillath, O., Bahns, A. J., & Burghart, H. A. (2017). Eye movements when looking at potential friends and romantic partners. Archives of Sexual Behavior,46, 2313–2325.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glassenberg, A. N., Feinberg, D. R., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2010). Sex-dimorphic face shape preference in heterosexual and homosexual men and women. Archives of Sexual Behavior,39, 1289–1296.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grueter, C. C., Isler, K., & Dixson, B. J. (2015). Are primate badges of status adaptive in large groups? Evolution and Human Behavior,36, 398–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrick, R., Mendez, J. M., & Pryor, B. (2015). Razor’s edge: The politics of facial hair. Social Science Quarterly,96, 1301–1313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A. K., Hunt, J., Welling, L. L., Cárdenas, R. A., Rotella, M. A., Wheatley, J. R., & Puts, D. A. (2013). Quantifying the strength and form of sexual selection on men’s traits. Evolution and Human Behavior,34, 334–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janif, Z. J., Brooks, R. C., & Dixson, B. J. (2014). Negative frequency-dependent preferences and variation in male facial hair. Biology Letters,10, 20130958. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2013.0958.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kandrik, M., Fincher, C. L., Jones, B. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2014). Men’s, but not women’s, sociosexual orientation predicts couples’ perceptions of sexually dimorphic cues in own-sex faces. Archives of Sexual Behavior,43, 965–971.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kenrick, D. T., & Keefe, R. C. (1992). Age preferences in mates reflect sex differences in human reproductive strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,15, 75–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philidelphea, PA: W. B. Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knussman, R., & Christiansen, K. (1988). Attributes of masculinity and androgen level. Homo,39, 45–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kordsmeyer, T. L., Hunt, J., Puts, D. A., Ostner, J., & Penke, L. (2018). The relative importance of intra-and intersexual selection on human male sexually dimorphic traits. Evolution and Human Behavior,39, 424–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruger, D. J. (2006). Male facial masculinity influences attributions of personality and reproductive strategy. Personal Relationships,13, 451–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A. J., Dubbs, S. L., von Hippel, W., Brooks, R. C., & Zietsch, B. P. (2014a). A multivariate approach to human mate preferences. Evolution and Human Behavior,35, 193–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A. J., Mitchem, D. G., Wright, M. J., Martin, N. G., Keller, M. C., & Zietsch, B. P. (2014b). Genetic factors increasing male facial masculinity decrease facial attractiveness of female relatives. Psychological Science,25, 476–484.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Bailey, D. H., Winegard, B., Puts, D. A., Welling, L. L. M., & Geary, D. C. (2014). Women’s preference for masculine traits is disrupted by images of male-on-female aggression. PLoS ONE,9, e110497.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Little, A. C., Connely, J., Feinberg, D. R., Jones, B. C., & Roberts, S. C. (2011). Human preference for masculinity differs according to context in faces, bodies, voices, and smell. Behavioral Ecology,22, 862–868.

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, A. C., & Jones, B. C. (2012). Variation in facial masculinity and symmetry preferences across the menstrual cycle is moderated by relationship context. Psychoneuroendocrinology,37, 999–1008.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., Penton-Voak, I. S., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2002). Partnership status and the temporal context of relationships influence human female preferences for sexual dimorphism in male face shape. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B,269, 1095–1100.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marcinkowska, U. M., Jasienska, G., & Prokop, P. (2018). A comparison of masculinity facial preference among naturally cycling, pregnant, lactating, and post-menopausal women. Archives of Sexual Behavior,47, 1367–1374.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marcinkowska, U. M., Rantala, M. J., Lee, A. J., Kozlov, M. V., Toivo, A., Cai, T. H., … Dixson, B. J. W. (2019). Women’s preferences for men’s facial masculinity are strongest under favorable ecological conditions. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-39350-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Marečková, K., Weinbrand, Z., Chakravarty, M. M., Lawrence, C., Aleong, R., Leonard, G., & Pausova, Z. (2011). Testosterone-mediated sex differences in the face shape during adolescence: Subjective impressions and objective features. Hormones and Behavior,60, 681–690.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2011). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Behavioral Research Methods,43, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh, T., Lee, A. J., Sidari, M., Stower, R., Sherlock, J. M., & Dixson, B. J. W. (2017). Microbes and masculinity: Does exposure to pathogenic cues alter women’s preferences for male facial masculinity and beardedness? PLoS ONE,12(6), e0178206.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, N. K., & Fincher, C. L. (2017). Unrestricted sexuality promotes distinctive short-and long-term mate preferences in women. Personality and Individual Differences,111, 169–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muscarella, F., & Cunningham, M. R. (1996). The evolutionary significance and social perception of male pattern baldness and facial hair. Ethology and Sociobiology,17, 99–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neave, N., & Shields, K. (2008). The effects of facial hair manipulation on female perceptions of attractiveness, masculinity, and dominance in male faces. Personality and Individual Differences,45, 373–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oldmeadow, J. A., & Dixson, B. J. (2016a). The association between men’s sexist attitudes and facial hair. Archives of Sexual Behavior,45, 891–899.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oldmeadow, J. A., & Dixson, B. J. (2016b). No contradictions, but directions for further research: A reply to Hellmer and Stenson [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior,45, 785–786.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Penke, L., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2008). Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,95, 1113–1135.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Penton-Voak, I. S., Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., Burt, D. M., Tiddeman, B. P., & Perrett, D. I. (2003). Female condition influences preferences for sexual dimorphism in faces of male humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology,117, 264–271.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perrett, D. I., Lee, K. J., Penton-Voak, I., Rowland, D., Yoshikawa, S., Burt, D. M., … Akamatsu, S. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature,394, 884–887.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petterson, L. J., Dixson, B. J., Little, A. C., & Vasey, P. L. (2015). Viewing time measures of sexual orientation in Samoan cisgender men who engage in sexual interactions with Fa’afafine. PLoS ONE,10(2), e0116529.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Petterson, L. J., Dixson, B. J., Little, A. C., & Vasey, P. L. (2016). Reconsidering male bisexuality: Sexual activity role and sexual attraction in Samoan men who engage in sexual interactions with Fa’afafine. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity,3, 11–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petterson, L. J., Dixson, B. J., Little, A. C., & Vasey, P. L. (2018). Viewing time and self report measures of sexual attraction in Samoan cisgender and transgender androphilic males. Archives of Sexual Behavior,47, 2427–2434.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Provost, M. P., Kormos, C., Kosakoski, G., & Quinsey, V. L. (2006). Sociosexuality in women and preference for facial masculinization and somatotype in men. Archives of Sexual Behavior,35, 305–312.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Puts, D. A. (2010). Beauty and the beast: Mechanisms of sexual selection in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior,31, 157–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randall, V. A. (2008). Androgens and hair growth. Dermatologic Therapy,21, 314–328.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rantala, M. J., Moore, F. R., Skrinda, I., Krama, T., Kivleniece, I., Kecko, S., & Krams, I. (2012). Evidence for the stress-linked immunocompetence handicap hypothesis in humans. Nature Communications,3, 694. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1696

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology,57, 199–226.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, G., Chan, J., Zebrowitz, L. A., & Simmons, L. W. (2003). Does sexual dimorphism in human faces signal health? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B,270, S93–S95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, G., Morley, G., & Simmons, L. W. (2013). Women can judge sexual unfaithfulness from unfamiliar men’s faces. Biology Letters,9, 20120908. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2012.0908.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, G., Simmons, L. W., & Peters, M. (2005). Attractiveness and sexual behavior: Does attractiveness enhance mating success? Evolution and Human Behavior,26, 186–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. E. (1976). Fashions in shaving and trimming of the beard: The men of the Illustrated London News, 1842–1972. American Journal of Sociology,81, 1133–1141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacco, D. F., Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., & Hugenberg, K. (2012). The roles of sociosexual orientation and relationship status in women’s face preferences. Personality and Individual Differences,53, 1044–1047.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxton, T. K., Mackey, L. L., McCarty, K., & Neave, N. (2016). A lover or a fighter? Opposing sexual selection pressures on men’s vocal pitch and facial hair. Behavioral Ecology,27, 512–519.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, I. M., Clark, A. P., Boothroyd, L. G., & Penton-Voak, I. S. (2013). Do men’s faces really signal heritable immunocompetence? Behavioral Ecology,24, 579–589.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, I. M., Clark, A. P., Josephson, S. C., Boyette, A. H., Cuthill, I. C., Fried, R. L., & Jankowiak, W. (2014). Human preferences for sexually dimorphic faces may be evolutionarily novel. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,111, 14388–14393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, I. M., & Penton-Voak, I. S. (2011). The validity of composite photographs for assessing masculinity preferences. Perception,40, 323–331.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sherlock, J. M., Tegg, B., Sullikowski, D., & Dixson, B. J. W. (2017). Facial masculinity and beardedness determine men’s explicit, but not their implicit, responses to male dominance. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology,3, 14–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,60, 870–883.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (2006). Facial sexual dimorphism, developmental stability, and susceptibility to disease in men and women. Evolution and Human Behavior,27, 131–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentova, J. V., Varella, M., Bártová, K., Štěrbová, Z., & Dixson, B. J. W. (2017). Mate preferences and choices for facial and body hair in heterosexual women and homosexual men: Effects of sex, population, homogamy, and imprinting-like effects. Evolution and Human Behavior,38, 241–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verweij, K. J., Burri, A. V., & Zietsch, B. P. (2012). Evidence for genetic variation in human mate preferences for sexually dimorphic physical traits. PLoS ONE,7(11), e49294. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0049294.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Waynforth, D., Delwadia, S., & Camm, M. (2005). The influence of women’s mating strategies on preference for masculine facial architecture. Evolution and Human Behavior,26, 409–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehouse, A. J., Gilani, S. Z., Shafait, F., Mian, A., Tan, D. W., Maybery, M. T., & Eastwood, P. (2015). Prenatal testosterone exposure is related to sexually dimorphic facial morphology in adulthood. Proceedings of the Royal Society B,282, 20151351. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.1351.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Windhager, S., Schaefer, K., & Fink, B. (2011). Geometric morphometrics of male facial shape in relation to physical strength and perceived attractiveness, dominance, and masculinity. American Journal of Human Biology,23, 805–814.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. R. (1986). Self-perceived masculinity between bearded and nonbearded males. Perceptual and Motor Skills,62, 769–770.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zietsch, B. P., Lee, A. J., Sherlock, J. M., & Jern, P. (2015). Variation in women’s facial masculinity preference is better explained by genetic differences than by previously identified context-dependent effects. Psychological Science,26, 1440–1448.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This research was approved by the Human Ethics Committee at the University of Queensland (Ethics #16-PSYCH-4-62-TS). In accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, participation was voluntary and anonymous and individuals could withdraw from the study at any point. BJWD was supported by a University of Queensland Post-Doctoral Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychology, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia

    Rebecca E. Stower, Toneya L. McIntosh, Morgan J. Sidari, James M. Sherlock & Barnaby J. W. Dixson

  2. Division of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, UK

    Anthony J. Lee

Authors
  1. Rebecca E. Stower
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony J. Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Toneya L. McIntosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Morgan J. Sidari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. James M. Sherlock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Barnaby J. W. Dixson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barnaby J. W. Dixson.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (SAV 95 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stower, R.E., Lee, A.J., McIntosh, T.L. et al. Mating Strategies and the Masculinity Paradox: How Relationship Context, Relationship Status, and Sociosexuality Shape Women’s Preferences for Facial Masculinity and Beardedness. Arch Sex Behav 49, 809–820 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-1437-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-1437-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation