We examined sex differences in preferences for sexual variety and novelty to determine whether the Coolidge effect plays a role in human sexuality. In two experimental studies that employed different manipulations, we found converging evidence that men showed a greater preference for variety in potential short-term mates than did women. In the first study, men (n = 281) were more likely than women (n = 353) to select a variety of mates when given the opportunity to distribute chances to have sex with different individuals in hypothetical situations. This sex difference was evident regardless of the targets’ attractiveness and age. Further, men found it more appealing if their committed romantic/sexual partners frequently changed their physical appearance, while women reported that they modified their physical appearance more frequently than did men, potentially appealing to male desires for novelty. In the second study, when participants were given a hypothetical dating task using photographs of potential short-term mates, men (n = 40) were more likely than women (n = 56) to select a novel person to date. Collectively, these findings lend support to the idea that sex differences in preferences for sexual variety and novelty are a salient sex-specific evolved component of the repertoire of human mating strategies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Allen, M. (1981). Individual copulatory preference and the “strange female effect” in a captive group-living male chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Primates,22, 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02382612.
Banca, P., Morris, L. S., Mitchell, S., Harrison, N. A., Potenza, M. N., & Voon, V. (2016). Novelty, conditioning and attentional bias to sexual rewards. Journal of Psychiatric Research,72, 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.10.017.
Bermant, G. (1976). Sexual behavior: Hard times with the Coolidge effect. In M. H. Siegel & H. P. Ziegler (Eds.), Psychological research: The inside story (pp. 76–103). New York, NY: Harper and Row.
Boies, S. C. (2002). University students’ uses of and reactions to online sexual information and entertainment: Links to online and offline sexual behavior. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality,11(2), 77–89.
Briere, J., Smiljanich, K., & Henschel, D. (1994). Sexual fantasies, gender, and molestation history. Child Abuse and Neglect,18(2), 131–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/0145-2134(94)90115-5.
Bunnell, B. N., Boland, B. D., & Dewsbury, D. A. (1977). Copulatory behavior of golden hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus). Behaviour,61(3/4), 180–206. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853977X00342.
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,12(1), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00023992.
Buss, D. M. (2016). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating (Revised and updated edition). New York, NY: Basic Books.
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review,100(2), 204–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.204.
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology,70, 77–110. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.204.
Carroll, J. S., Padilla-Walker, L. M., Nelson, L. J., Olson, C. D., Barry, C. M., & Madsen, S. D. (2008). Generation XXX: Pornography acceptance and use among emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research,23(1), 6–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558407306348.
Caspar, H. (2010). Facity. Retrieved April 2017, from http://www.facity.com/.
Cheetham, S. A., Thom, M. D., Beynon, R. J., & Hurst, J. L. (2008). The effect of familiarity on mate choice. In J. L. Hurst, R. J. Beynon, S. C. Roberts, & T. D. Wyatt (Eds.), Chemical signals in vertebrates 11 (pp. 271–280). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-73945-8_26.
Clark, R. D. (1990). The impact of AIDS on gender differences in willingness to engage in casual sex. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,20, 771–782. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1990.tb00437.x.
Clark, R. D., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality,2(1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1300/J056v02n01_04.
D’Orlando, F. (2011). The demand for pornography. Journal of Happiness Studies,12, 51–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-009-9175-0.
Darling, C. A., & Davidson, J. K. (1986). Coitally active university students: Sexual behaviors, concerns, and challenges. Adolescence,21(82), 403–419.
Davis, J. A., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2006). Preeclampsia and other pregnancy complications as an adaptive response to unfamiliar semen. In S. Platek & T. Shackelford (Eds.), Female infidelity and paternal uncertainty: Evolutionary perspectives on male anti-cuckoldry tactics (pp. 191–204). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511617812.010.
Delton, A., Robertson, T. E., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). The mating game isn’t over: A reply to Buller’s critique of the evolutionary psychology of mating. Evolutionary Psychology,4, 262–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470490600400122.
Dewsbury, D. A. (1981). Effects of novelty on copulatory behavior: The Coolidge effect and related phenomena. Psychological Bulletin,89, 464–482. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.89.3.464.
Dines, G., Jensen, R., & Russo, A. (1998). Pornography: The production and consumption of inequality. New York: Routledge.
Dunson, D. B., Baird, D. D., & Colombo, B. (2004). Increased infertility with age in men and women. Obstetrics and Gynecology,103(1), 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000100153.24061.45.
Ellis, L., Karadi, K., Hershberger, S., Field, E., Wersinger, S., Pellis, S., … Hetsroni, A. (Eds). (2008). Sex differences: Summarizing more than a century of scientific research. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Ellis, B. J., & Symons, D. (1990). Sex differences in sexual fantasy: An evolutionary psychological approach. Journal of Sex Research,27(4), 527–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499009551579.
Fiorino, D. F., Coury, A., & Phillips, A. G. (1997). Dynamic changes in nucleus accumbens dopamine efflux during the Coolidge effect in male rat. Journal of Neuroscience,17(12), 4849–4855. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.17-12-04849.1997.
Fisher, W. A., & Barak, A. (2001). Internet pornography: A social psychological perspective on internet sexuality. Journal of Sex Research,38(4), 312–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490109552102.
Fox, C. W., & Rauter, C. M. (2003). Bet-hedging and the evolution of multiple mating. Evolutionary Ecology Research,5, 273–286.
Gallup, G. G., Jr., & Frederick, D. A. (2010). The science of sex appeal: An evolutionary perspective. Review of General Psychology,14, 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020451.
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,23(4), 573–644. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0000337X.
Grammer, K. (1992). Variations on a theme: Age dependent mate selection in humans. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,15, 100–102. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00067704.
Gray, G. D., & Dewsbury, D. A. (1975). A quantitative description of the copulatory behavior of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Animal Behaviour,23, 261–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(75)90074-3.
Guéguen, N. (2011). Effects of solicitor sex and attractiveness on receptivity to sexual offers: A field study. Archives of Sexual Behavior,40(5), 915–919. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9750-4.
Hald, G. M. (2006). Gender differences in pornography consumption among young heterosexual Danish adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior,35(5), 577–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9064-0.
Hale, E. B., & Almquist, J. O. (1956). Effect of changes in the stimulus field on responsiveness of bulls to a constant stimulus animal [Abstract]. Anatomical Record,125, 607.
Hatfield, E., & Walster, G. W. (1978). A new look at love. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Hicks, T. V., & Leitenberg, H. (2001). Sexual fantasies about one’s partner versus someone else: Gender differences in the incidence and frequency. Journal of Sex Research,38(1), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490109552069.
Hill, K., & Hurtado, A. M. (1996). Ache life history: The ecology and demography of a foraging people. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Hughes, S. M., Harrison, M. A., & Gallup, G. J. (2004). Sex differences in mating strategies: Mate guarding, infidelity and multiple concurrent sex partners. Sexualities, Evolution, and Gender,6(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616660410001733588.
Jackson, L. A., Sullivan, L. A., & Hymes, J. S. (1987). Gender, gender role, and physical appearance. Journal of Psychology,121(1), 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1987.9712642.
Jokela, M. (2009). Physical attractiveness and reproductive success in humans: Evidence from the late 20th century United States. Evolution and Human Behavior,30(5), 342–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.03.006.
Jokela, M., Rotkirch, A., Rickard, I. J., Pettay, J., & Lummaa, V. (2010). Serial monogamy increases reproductive success in men but not in women. Behavioral Ecology,21(5), 906–912. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arq078.
Jordan, L. A., & Brooks, R. C. (2010). The lifetime costs of increased male reproductive effort: Courtship, copulation and the Coolidge effect. Journal of Evolutionary Biology,23(11), 2403–2409. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.02104.x.
Joseph, P. N., Sharma, R. K., Agarwal, A., & Sirot, L. K. (2015). Men ejaculate larger volumes of semen, more motile sperm, and more quickly when exposed to images of novel women. Evolutionary Psychological Science,1, 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-015-0022-8.
Kekäläinen, J., Rudolfsen, G., Janhunen, M., Figenschou, L., Peuhkuri, N., Tamper, N., & Kortet, R. (2010). Genetic and potential non-genetic benefits increase offspring fitness of polyandrous females in non-resource based mating system. BMC Evolutionary Biology. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-10-20.
Kelley, K., & Musialowski, D. (1986). Repeated exposure to sexually explicit stimuli: Novelty, sex, and sexual attitudes. Archives of Sexual Behavior,15, 487–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01542313.
Kirsner, B. R., Figueredo, A. J., & Jacobs, W. J. (2003). Self, friends, and lovers: Structural relations among Beck Depression Inventory scores and perceived mate values. Journal of Affective Disorders,75, 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0327(02)00048-4.
Klusmann, D. (2002). Sexual motivation and the duration of partnership. Archives of Sexual Behavior,31(3), 275–287. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015205020769.
Koukounas, E., & Over, R. (2000). Changes in the magnitude of the eyeblink startle response during habituation of sexual arousal. Behaviour Research and Therapy,38, 573–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(99)00075-3.
Law Smith, M. J., Perrett, D. I., Jones, B. C., Cornwell, R. E., Moore, F. R., Feinberg, D. R., Boothroyd, L. G., … Hillier, S. G. (2006). Facial appearance is a cue to oestrogen levels in women. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273(1583), 135–140. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2005.3296.
Lisk, R. D., & Baron, G. (1982). Female regulation of mating location and acceptance of new mating partners following mating to sexual satiety: The Coolidge effect demonstrated in the female golden hamster. Behavioral and Neural Biology,36(4), 416–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0163-1047(82)90822-6.
Little, A. C., DeBruine, L. M., & Jones, B. C. (2014). Sex differences in attraction to familiar and unfamiliar opposite-sex faces: Men prefer novelty and women prefer familiarity. Archives of Sexual Behavior,43(5), 973–981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0120-2.
Ma, D. S., Correll, J., & Wittenbrink, B. (2015). The Chicago face database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior Research Methods,47(4), 1122–1135. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0532-5.
Malamuth, N. M., Addison, T., & Koss, M. (2000). Pornography and sexual aggression: Are there reliable effects and can we understand them? Annual Review of Sex Research,11(1), 26–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/10532528.2000.10559784.
Meuwissen, I., & Over, R. (1990). Habituation and dishabituation of female sexual arousal. Behaviour Research and Therapy,28(3), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(90)90004-3.
Michael, R. P., & Zumpe, D. (1978). Potency in male rhesus monkeys: Effects of continuously receptive females. Science,200(28), 451–453. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.417398.
Morton, H., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2015). Role of partner novelty in sexual functioning: A review. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy,41(6), 593–609. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2014.958788.
O’Donohue, W. T., & Geer, J. H. (1985). The habituation of sexual arousal. Archives of Sexual Behavior,14(3), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01542106.
Olmstead, S. B., Negash, S., Pasley, K., & Fincham, F. D. (2013). Emerging adults’ expectation for pornography use in the context of future committed romantic relationships: A qualitative study. Archives of Sexual Behavior,42, 625–635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9986-7.
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3518.104.22.1683.
Pizzari, T., Cornwallis, C. K., Løvlie, H., Jakobsson, S., & Birkhead, T. R. (2003). Sophisticated sperm allocation in male fowl. Nature,426(6962), 70–74. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02004.
Plaud, J. J., Gaither, G. A., Amato-Henderson, S., & Devitt, M. (1997). The long-term habituation of sexual arousal in human males: A crossover design. Psychological Record,47(3), 385–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395233.
Richters, J., de Visser, R. O., Rissel, C. E., Grulich, A. E., & Smith, A. A. (2008). Demographic and psychosocial features of participants in bondage and discipline, ‘sadomasochism’ or dominance and submission (BDSM): Data from a national survey. Journal of Sexual Medicine,5(7), 1660–1668. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00795.x.
Rudd, N. A., & Lennon, S. J. (2000). Body image and appearance-management behaviors in college women. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal,18(3), 152–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X0001800304.
Schaefer, H., & Colgan, A. H. (1977). The effect of pornography on penile tumescence as a function of reinforcement and novelty. Behavior Therapy,8(5), 938–946. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(77)80163-9.
Schmitt, D. P., Alcalay, L., Allik, J., Austers, I., Bennett, K. L., Bianchi, G., & Zupanèiè, A. (2003). Universal sex differences in the desire for sexual variety: Tests from 52 nations, 6 continents, and 13 islands. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,85(1), 85–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3522.214.171.124.
Schmitt, D. P., Shackelford, T. K., Duntley, J., Tooke, W., & Buss, D. M. (2001). The desire for sexual variety as a key to understanding basic human mating strategies. Personal Relationships,8(4), 425–455. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2001.tb00049.x.
Steiger, S., Franz, R., Eggert, A., & Müller, J. K. (2008). The Coolidge effect, individual recognition and selection for distinctive cuticular signatures in a burying beetle. Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological Sciences Series B,275(1645), 1831–1838. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2008.0375.
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,3(12), 452–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01403-5.
Tlachi-López, J. L., Eguibar, J. R., Fernández-Guasti, A., & Lucio, R. A. (2012). Copulation and ejaculation in male rats under sexual satiety and the Coolidge effect. Physiology & Behavior,106(5), 626–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2012.04.020.
Ventura-Aquino, E., Baños-Araujo, J., Fernández-Guasti, A., & Paredes, R. G. (2016). An unknown male increases sexual incentive motivation and partner preference: Further evidence for the Coolidge effect in female rats. Physiology & Behavior,158, 54–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.02.026.
Ventura-Aquino, E., Fernández-Guasti, A., & Paredes, R. G. (2018). Hormones and the Coolidge effect. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology,467, 42–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mce.2017.09.010.
von Rueden, C., Gurven, M., & Kaplan, H. (2008). Multiple dimensions of male social status in an Amazonian society. Evolution and Human Behavior,29(6), 402–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2008.05.001.
Whalen, R. E. (1963). Sexual behavior of cats. Behaviour,20, 321–342.
Wilson, G. D. (1981). Cross-generational stability of gender differences in sexuality. Personality and Individual Differences,2(3), 254–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(81)90034-9.
Wilson, G. D. (1987). Male-female differences and sexual activity, enjoyment, and fantasies. Personality and Individual Differences,8(1), 125–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(87)90019-5.
Wilson, G. D. (1997). Gender differences in sexual fantasy: An evolutionary analysis. Personality and Individual Differences,22(1), 27–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00180-8.
Wilson, J. R., Kuehn, R. E., & Beach, F. A. (1963). Modification in sexual behavior of male rats produced by changing stimulus female. Journal of Comparative Physiology,56, 636–644. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042469.
Wilson, G. D., & Lang, R. J. (1981). Sex differences in sexual fantasy patterns. Personality and Individual Differences,2(4), 343–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(81)90093-3.
Zurbriggen, E. L., & Yost, M. R. (2004). Power, desire, and pleasure in sexual fantasies. Journal of Sex Research,41(3), 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490409552236.
We wish to acknowledge the Albright Creative Research Experience (ACRE) program for its support of this project.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
A schematic representation of the picture stimuli shown in Study 2. Participants viewed three different blocks, beginning with two paired pictures, A and B, in Block 1. As an example, if stimulus “A” was chosen as a preferred short-term dating partner, stimulus “A” would repeat and would be paired with a novel stimulus “C.” If “C” was chosen, “C” would repeat and be paired with a novel stimulus “D.” If “C” was chosen again, “C” would be paired with a novel stimulus “X.” After participants chose either “C” or “X,” Block 2 would begin, presenting pictures “E” and “F.” Note. A, B, C, E, F, G, I, J, K = facial images that could be repeated, dependent on participant’s input (gray); D, H, L, X, Y, Z = facial images were only presented once (white); End = end of the stimulus presentation.
About this article
Cite this article
Hughes, S.M., Aung, T., Harrison, M.A. et al. Experimental Evidence for Sex Differences in Sexual Variety Preferences: Support for the Coolidge Effect in Humans. Arch Sex Behav (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01730-x
- Sexual variety
- Coolidge effect
- Sexual novelty
- Short-term mating
- Mate selection
- Appearance change