Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Women’s Mating Strategies and Mate Value Are Associated with Viewing Time to Facial Masculinity

Archives of Sexual Behavior volume 52, pages 2143–2151 (2023)Cite this article

Abstract

Sexual selection has shaped women’s preferences for ideal physical features in men that signal good health. Facial masculinity is often used as a proxy in signaling health, viability, and disease resistance, and it is thought to be attractive because it advertises heritable benefits. Preferences for facial masculinity are also associated with individual differences in one’s sociosexuality and mate value, where women oriented toward a short-term mating orientation and are of high mate value may prefer men with masculine features. The current study examined women’s sociosexuality and mate value (i.e., self-rating of overall desirability) in rating attractiveness and visual attention to facial masculinity in men’s faces using an eye-tracking task. Overall, women (N = 72) did not show any significant preferences for men with masculinized over feminized faces. However, women who scored high on sociosexuality (i.e., unrestricted sociosexuality) and mate value demonstrated increased visual attention and looking frequency to masculinized over feminized faces. The study highlights the unique role of cognitive mechanisms in visually assessing a potential mate and how individual differences in short-term mating strategies and mate value may moderate those preferences. These findings underscore the importance of examining individual differences in mate preferences research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Data Availability

The data and stimuli are available upon request.

Code Availability

The JAMOVI file for statistical analysis is available upon request.

References

  • Arnocky, S. (2018). Self-perceived mate value, facial attractiveness, and mate preferences: Do desirable men want it all? Evolutionary Psychology, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704918763271

  • Boothroyd, L. G., Jones, B. C., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2007). Partner characteristics associated with masculinity, health and maturity in male faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1161–1173.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boothroyd, L., Scott, I., Gray, A. W., Coombes, C. I., & Pound, N. (2013). Male facial masculinity as a cue to health outcomes. Evolutionary Psychology, 11, 1044–1058.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burriss, R. P., Marcinkowska, U. M., & Lyons, M. T. (2014). Gaze properties of women judging the attractiveness of masculine and feminine male faces. Evolutionary Psychology, 12, 19–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100(2), 204–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 77–110.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (2008). Attractive women want it all: Good genes, economic investment, parenting proclivities, and emotional commitment. Evolutionary Psychology, 6(1), 134–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, L., Jian, X., Fan, H., Yang, Y., & Ren, Z. (2018). The relationship between observers’ self-attractiveness and preference for physical dimorphism: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(2431). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02431

  • Clarkson, T. R., Sidari, M. J., Sains, R., Alexander, M., Harrison, M., Mefodeva, V., Pearson, S., Lee, A. J., & Dixson, B. J. W. (2020). A multivariate analysis of women’s mating strategies and sexual selection on men’s facial morphology. Royal Society Open Science, 7, 191209. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.191209

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, K., Pellicer-Sanchez, A., & Carrol, G. (2018). Eye-tracking: A guide for applied linguistics research. Cambridge Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L., & Jones, B. (2017). Young adult white faces with manipulated versions. figshare. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.4220517.v1

  • Dixson, B. J., Grimshaw, G. M., Ormsby, D. K., & Dixson, A. F. (2014). Eye-tracking women’s preferences for men’s somatotypes. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35, 73–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durkee, P., Goetz, A. T., & Lukaszewski, A. (2017). Formidability assessment mechanisms: Examining their speed and automaticity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(2), 170–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edlund, J. E., & Sagarin, B. J. (2017). The Mate Value Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 64, 72–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekrami, O., Claes, P., Shriver, M. D., Wienberg, S. M., Marazita, M. L., Walsh, S., & Van Dongen, S. (2021). Effects of male facial masculinity on perceived attractiveness. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, 7, 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40750-020-00156-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Folstad, I., & Karter, A. J. (1992). Parasites, bright males, and the immunocompetence handicap. The American Naturalist, 139, 603–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foo, Y. Z., Simmons, L. W., Perrett, D. I., Holt, P. G., Eastwood, P. R., & Rhodes, G. (2020). Immune function during early adolescence positively predicts adult facial sexual dimorphism in both men and women. Evolution and Human Behavior, 41(3), 199–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W. (1993). Sexual selection and physical attractiveness—Implications for mating dynamics. Human Nature, 4, 205–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02692200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Garza, R., Heredia, R. R., & Cieslicka, A. B. (2017). An eye tracking examination of men’s attractiveness by conceptive risk women. Evolutionary Psychology, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704917690741

  • Garza, R., & Byrd-Craven, J. (2019). Fertility status in visual processing of men’s attractiveness. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 5, 328–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-019-00190-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garza, R., & Byrd-Craven, J. (2021). Effects of women’s short-term mating orientation and self-perceived attractiveness in rating and viewing men’s waist to chest ratios. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 50(2), 543–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01846-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Geniole, S. N., Denson, T. F., Dixson, B. J., Carre, J. M., & McCormick, C. M. (2015). Evidence from meta-analyses of the facial-width-to-height ratio as an evolved cue of threat. PLoS ONE, 10(7), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krupp, D. B. (2008). Through evolution’s eyes: Extracting mate preferences by linking visual attention to adaptive design. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-007-9273-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Little, A. C., Burt, D. M., Penton-Voak, I. S., & Perrett, D. I. (2001). Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 268, 39–44.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  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 relation- ships influence human female preferences of sexual dimorphism in male face shape. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 269, 1095–1193.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, M., Marcinkowska, U., Moisey, V., & Harrison, N. (2016). The effects of resource availability and relationship status on women’s preference for facial masculinity in men: An eye-tracking study. Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 25–28.

    Article  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, 1367–1354.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marcinkowska, U. M., Rantala, M. J., Lee, A. J., Kozlov, M. V., Aavik, T., Cai, H., & Dixson, B. J. W. (2019). Women’s preferences for men’s facial masculinity are strongest under favorable ecological conditions. Scientific Reports, 9, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-39350-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mefodeva, V., Sidari, M. J., Chau, H., Fitzsimmons, B., Antoine, G., Clarkson, T. R., Pearson, S., Lee, A. J., & Dixson, B. J. W. (2020). Multivariate intra-sexual selection on men’s perceptions of male facial morphology. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, 6, 143–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitrovic, A., Goller, J., Tinio, P. P. L., & Leder, H. (2018). How relationships status and sociosexual orientation influence the link between facial attractiveness and visual attention. PLoS ONE, 13(11), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mogilski, J. K., & Welling, L. L. M. (2017). The relative importance of sexual dimorphism, fluctuating asymmetry, and color cues to health during evaluation of potential partners’ facial photographs: A conjoint analysis study. Human Nature, 28, 53–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mogilski, J. K., & Welling, L. L. M. (2018). The relative contribution of jawbone and cheekbone prominence, eyebrow thickness, eye size, and face length to evaluations of facial masculinity and attractiveness: A conjoint data-driven approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2428. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02428

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, J. J. M., Feinberg, D. R., Fraccaro, P. J., Borak, D. J., Tigue, C. C., Re, D. E., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., & Tiddeman, B. (2012). Manipulations of vocal and facial masculinity in videos influence attractiveness. Ethology, 118, 321–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pazhoohi, F., Garza, R., Doyle, J. F., Macedo, A. F., & Arantes, J. (2019). Sex differences for preferences of shoulder to hip ratio in men and women: An eye tracking study. Evolutionary Psychological Sciences, 5, 405–415.

    Article  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.

    Article  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(3), 264–271. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.117.3.264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Provost, M. P., Komos, 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Provost, M. P., Troje, N. F., & Quinsey, V. L. (2008). Short-term mating strategies and attraction to masculinity in point-light walkers. Evolution & Human Behavior, 29, 65–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rantala, M., Moore, F., 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  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 199–226. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, G., Morley, G., & Simmons, L. W. (2012). Women can judge sexual unfaithfulness from unfamiliar men’s faces. Biology Letters, 9, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2012.0908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, I. M. L., Clark, A. P., Boothroyd, L. G., & Penton-Voak, I. S. (2012). Do men’s faces really signal heritable immunocompetence. Behavioral Ecology, 1, 579–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stower, R. E., Lee, A. J., McIntosh, T. L., Sidari, M. J., Sherlock, J. M., & Dixson, B. J. W. (2020). Mating strategies and the masculinity paradox: How relationship context, relationship status, and sociosexuality shape women’s preferences for facial masculinity and beardedness. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 49, 809–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-1437-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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. PMID: 10562724.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. Sexual selection & the descent of Man, 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Aldine de Gruyter.

    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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen, F. F., & Zuo, B. (2012). The effects of transformed gender facial features on face preference of college students: Based on the test of computer graphics and eye movement tracks. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 44, 14–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wincenciak, J., Fincher, C. L., Fisher, C. I., Hahn, A. C., Jones, B. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2015). Mate choice, mate preference, and biological markets: The relationship between partner choice and health preference is modulated by women’s own attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36, 274–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.12.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, T., Chen, H., Hu, Y., Zheng, Y., & Wang, W. (2015). Preferences for sexual dimorphism on attractiveness levels: An eye-tracking study. Personality and Individual Differences, 77, 179–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The study did not receive any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology and Communication, Texas A&M International University, 5201 University Blvd., Laredo, TX, 78041, USA

    Ray Garza

  2. The Oklahoma Center for Evolutionary Analysis (OCEAN), Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA

    Jennifer Byrd-Craven

Authors
  1. Ray Garza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jennifer Byrd-Craven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ray Garza.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interests. All participants provided consent when participating in this study.

Ethical Approval

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Oklahoma State University.

Informed Consent

All participants consented to participating in the study (AS-19-95).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Garza, R., Byrd-Craven, J. Women’s Mating Strategies and Mate Value Are Associated with Viewing Time to Facial Masculinity. Arch Sex Behav 52, 2143–2151 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-023-02621-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-023-02621-7

Keywords

search

Navigation