Abstract
Previous research has demonstrated that hormones, relationship goals, and social context influence interest in the opposite sex. It has not been previously reported, however, whether having a current sexual partner also influences interest in members of the opposite sex. To test this, we obtained explicit and implicit measures of interest by measuring men’s and women’s subjective ratings and response times while they evaluated photos of opposite-sex faces. Fifty-nine men and 56 women rated 510 photos of opposite-sex faces for realism, masculinity, attractiveness, or affect. We found that these subjective ratings were not influenced by partner status in either men or women. However, women who did not report having a current sexual partner spent more time evaluating the photos than women who did have partners, demonstrating greater interest in the photos. Sexual partner status did not predict men’s response times. These findings may reveal that relationship commitment in women suppresses interest in alternative partners.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bateson, M., & Healy, S. D. (2005). Comparative evaluation and its implications for mate choice. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20, 659–664.
Brown, M. (1979). Viewing time of pornography. Journal of Psychology, 102, 83–95.
Conaglen, H. M., & Evans, I. M. (2006). Pictorial cues and sexual desire: an experimental approach. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 197–212.
Field, M., Mogg, K., Zetteler, J., & Bradley, B. P. (2004). Attentional biases for alcohol cues in heavy and light social drinkers: the roles of initial orienting and maintained attention. Psychopharmacology, 176, 88–93.
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–644.
Gangestad, S. W., Garver-Apgar, C. E., Simpson, J. A., & Cousins, A. J. (2007). Changes in women’s mate preferences across the ovulatory cycle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 151–163.
Gonzaga, G. C., Haselton, M. G., Smurda, J., Davies, M., & Poore, J. C. (2008). Love, desire, and the suppression of thoughts of romantic alternatives. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 119–126.
Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., Quinsey, V. L., & Chaplin, T. C. (1996). Viewing time as a measure of sexual interest among child molesters and normal heterosexual men. Behavioral Research Therapy, 34, 389–394.
Haselton, M. G., & Gangestad, S. W. (2006). Conditional expression of women’s desires and men’s mate guarding across the ovulatory cycle. Hormones and Behavior, 49, 509–518.
Havlicek, J., Roberts, S. C., & Flegr, J. (2005). Women’s preference for dominant male odour: effects of menstrual cycle and relationship status. Biology Letters, 1, 256–259.
Jones, B. C., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Boothroyd, L., DeBruine, L. M., Feinberg, D. R., et al. (2005). Commitment to relationships and preferences for femininity and apparent health in faces are strongest on days of the menstrual cycle when progesterone levels are high. Hormones and Behavior, 48, 283–290.
Keogh, E., Dillon, C., Georgiou, G., & Hunt, C. (2001). Selective attentional biases for physical threat in physical anxiety sensitivity. Anxiety Disorders, 15, 299–315.
Laws, D. R., & Gress, C. L. Z. (2004). Seeing things differently: the viewing time alternative to penile plethysmography. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9, 183–196.
Lindgren, K., Shoda, Y., & George, W. H. (2007). Sexual or friendly? Associations about women, men, and self. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 190–201.
Lydon, J. E., Fitzsimons, G. M., & Naidoo, L. (2003). Devaluation versus enhancement of attractive alternatives: a critical test using the calibration paradigm. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 349–359.
Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., & DeWall, C. N. (2007). Adaptive attentional attunement: evidence for mating-related perceptual bias. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 28–36.
Miller, R. S. (1997). Inattentive and contented: relationship commitment and attention to alternatives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 758–766.
Miller, G. F., & Todd, P. M. (1998). Mate choice turns cognitive. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 190–198.
Miller, G., Tybur, J. M., & Jordan, B. D. (2007). Ovulatory cycle effects on tip earnings by lap dancers: economic evidence for human estrus? Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 375–381.
Mogg, K., Bradley, B. P., Hyare, H., & Lee, S. (1998). Selective attention to food-related stimuli in hunger: are attentional biases specific to emotional and psychopathological states, or are they also found in normal drive states? Behavior Research and Therapy, 36, 227–237.
Moore, M. M. (1985). Nonverbal courtship patterns in women; context and consequences. Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 237–247.
O’Hagan, S., Johnson, A., Lardi, G., & Keenan, J. P. (2003). The effect of relationship status on perceived attractiveness. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 291–300.
Pillsworth, E. G., & Haselton, M. G. (2006). Male sexual attractiveness predicts differential ovulatory shifts in female extra-pair attraction and male mate retention. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 247–258.
Provost, M. A., 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.
Quinsey, V. L., Ketsetzis, M., Earls, C., & Karamanoukian, A. (1996). Viewing time as a measure of sexual interest. Ethology and Sociobiology, 17, 341–354.
Rowland, D. A., & Perrett, D. I. (1995). Manipulating facial appearance through shape and color. Computer Graphics and Applications, 15, 70–76.
Rupp, H. A., & Wallen, K. (2007a). Sex differences in viewing sexual stimuli: an eye tracking study in men and women. Hormones and Behavior, 51, 524–533.
Rupp, H. A., & Wallen, K. (2007b). Relationship between testosterone and interest in sexual stimuli: the effect of experience. Hormones and Behavior, 52, 581–589.
Rupp, H. A., & Wallen, K. (2008a). Sex specific content preferences for visual sexual stimuli. Archives of Sexual Behavior (in press). (doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9402-5).
Rupp, H. A., & Wallen, K. (2008b). Sex differences in response to visual sexual stimuli: a review. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 206–218.
Schultheiss, O. C., Dargel, A., & Rohde, W. (2003). Implicit motives and gonadal steroid hormones: effects of menstrual cycle phase, oral contraceptive use, and relationship status. Hormones and Behavior, 43, 293–301.
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
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.
Wilcox, A. J., Dunson, D. B., Weinberg, C. R., Trussell, J., & Baird, D. D. (2001). Likelihood of conception with a single act of intercourse: providing benchmark rates for assessment of post-coital contraceptives. Contraception, 63, 211–215.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Dr. Erick Janssen for the generous use of his male face stimuli and helpful comments on the project. This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health–funded Common Themes in Reproductive Diversity training grant NICHHD-T32-HD-49339-0.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rupp, H., Librach, G.R., Feipel, N.C. et al. Partner Status Influences Women’s Interest in the Opposite Sex. Hum Nat 20, 93–104 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-009-9056-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-009-9056-6