Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Want to Hookup?: Sex Differences in Short-term Mate Attraction Tactics

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Evolutionary Psychological Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While a great deal of psychological research has been conducted on sex-specific mate choice preferences, relatively little attention has been directed toward how heterosexual men and women solicit short-term sexual partners, and which acts are perceived to be the most effective. The present research relied on an act nomination methodology with the goal of determining which actions are used by men and women to solicit a short-term “hook-up” partner (study 1) and then determine which of these actions are perceived as most effective by men and women (study 2). Using sexual strategy theory, we hypothesized that actions that suggest sexual access would be nominated most often by women whereas actions that suggest a willingness to commit were expected to be nominated most often by men. Additionally, men and women were predicted to rate actions by men that suggest a willingness to commit as most effective and actions by women that suggest sexual access as most effective. The results were consistent with these hypotheses. These findings are discussed in the context of both short- and long-term mating strategies and mate solicitation. The relationship between motivation, sexual strategies, and sexual behavior are examined, along with the need for research on the hookup tactics and motivations of self-identifying gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A version of this paper was presented at the 28th Human Behavior and Evolution Society Conference, Vancouver, BC.

References

  • Alley, T. R., Brubaker, L. W., & Fox, O. M. (2013). Courtship feeding in humans?. Human Nature, 24(4), 430–443

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Apostolou, M., & Christoforou, C. (2020). The art of flirting: What are the traits that make it effective?. Personality and Individual Differences, 158(1).

  • Armstrong, H. L., & Reissing, E. D. (2015). Women’s motivations to have sex in casual and committed relationships with male and female partners. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(4), 921–934. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0462-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, C., Kahn, A., & Saville, B. (2010). To hook up or date: which gender benefits? Sex Roles, 62, 661–669. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9765-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenman, A., & Wade, T. J. (2020). The influence of self-perceptions of attractiveness on substance use: Sex differences in predictors of alcohol consumption in college students. EvoS Journal: The Journal of the Evolutionary Studies Consortium, 11. Sp. Iss, 1, 1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (1994). The strategies of human mating. American Scientist, 82(3), 238–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (2016). Act Nomination Method. Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science, 1–3

  • Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(3), 559–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 224–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. D., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 2, 39–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M. L. (2002). Alcohol use and risky sexual behavior among college students and youth: Evaluating the evidence. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Supplement, 14, 101–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Jong, D. C., Adams, K. N., & Reis, H. T. (2018). Predicting women’s emotional responses to hooking up: Do motives matter? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35, 532–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, J. L., Drouin, M., & Punyanunt-Carter, N. M. (2019). An empirical comparison of back burners, hookups, and friends with benefits relationships in young adults. Communication Research Reports, 26(5), 415–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2019.1683530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fielder, R. L., & Carey, M. P. (2010). Prevalence and characteristics of sexual ‘hookups’ among first-semester female college students. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 36, 346–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, M. L., Worth, K., Garcia, J. R., & Meredith, T. (2011). Feelings of regret following uncommitted sexual encounters in Canadian university students. Culture, Health & Sexuality,. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2011.619579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flack Jr, W. F., Daubman, K. A., Caron, M. L., Asadorian, J. A., D’Aureli, N. R., Gigliotti, S. N., & Stine, E. R. (2007). Risk factors and consequences of unwanted sex among university students: Hooking up, alcohol, and stress response. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22(2), 139-157.

  • Garcia, J., & Reiber, C. (2008). Hook-up behavior: A biopsychosocial perspective. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2(4), 192–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, J. R., Reiber, C., Massey, S. G., & Merriwether, A. M. (2012). Sexual hookup culture: A review. Review of General Psychology, 16(2), 161

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Garneau, C., Olmstead, S., Pasley, K., & Fincham, F. (2013). The role of family structure and attachment in college student hookups. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1473–1486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0118-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goetz, C. D., Easton, J. A., Lewis, D. M., & Buss, D. M. (2012). Sexual exploitability: Observable cues and their link to sexual attraction. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(4), 417-426.

  • Greer, A., & Buss, D. (1994). Tactics for promoting sexual encounters. Journal of Sex Research, 31(3), 185–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greiling, H. (1994). Women's short- term mating. Paper presented at the 6th annual meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society, Ann Arbor, MI.

  • Greiling, H., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Women's sexual strategies: The hidden dimension of extra-pair mating. Personality and individual Differences, 28(5), 929-963.

  • Hald, G. M., & Høgh-Olesen, H. (2010). Receptivity to sexual invitations from strangers of the opposite gender. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(6), 453–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, J. L. (1988). Dance, sex, and gender: Signs of identity, dominance, defiance, and desire. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, J. L. (2010). Dance and sexuality: Many moves. Journal of Sex Research, 47(2–3), 212–241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hehman, J. A., & Salmon, C. A. (2020). Beyond sex differences: Predictors of negative emotions following casual sex. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 6, 97–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hrdy, S. B. (1999). Mother nature: A history of mothers, infants, and natural selection. Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, S. M., Harrison, M. A., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2007). Sex differences in romantic kissing among college students: An evolutionary perspective. Evolutionary Psychology, 5(3), 612–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, V. S., Hagel, R., Franklin, M., Fink, B., & Grammer, K. (2001). Male facial attractiveness: Evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 251–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., & Buss, D. M. (2012). Avoiding entangling commitments: Tactics for implementing a short-term mating strategy. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(5), 606-610.

  • Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., Webster, G. D., & Schmitt, D. P. (2009). The dark triad: Facilitating a short-term mating strategy in men. European Journal of Personality, 23(1), 5–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., Valentine, K. A., Li, N. P., & Harbeson, C. L. (2011). Mate-selection and the Dark Triad: Facilitating a short-term mating strategy and creating a volatile environment. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(6), 759–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J., & Schneider, M. (2013). Casual hook up sex during the first year of college: Prospective associations with attitudes about sex and love relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1451–1462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0078-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, H., & Chasiotis, A. (2007). Maternal investment. In C. Salmon & T. K. Shackelford (Eds.), Family relationships: An evolutionary perspective. (pp. 91–114). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kennair, L. E. O., Bendixen, M., & Buss, D. M. (2016). Sexual regret: Tests of competing explanations of sex differences. Evolutionary Psychology, 14(4), 1474704916682903

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • LaBrie, J. W., Hummer, J. F., Ghaidarov, T. M., Lac, A., & Kenney, S. R. (2014). Hooking up in the college context: The event-level effects of alcohol use and partner familiarity on hookup behaviors and contentment. Journal of Sex Research, 51(1), 62–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, T. A., Kahn, A. S., & Apple, K. J. (2003). Pluralistic ignorance and hooking up. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 129–133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Li, N. P. (2007). Mate preference necessities in long-and short-term mating: People prioritize in themselves what their mates prioritize in them. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 39, 528–535

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, N. P., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Sex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: What, whether, and why. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 468–489

  • Maisto, S. A., Carey, M. P., Carey, K. B., Gordon, C. M., Schum, J. L., & Lynch, K. G. (2004). The relationship between alcohol and individual differences variables on attitudes and behavioral skills relevant to sexual health among heterosexual young adult men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33(6), 571–584

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Moran, J. B., Wade, T. J., & Murray, D. R. (2020). The psychology of breakup sex: Exploring the motivational factors and affective consequences of post-breakup sexual activity. Evolutionary Psychology, 18(3).

  • Morris, D. (1994). The human animal: A personal view of the human species. BBC Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, E. L., & Hayes, A. (2002). The casualties of ‘casual’ sex: A qualitative exploration of the phenomenology of college students’ hookups. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 639–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavard, S., Koons, D. N., & Heyer, E. (2007). The influence of maternal care in shaping human survival and fertility. Evolution: International Journal of Organic Evolution, 61(12), 2801-2810.

  • Paynter, A., & Leaper, C. (2016). Heterosexual dating double standards in undergraduate women and men. Sex Roles, 75, 393–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perilloux, C., Cloud, J. M., & Buss, D. M. (2013). Women’s physical attractiveness and short-term mating strategies. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(4), 490–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, T., Barnard, C., Ferguson, E., & Reader, T. (2008). Do humans prefer altruistic mates? Testing a link between sexual selection and altruism towards non-relatives. British Journal of Psychology, 99(4), 555–572

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roese, N. J., Pennington, G. L., Coleman, J., Janicki, M., Li, N. P., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Sex differences in regret: All for love or some for lust? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(6), 770–780

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, C. (2017). Long-term romantic relationships: Adaptationist approaches. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 11(2), 121–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, C., Townsend, J. M., & Hehman, J. (2016). Casual sex and college students: sex differences and the impact of father absence. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2(4), 254–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P., Shackelford, T. K., & Buss, D. M. (2001). Are men really more oriented toward short-term mating than women? A critical review of theory and research. Psychology, Evolution & Gender, 3(3), 211–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (1996). Strategic self-promotion and competitor derogation: Sex and context effects on the perceived effectiveness of mate attraction tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shepardson, R. L., Walsh, J. L., Carey, K. B., & Carey, M. P. (2016). Benefits of hooking up: Self-reports from first-year college women. International Journal of Sexual Health, 28(3), 216–220

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Shukusky, J. A., & Wade, T. J. (2012). Sex differences in hookup behavior: a replication and examination of parent-child relationship quality. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 6, 494–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinson, R. (2010). Hooking up in young adulthood: a review of factors influencing the sexual behavior of college students. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 24, 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/87568220903558596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strahan, R., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1972). Short, homogeneous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191-193.

  • Thomas, A. G., & Stewart-Williams, S. (2018). Mating strategy flexibility in the laboratory: Preferences for long-and short-term mating change in response to evolutionarily relevant variables. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(1), 82–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (2008). The evolutionary biology of human female sexuality.New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Voracek, M., Hofhansl, A., & Fisher, M. L. (2005). Clark and Hatfield’s evidence of women’s low receptivity to male strangers’ sexual offers revisited. Psychological Reports, 97(1), 11–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wade, T. J., Auer, G., & Roth, T. M. (2009). What is love: Further investigation of love acts. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 3(4), 290–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wade, T. J., & Feldman, A. (2016). Sex and the perceived effectiveness of flirtation techniques. Human Ethology Bulletin, 30.

  • Wade, T. J., & Slemp, J. (2015). How to flirt best: The perceived effectiveness of flirtation techniques. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 9(1), 32–43.

  • Wade, T. J., Weinstein, E., Dalal, N., & Salerno, K. J. (2015). I can dance: Further investigations of the effect of dancing ability on mate value. Human Ethology Bulletin, 10.

  • Wlodarski, R., & Dunbar, R. I. (2013). Examining the possible functions of kissing in romantic relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42(8), 1415–1423

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bucknell University, Psychological Adaptations Research Consortium, Lewisburg, PA, USA

    T. Joel Wade & Carly Downs

  2. Saint Mary’s University, Psychological Adaptations Research Consortium, Halifax, NS, B3H 1G3, Canada

    Maryanne L. Fisher

  3. University of Redlands, Psychological Adaptations Research Consortium, Redlands, CA, USA

    Catherine Salmon

Authors
  1. T. Joel Wade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maryanne L. Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Catherine Salmon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carly Downs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

T. Joel Wade did the data analyses for this research. T. Joel Wade, Maryanne Fisher, Catherine Salmon, and Carly Downs wrote the manuscript. Data collection was done by Carly Downs.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Joel Wade.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

Approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Bucknell University. The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wade, T.J., Fisher, M.L., Salmon, C. et al. Want to Hookup?: Sex Differences in Short-term Mate Attraction Tactics. Evolutionary Psychological Science 7, 430–438 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-021-00282-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-021-00282-0

Search

Navigation