A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Eastwick, P. W.
Publication Date: 2025
Other Authors: Sparks, J., Finkel, E. J., Meza, E. M., Adamkovič, M., Adu, P., Ai, T., Akintola, A. A., Al-Shawaf, L., Apriliawati, D., Arriaga, P., Aubert-Teillaud, B., Banik, G., Barzykowski, K., Batres, C., Baucom, K. J., Beaulieu, E. Z., Behnke, M., Butcher, N., Charles, D. Y., Chen, J. M., Cheon, J. E., Chittham, P., Chwiłkowska, P., Cong, C. W., Copping, L. T., Corral-Frias, N. S., Adoric, V. C., Dizon, M., Du, H., Ehinmowo, M. I., Escribano, D. A., Espinosa, N. M., Expósito, F., Feldman, G., Freitag, R., Frias Armenta, M., Gallyamova, A., Gillath, O., Gjoneska, B., Gkinopoulos, T., Grafe, F., Grigoryev, D., Groyecka-Bernard, A., Gunaydin, G., Ilustrisimo, R., Impett, E., Kačmár, P., Kim, Y.-H., Kocur, M., Kowal, M., Krishna, M., Labor, P. D., Lu, J. G., Lucas, M. Y., Małecki, W., Malinakova, K., Meißner, S., Meier, Z., Misiak, M., Muise, A., Novak, L., O, J., Özdoğru, A. A., Park, H. G., Paruzel, M., Pavlović, Z., Püski, M., Ribeiro, G., Roberts, S. C., Röer, J. P., Ropovik, I., Ross, R. M., Sakman, E., Salvador, C. E., Selcuk, E., Skakoon-Sparling, S., Sorokowska, A., Sorokowski, P., Spasovski, O., Stanton, S. C. E., Stewart, S. L..K., Swami, V., Szaszi, B., Takashima, K., Tavel, P., Tejada, J., Tu, E., Tuominen, J., Vaidis, D., Vally, Z., Vaughn, L. A., Villanueva-Moya, L., Wisnuwardhani, D., Yamada, Y., Yonemitsu, F., Žídková, R., Živná, K., Coles, N. A.
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
Download full: http://hdl.handle.net/10071/33459
Summary: Ideal partner preferences (i.e., ratings of the desirability of attributes like attractiveness or intelligence) are the source of numerous foundational findings in the interdisciplinary literature on human mating. Recently, research on the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching (i.e., Do people positively evaluate partners who match vs. mismatch their ideals?) has become mired in several problems. First, articles exhibit discrepant analytic and reporting practices. Second, different findings emerge across laboratories worldwide, perhaps because they sample different relationship contexts and/or populations. This registered report—partnered with the Psychological Science Accelerator—uses a highly powered design (N = 10,358) across 43 countries and 22 languages to estimate preference-matching effect sizes. The most rigorous tests revealed significant preference-matching effects in the whole sample and for partnered and single participants separately. The “corrected pattern metric” that collapses across 35 traits revealed a zero-order effect of ? = .19 and an effect of ? = .11 when included alongside a normative preference-matching metric. Specific traits in the “level metric” (interaction) tests revealed very small (average ? = .04) effects. Effect sizes were similar for partnered participants who reported ideals before entering a relationship, and there was no consistent evidence that individual differences moderated any effects. Comparisons between stated and revealed preferences shed light on gender differences and similarities: For attractiveness, men’s and (especially) women’s stated preferences underestimated revealed preferences (i.e., they thought attractiveness was less important than it actually was). For earning potential, men’s stated preferences underestimated—and women’s stated preferences overestimated—revealed preferences. Implications for the literature on human mating are discussed.
id RCAP_a8bd65f1a2b0c7a0099822f8b31f8050
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/33459
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository_id_str https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160
spelling A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matchingAttractionClose relationshipsHuman matingIdealsMatching hypothesisIdeal partner preferences (i.e., ratings of the desirability of attributes like attractiveness or intelligence) are the source of numerous foundational findings in the interdisciplinary literature on human mating. Recently, research on the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching (i.e., Do people positively evaluate partners who match vs. mismatch their ideals?) has become mired in several problems. First, articles exhibit discrepant analytic and reporting practices. Second, different findings emerge across laboratories worldwide, perhaps because they sample different relationship contexts and/or populations. This registered report—partnered with the Psychological Science Accelerator—uses a highly powered design (N = 10,358) across 43 countries and 22 languages to estimate preference-matching effect sizes. The most rigorous tests revealed significant preference-matching effects in the whole sample and for partnered and single participants separately. The “corrected pattern metric” that collapses across 35 traits revealed a zero-order effect of ? = .19 and an effect of ? = .11 when included alongside a normative preference-matching metric. Specific traits in the “level metric” (interaction) tests revealed very small (average ? = .04) effects. Effect sizes were similar for partnered participants who reported ideals before entering a relationship, and there was no consistent evidence that individual differences moderated any effects. Comparisons between stated and revealed preferences shed light on gender differences and similarities: For attractiveness, men’s and (especially) women’s stated preferences underestimated revealed preferences (i.e., they thought attractiveness was less important than it actually was). For earning potential, men’s stated preferences underestimated—and women’s stated preferences overestimated—revealed preferences. Implications for the literature on human mating are discussed.American Psychological Association2025-02-19T15:24:53Z2025-01-01T00:00:00Z20252025-02-19T15:20:54Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/33459eng0022-351410.1037/pspp0000524Eastwick, P. W.Sparks, J.Finkel, E. J.Meza, E. M.Adamkovič, M.Adu, P.Ai, T.Akintola, A. A.Al-Shawaf, L.Apriliawati, D.Arriaga, P.Aubert-Teillaud, B.Banik, G.Barzykowski, K.Batres, C.Baucom, K. J.Beaulieu, E. Z.Behnke, M.Butcher, N.Charles, D. Y.Chen, J. M.Cheon, J. E.Chittham, P.Chwiłkowska, P.Cong, C. W.Copping, L. T.Corral-Frias, N. S.Adoric, V. C.Dizon, M.Du, H.Ehinmowo, M. I.Escribano, D. A.Espinosa, N. M.Expósito, F.Feldman, G.Freitag, R.Frias Armenta, M.Gallyamova, A.Gillath, O.Gjoneska, B.Gkinopoulos, T.Grafe, F.Grigoryev, D.Groyecka-Bernard, A.Gunaydin, G.Ilustrisimo, R.Impett, E.Kačmár, P.Kim, Y.-H.Kocur, M.Kowal, M.Krishna, M.Labor, P. D.Lu, J. G.Lucas, M. Y.Małecki, W.Malinakova, K.Meißner, S.Meier, Z.Misiak, M.Muise, A.Novak, L.O, J.Özdoğru, A. A.Park, H. G.Paruzel, M.Pavlović, Z.Püski, M.Ribeiro, G.Roberts, S. C.Röer, J. P.Ropovik, I.Ross, R. M.Sakman, E.Salvador, C. E.Selcuk, E.Skakoon-Sparling, S.Sorokowska, A.Sorokowski, P.Spasovski, O.Stanton, S. C. E.Stewart, S. L..K.Swami, V.Szaszi, B.Takashima, K.Tavel, P.Tejada, J.Tu, E.Tuominen, J.Vaidis, D.Vally, Z.Vaughn, L. A.Villanueva-Moya, L.Wisnuwardhani, D.Yamada, Y.Yonemitsu, F.Žídková, R.Živná, K.Coles, N. A.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAP2025-02-23T01:17:53Zoai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/33459Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T20:39:25.552521Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching
title A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching
spellingShingle A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching
Eastwick, P. W.
Attraction
Close relationships
Human mating
Ideals
Matching hypothesis
title_short A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching
title_full A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching
title_fullStr A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching
title_full_unstemmed A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching
title_sort A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching
author Eastwick, P. W.
author_facet Eastwick, P. W.
Sparks, J.
Finkel, E. J.
Meza, E. M.
Adamkovič, M.
Adu, P.
Ai, T.
Akintola, A. A.
Al-Shawaf, L.
Apriliawati, D.
Arriaga, P.
Aubert-Teillaud, B.
Banik, G.
Barzykowski, K.
Batres, C.
Baucom, K. J.
Beaulieu, E. Z.
Behnke, M.
Butcher, N.
Charles, D. Y.
Chen, J. M.
Cheon, J. E.
Chittham, P.
Chwiłkowska, P.
Cong, C. W.
Copping, L. T.
Corral-Frias, N. S.
Adoric, V. C.
Dizon, M.
Du, H.
Ehinmowo, M. I.
Escribano, D. A.
Espinosa, N. M.
Expósito, F.
Feldman, G.
Freitag, R.
Frias Armenta, M.
Gallyamova, A.
Gillath, O.
Gjoneska, B.
Gkinopoulos, T.
Grafe, F.
Grigoryev, D.
Groyecka-Bernard, A.
Gunaydin, G.
Ilustrisimo, R.
Impett, E.
Kačmár, P.
Kim, Y.-H.
Kocur, M.
Kowal, M.
Krishna, M.
Labor, P. D.
Lu, J. G.
Lucas, M. Y.
Małecki, W.
Malinakova, K.
Meißner, S.
Meier, Z.
Misiak, M.
Muise, A.
Novak, L.
O, J.
Özdoğru, A. A.
Park, H. G.
Paruzel, M.
Pavlović, Z.
Püski, M.
Ribeiro, G.
Roberts, S. C.
Röer, J. P.
Ropovik, I.
Ross, R. M.
Sakman, E.
Salvador, C. E.
Selcuk, E.
Skakoon-Sparling, S.
Sorokowska, A.
Sorokowski, P.
Spasovski, O.
Stanton, S. C. E.
Stewart, S. L..K.
Swami, V.
Szaszi, B.
Takashima, K.
Tavel, P.
Tejada, J.
Tu, E.
Tuominen, J.
Vaidis, D.
Vally, Z.
Vaughn, L. A.
Villanueva-Moya, L.
Wisnuwardhani, D.
Yamada, Y.
Yonemitsu, F.
Žídková, R.
Živná, K.
Coles, N. A.
author_role author
author2 Sparks, J.
Finkel, E. J.
Meza, E. M.
Adamkovič, M.
Adu, P.
Ai, T.
Akintola, A. A.
Al-Shawaf, L.
Apriliawati, D.
Arriaga, P.
Aubert-Teillaud, B.
Banik, G.
Barzykowski, K.
Batres, C.
Baucom, K. J.
Beaulieu, E. Z.
Behnke, M.
Butcher, N.
Charles, D. Y.
Chen, J. M.
Cheon, J. E.
Chittham, P.
Chwiłkowska, P.
Cong, C. W.
Copping, L. T.
Corral-Frias, N. S.
Adoric, V. C.
Dizon, M.
Du, H.
Ehinmowo, M. I.
Escribano, D. A.
Espinosa, N. M.
Expósito, F.
Feldman, G.
Freitag, R.
Frias Armenta, M.
Gallyamova, A.
Gillath, O.
Gjoneska, B.
Gkinopoulos, T.
Grafe, F.
Grigoryev, D.
Groyecka-Bernard, A.
Gunaydin, G.
Ilustrisimo, R.
Impett, E.
Kačmár, P.
Kim, Y.-H.
Kocur, M.
Kowal, M.
Krishna, M.
Labor, P. D.
Lu, J. G.
Lucas, M. Y.
Małecki, W.
Malinakova, K.
Meißner, S.
Meier, Z.
Misiak, M.
Muise, A.
Novak, L.
O, J.
Özdoğru, A. A.
Park, H. G.
Paruzel, M.
Pavlović, Z.
Püski, M.
Ribeiro, G.
Roberts, S. C.
Röer, J. P.
Ropovik, I.
Ross, R. M.
Sakman, E.
Salvador, C. E.
Selcuk, E.
Skakoon-Sparling, S.
Sorokowska, A.
Sorokowski, P.
Spasovski, O.
Stanton, S. C. E.
Stewart, S. L..K.
Swami, V.
Szaszi, B.
Takashima, K.
Tavel, P.
Tejada, J.
Tu, E.
Tuominen, J.
Vaidis, D.
Vally, Z.
Vaughn, L. A.
Villanueva-Moya, L.
Wisnuwardhani, D.
Yamada, Y.
Yonemitsu, F.
Žídková, R.
Živná, K.
Coles, N. A.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Eastwick, P. W.
Sparks, J.
Finkel, E. J.
Meza, E. M.
Adamkovič, M.
Adu, P.
Ai, T.
Akintola, A. A.
Al-Shawaf, L.
Apriliawati, D.
Arriaga, P.
Aubert-Teillaud, B.
Banik, G.
Barzykowski, K.
Batres, C.
Baucom, K. J.
Beaulieu, E. Z.
Behnke, M.
Butcher, N.
Charles, D. Y.
Chen, J. M.
Cheon, J. E.
Chittham, P.
Chwiłkowska, P.
Cong, C. W.
Copping, L. T.
Corral-Frias, N. S.
Adoric, V. C.
Dizon, M.
Du, H.
Ehinmowo, M. I.
Escribano, D. A.
Espinosa, N. M.
Expósito, F.
Feldman, G.
Freitag, R.
Frias Armenta, M.
Gallyamova, A.
Gillath, O.
Gjoneska, B.
Gkinopoulos, T.
Grafe, F.
Grigoryev, D.
Groyecka-Bernard, A.
Gunaydin, G.
Ilustrisimo, R.
Impett, E.
Kačmár, P.
Kim, Y.-H.
Kocur, M.
Kowal, M.
Krishna, M.
Labor, P. D.
Lu, J. G.
Lucas, M. Y.
Małecki, W.
Malinakova, K.
Meißner, S.
Meier, Z.
Misiak, M.
Muise, A.
Novak, L.
O, J.
Özdoğru, A. A.
Park, H. G.
Paruzel, M.
Pavlović, Z.
Püski, M.
Ribeiro, G.
Roberts, S. C.
Röer, J. P.
Ropovik, I.
Ross, R. M.
Sakman, E.
Salvador, C. E.
Selcuk, E.
Skakoon-Sparling, S.
Sorokowska, A.
Sorokowski, P.
Spasovski, O.
Stanton, S. C. E.
Stewart, S. L..K.
Swami, V.
Szaszi, B.
Takashima, K.
Tavel, P.
Tejada, J.
Tu, E.
Tuominen, J.
Vaidis, D.
Vally, Z.
Vaughn, L. A.
Villanueva-Moya, L.
Wisnuwardhani, D.
Yamada, Y.
Yonemitsu, F.
Žídková, R.
Živná, K.
Coles, N. A.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Attraction
Close relationships
Human mating
Ideals
Matching hypothesis
topic Attraction
Close relationships
Human mating
Ideals
Matching hypothesis
description Ideal partner preferences (i.e., ratings of the desirability of attributes like attractiveness or intelligence) are the source of numerous foundational findings in the interdisciplinary literature on human mating. Recently, research on the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching (i.e., Do people positively evaluate partners who match vs. mismatch their ideals?) has become mired in several problems. First, articles exhibit discrepant analytic and reporting practices. Second, different findings emerge across laboratories worldwide, perhaps because they sample different relationship contexts and/or populations. This registered report—partnered with the Psychological Science Accelerator—uses a highly powered design (N = 10,358) across 43 countries and 22 languages to estimate preference-matching effect sizes. The most rigorous tests revealed significant preference-matching effects in the whole sample and for partnered and single participants separately. The “corrected pattern metric” that collapses across 35 traits revealed a zero-order effect of ? = .19 and an effect of ? = .11 when included alongside a normative preference-matching metric. Specific traits in the “level metric” (interaction) tests revealed very small (average ? = .04) effects. Effect sizes were similar for partnered participants who reported ideals before entering a relationship, and there was no consistent evidence that individual differences moderated any effects. Comparisons between stated and revealed preferences shed light on gender differences and similarities: For attractiveness, men’s and (especially) women’s stated preferences underestimated revealed preferences (i.e., they thought attractiveness was less important than it actually was). For earning potential, men’s stated preferences underestimated—and women’s stated preferences overestimated—revealed preferences. Implications for the literature on human mating are discussed.
publishDate 2025
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2025-02-19T15:24:53Z
2025-01-01T00:00:00Z
2025
2025-02-19T15:20:54Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10071/33459
url http://hdl.handle.net/10071/33459
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 0022-3514
10.1037/pspp0000524
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv American Psychological Association
publisher.none.fl_str_mv American Psychological Association
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
collection Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv info@rcaap.pt
_version_ 1833598776510513152