Evolutionary Explanations of Partner
preferences
How our preferences for mates have evolved Psychology Year 2: Relationsh
Anisogamy
• Male gametes are
produced in large
Inter-sexual selection
• Females prefer quality
and are especially
Intra-sexual selection
• Males prefer quantity
but must compete to
Samuel Nesbitt
samples at little cost, choosy. Males access fertile females.
in contrast with compete to be chosen.
female gametes.
Factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships
1 – Self-disclosure 2 – Physical attractiveness
Revealing personal and sensitive information Physical good looks increase the liking people have for you. 3 – Filter
Because you can’t go
Social penetration Breadth and depth of Reciprocity of self- Importance of physical Halo effect Matching Hypothesis Social demography (1s filter)
theory self-disclosure disclosure attractiveness • We have positive • We chose partners • Factors such as proximity and
• • • stereotypes of who are of a roughly level reduce the field of availa
Partners penetrate • Layers of an onion Successful Shackelford and
more deeply into each metaphor – start with relationships needs a Larsen – symmetrical attractive people that similar level of Similarity in attitudes (2nd filt
other’s lives as they breadth but little balance in self- face – sign of genetic influence our physical • Bryne – produces a field of de
self- disclose depth and then move disclosure. fitness. judgements of them. attractiveness,
Complementary (3rd filter)
deeper. • Neotenous – triggers • Each partner being able to con
caring instinct in trait the other lacks – more im
males. than similarity later in relation
Virtual relationships in social media Parasocial relationships
One-sided relationships with celebrities or other
Relationships formation in CMCs compared to FtF
distant figures.
Reduced cues theory The hyperpersonal Absence of gating in Relationship Levels of parasocial The absorption- The attachment
• CMC relationships lack model virtual relationships. maintenance relationships addiction model explanation
the cues of Ftf • CMC presentation • Certain characteristics mechanisms. • Entertainment-social • A fan absorbs • Insecure-resistant –
interaction so there is gives more control act as a barrier to • Committed partners • Intense-personal themselves in the emotional unfulfilled
greater de- over disclosure and relationship formation act to promote their • Borderline celebrity’s world, then needs
individuation and less can be manipulated to when FtF but not in relationship through pathological needs to increase their • Parasocial
self-disclosure. promote intimacy, so CMC’s accommodation, involvement in the relationships avoid
relationships can • E.g. social anxiety, willingness to sacrifice, same that addicts do. . threat of rejection.
become more intense facial disfigurement, forgiveness etc.
than FtF
preferences
How our preferences for mates have evolved Psychology Year 2: Relationsh
Anisogamy
• Male gametes are
produced in large
Inter-sexual selection
• Females prefer quality
and are especially
Intra-sexual selection
• Males prefer quantity
but must compete to
Samuel Nesbitt
samples at little cost, choosy. Males access fertile females.
in contrast with compete to be chosen.
female gametes.
Factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships
1 – Self-disclosure 2 – Physical attractiveness
Revealing personal and sensitive information Physical good looks increase the liking people have for you. 3 – Filter
Because you can’t go
Social penetration Breadth and depth of Reciprocity of self- Importance of physical Halo effect Matching Hypothesis Social demography (1s filter)
theory self-disclosure disclosure attractiveness • We have positive • We chose partners • Factors such as proximity and
• • • stereotypes of who are of a roughly level reduce the field of availa
Partners penetrate • Layers of an onion Successful Shackelford and
more deeply into each metaphor – start with relationships needs a Larsen – symmetrical attractive people that similar level of Similarity in attitudes (2nd filt
other’s lives as they breadth but little balance in self- face – sign of genetic influence our physical • Bryne – produces a field of de
self- disclose depth and then move disclosure. fitness. judgements of them. attractiveness,
Complementary (3rd filter)
deeper. • Neotenous – triggers • Each partner being able to con
caring instinct in trait the other lacks – more im
males. than similarity later in relation
Virtual relationships in social media Parasocial relationships
One-sided relationships with celebrities or other
Relationships formation in CMCs compared to FtF
distant figures.
Reduced cues theory The hyperpersonal Absence of gating in Relationship Levels of parasocial The absorption- The attachment
• CMC relationships lack model virtual relationships. maintenance relationships addiction model explanation
the cues of Ftf • CMC presentation • Certain characteristics mechanisms. • Entertainment-social • A fan absorbs • Insecure-resistant –
interaction so there is gives more control act as a barrier to • Committed partners • Intense-personal themselves in the emotional unfulfilled
greater de- over disclosure and relationship formation act to promote their • Borderline celebrity’s world, then needs
individuation and less can be manipulated to when FtF but not in relationship through pathological needs to increase their • Parasocial
self-disclosure. promote intimacy, so CMC’s accommodation, involvement in the relationships avoid
relationships can • E.g. social anxiety, willingness to sacrifice, same that addicts do. . threat of rejection.
become more intense facial disfigurement, forgiveness etc.
than FtF
