Pooja JassaniJustin Kok Pov LeeLinda Van Laer

Human Mate Selection

How do two individuals become a couple?

Why Do People Need a Partner?

• Desire for intimacy (emotional & sexual)• Establishing a family, procreation• Benefits mental & physical health• Social & financial stability• Cultural expectations (e.g. status)

(Sassler, 2010)

Components of Mating Strategies

• Biological: Physiological aspects including physical arousal, attraction, and neurological effects of attraction.

• Learned: Molded through social learning, interaction of sexual scripts, and mental schemas.

• Cognitive: Maintenance of the relationship, and selection of mate based on all characteristics. Including control and response to internal/external stimuli.

Theories on Human Mating Behavior

• Sexual Selection (Evolution, Darwin)• Motivation Systems: Sexual Arousal• Homogamy (“Like Marries Like”)• Complementary Needs theory (“Opposites Attract”)• Exchange Theory• Time & Place Theory (“Happy Collision”)• Filter theory -- We filter out people that don’t meet our

criteria

Origins: Evolutionary Perspective

Human beings are a result of a long line of successful maters.

As a result, what we now define as ‘mating strategies’ drive the motivations of humankind toward the perpetuation of the species.

Mating Strategy

• Evolutionary view: defined as a Darwinist mechanism that enables the human species to reproduce with the most survivable chances.

• Biological: Driven by a sexual drive, classified as a base instinct of all mammalian species; utilizing specific physiological and neurological structures to aid the process.

• Cognitive: The higher-level thought processes available to humans which influence and devise specific mating strategies relative to environmental cues.

Sexual Selection Theory (Darwin)

• Males compete among themselves, to ward off predators and to become more attractive to females

• Females then select the more agreeable partner• Different cultures have different views on attractiveness

(Husain & Firdous, 1994)

Gender Differences: Generalizations

Long-Term Female Mating Strategies• Mate who has (or can obtain) resources to

invest in raising offspring. • Mate who is willing to use those resources

to raise offspring. • Capacity to physically protect both the

female and her offspring.• Has or can develop good parenting skills• Mate who is compatible socially and

emotionally• Physically healthy (Buss, 1999)

Long Term Male Mating Strategies• Greater sexual access• Increased chances of paternity and

continuance of bloodline.• Higher emphasis on physical standards of

beauty and physical attributes

Motivation Systems: Sexual Arousal

Toates incentive-motivation model•Model of sexual motivation, arousal and behavior:•Incentive cues in the environment stimulates the nervous system leading to sexual motivation•Sexual motivation and behavior is then moderated by internal cognition (schemas and scripts) and external stimulation. (Physiological and neurological)

Homogamy Theory

• “Like marries like”• We are attracted to people with similar characteristics:

ethnicity, religion, career, education, hobbies & interests, physical stature & appearance

(Husain & Firdous, 1994)

Theory of Propinquity

• Marry people we know, or who we can find in our direct surroundings (e.g: school, college, work, neighbourhood, etc.)

Complementary Needs Theory

• “Opposites Attract”• We find people that compliment our needs. We may be

attracted to a partner who has a certain trait that we are lacking.

(Husain & Firdous, 1994)

Exchange Theory

• We evaluate our worth and find someone of similar worth.• We find people with similarities to us (looks for looks, money

for money, etc.)• Or: People will exchange or barter to make up in areas (i.e. my

looks for your money).

Time and Place Theory(“Happy Collision”)

• Fate: we marry the person we are supposed to when the time is right.

• This theory suggests that we could have married many of the people that we dated but the timing wasn’t right.

• This is against society’s expectations that there are times in our life when we should get married because that is the next step: after college, after establishing our career, when returning from military service, etc.

Filter Theory

• We filter out people that don’t meet our criteria

• The three types of filters are: – Biological– Social– Psychological

Biological Filters• Most people choose the opposite gender.• We choose someone close to our age (e.g. most 22 year old

men are not looking for a 54 year old woman)• We can rule out our relatives• Physical features are usually similar to ours, i.e. body type,

weight, height, etc.

Social Filters• We often marry within our same social class or income level.• There is an increased chance of marriage success when we

stay within our own class.• Race is the least-likely line to be crossed in mate selection.• Most people marry within their own religion.• We try to find someone of similar intelligence and education.

Psychological Filters

• Based on conscious and unconscious needs of people.• These needs are based on childhood experiences.• People will often marry someone similar to their opposite sex

parent.

Challenges in Mate Selection

• Priorities have changed in modern society: Shifted to career and independence rather than family (Sassler, 2010).

• Long term vs. Short term mating• Different strategies Male vs. Female

Short-Term Mating Strategies

• Across most cultures, males were more likely to engage in short-term mating strategies when compared to their female counterparts.

• Evolution: males gain more by having access to a wider range of partners, whereas females are bound to invest more time when pregnancy occurs.

• In short-term mating, physical attractiveness becomes more of a priority than financial status and personal warmth (Li & Kenrick, 2006)

Mate Selection Over Life Course

Partnering behaviors may change over the life span •Marital delay•Divorce rate•Economic situation•Availability of potential partners•Different marriage aspirations in various stages of life

(Sassler, 2010)

THE END

References• Buss, M. D., & Schmitt, P. D. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on

human mating. Psychological Review, Vol. 100, No 2, 204-232.• Clark, R. D., III & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers.

Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 2, 39-55.• Husain, A. & Firdous (1994). Human mating behaviour. New Delhi, India: Nothern Book

Centre. • 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 2006, Vol. 90, No. 3, 468–489.

• Sassler, S. (2010). Partnering across the life course: Sex, relationships, and mate selection. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 3, 557-575.