Buss (1989) - Totton College
Download
Report
Transcript Buss (1989) - Totton College
Buss (1989)
SEX DIFFERENCES IN HUMAN MATE
PREFERENCES
Context
Darwin- suggested mate selection was a matter of evolution
(reproduction/ survival of one’s genes).
Evolutionary psychologists believe mate selection can be affected by
instincts maximising our chances of reproducing.
Buss was interested in 3 of these instincts:
Parental investment- Trivers (1972) women should favour ambitious,
hardworking and rich men.
Women invest more into child rearing (pregnancy/ typically the
primary caregiver) than men and are thus fussier in choosing a
partner.
Reproductive value- Access to fertile females is the main factor
affecting male reproduction.
Men will favour young women as female fertility peaks in late
teens/ early twenties.
Facial appearance gives cues as to age. Therefore, men will favour
facial attractiveness.
Paternal probability- want to be certain they pass on their genes.
Men value chastity more.
Aim
Do parental investment, reproductive value, and
paternal probability hold true across cultures- if so,
they are likely to be a result of evolution.
?
?
Procedure- Sample
37 samples from 33 countries across 6 continents…
In cases where countries had more than one separate population
(Israel, Canada, S.Africa) a sample was taken from each population.
10,047 participants
4601 male, 5446 female
Avg. age: 23.05
Sampling method:
Opportunity
Student samples, people applying for marriage licenses (Estonia),
secondary-age schoolchildren (New Zealand)
Self-selecting/ volunteer
Responders to a newspaper advert (Germany).
Procedure- Measure/ DV
2 questionnaires in native language
Questionnaire on factors affecting mate choice
Filler questions disguise the aim of the experiment.
Target variables of age, attractiveness, good financial prospects,
chastity, ambition, industriousness, and no previous sexual
experience.
Rating scale:
0
Irrelevant
1
2
3
Indispensable
Questionnaire ranking factors affecting mate choice
Rank 13 factors by most important when choosing a partner
Included good earning capacity and physical attractiveness.
Findings
Good financial prospects
36/37 cultures women placed more importance on good
financial prospects than men.
Ambition and industriousness
34/37 women placed more emphasis on ambition and
industriousness than men
In Spanish, Columbian, and Zulu S.African samples this was
reversed
Attractiveness
In 37/37 cultures men rated attractiveness as more important
than women.
Findings Cont.
Preferred age of partner
Men preferred a partner younger than themselves, and
younger than the average woman’s ideal age of partner.
Women preferred a man older than themselves.
Chastity
Most men preferred chaste women.
In Western European countries this was only emphasised in
Ireland.
Greatest cultural variation.
Conclusions
Largely supports evolutionary theory
Parental investment, reproductive value, and paternal
probability are important in mate choice across most cultures.
Evaluation- Strengths
Large sample size- representative. Increased
generalisability of results.
Validity- two separate measures used.
Questionnaires are valid measures of mate preferences.
Studies using other measures, such as marriage records, have
been criticised for measuring mate selection rather than
preference.
Cultural differences such as arranged marriage.
Evaluation- Weaknesses
Sampling procedures unrepresentative
Majority of participants from industrialised countries
Majority of student samples
Measure reduces representativeness
Can only be used for literate population.
Cultural differences: in some countries education for women is less
valued.
Demand characteristics
Participant may guess the aim of the experiment particularly from
the ranking task.
Socially sensitive
Evolution- deterministic (lack of free will).
Feminism- justifies discrimination (men value young, attractive
women)
Past Exam Questions
Section A
1. Describe the findings and conclusions of Buss’s (1989)
research ‘Sex differences in human mate preferences’.
[12] 2010
2. Outline the procedures of Buss’s (1989) research ‘Sex
differences in human mate preferences’. [12] 2009
Section B
1. Evaluate the methodology of Buss’s (1989) research
‘Sex differences in human mate preferences’. [12] 2011
2. Critically assess Buss’s (1989) research ‘Sex differences
in human mate preferences’. [12] 2009