Abstract
Cues in the environment, including the media environment, can shape the traits that women find attractive or desirable in potential romantic and sexual partners. In the present study, the possibility that advertisements for consumer goods may shape such preferences was explored. In a controlled experiment (n = 170), women were exposed to advertisements for everyday consumer goods, luxury goods, or to no advertisements before indicating their preferences for traits embodied by a desired romantic or sexual partner. Participants exposed to advertisements for everyday goods expressed preference for a constellation of traits that differed significantly from those preferred by participants who viewed no advertisements. In addition, preferences for specific traits, including intelligence, high earning potential, and muscularity, were influenced by exposure to ads for luxury goods; these effects were moderated by participants’ self-reported mate value. Results are discussed in terms of evolutionary theories of partner selection.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aitken, S. J., Lyons, M., & Jonason, P. K. (2013). Dads or cads? Women’s strategic decisions in the mating game. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(2), 118–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.02.017
Arnocky, S., Perilloux, C., Cloud, J. M., Bird, B. M., & Thomas, K. (2016). Envy mediates the link between social comparison and appearance enhancement in women. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2(2), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-015-0037-1
Borau, S., & Bonnefon, J. F. (2019). The imaginary intrasexual competition: Advertisements featuring provocative female models trigger women to engage in indirect aggression. Journal of Business Ethics, 157(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3643-y
Bradshaw, H. K., Rodeheffer, C. D., & Hill, S. E. (2019). Scarcity, sex, and spending: recession cues increase women’s desire for men owning luxury products and men’s desire to buy them. Journal of Business Research, advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.busres.2019.07.021
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses testing in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00023992
Buss, D. M. (2003). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating (Rev. ed.). Basic Books.
Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). From vigilance to violence: mate retention tactics in married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(2), 346–361. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.346
Chan, K., & Cai, X. (2009). Influence of television advertising on adolescents in China: an urban-rural comparison. Young consumers: Insight and ideas for responsible marketers, 10(2), 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1108/17473610910964714
Churchill, G. A., & Moschis, G. P. (1979). Television and interpersonal influences on adolescent consumer learning. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(1), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1086/208745
Durante, K. M., Griskevicius, V., Simpson, J. A., Cantu, S. M., & Li, N. P. (2012). Ovulation leads women to perceive sexy cads as good dads. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(2), 292. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028498
Giacomin, O., Janssen, F., & Shinnar, R. S. (2016). Student entrepreneurial optimism and overconfidence across cultures. International Small Business Journal, 34(7), 925–947. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242616630356
Greenberg, B. S., & Brand, J. E. (1993). Television news and advertising in schools: the ‘“Channel One”’ controversy. Journal of Communication, 43(1), 143–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01252.x
ISR (2018). Index calculations. Retrieved from data.sca.isr.umich.edu.
Kandrik, M., Jones, B. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2015). Scarcity of female mates predicts regional variation in men’s and women’s sociosexual orientation across US states. Evolution & Human Behavior, 36(3), 206–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.11.004
Kelly, R. L. (1995). The foraging spectrum: Diversity in hunter-gatherer lifeways. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Kenrick, D. T., Sadaila, E. K., Groth, G., & Trost, M. R. (1990). Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: qualifying the parental investment model. Journal of Personality, 58(1), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1990.tb00909.x
Kruger, D. A., Fisher, M., & Jobling, I. (2003). Proper and dark heroes as dads and cads: Alternative mating strategies in British romantic literature. Human Nature, 14(3), 305–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-003-1008-y
Landolt, M. A., Lalumiere, M. L., & Quinsey, V. L. (1995). Sex differences in intra-sex variations in human mating tactics: an evolutionary approach. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(94)00012-V
Lee, A. J., & Zietsch, B. P. (2011). Experimental evidence that women’s mate preferences are directly influenced by cues of pathogen prevalence and resource scarcity. Biology Letters, 7, 892–895. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2011.0454
Li, N. P., Bailey, J. M., Kenrick, D. T., & Linsenmeier, J. A. W. (2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 947–955. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.947
Lippa, R. A. (2007). The preferred traits of mates in a cross-national study of heterosexual and homosexual men and women: An examination of biological and cultural influences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36(2), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9151-2
Little, A. C., Burt, D. M., Penton-Voak, I. S., & Perrett, D. I. (2001). Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 268(1462), 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1327
Little, A. C., Cohen, D. L., Jones, B. C., & Belsky, J. (2007). Human preferences for facial masculinity change with relationship type and environmental harshness. Behavior Ecology and Sociobiology, 61(6), 967–973. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-006-0325-7
Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., & Burriss, R. P. (2007). Preferences for masculinity in male bodies change across the menstrual cycle. Hormones and Behavior, 51(5), 633–639.
Locke, A., Desrochers, J., & Arnocky, S. (2020). Induced mate abundance increases women’s expectations for engagement ring size and cost. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 6, 188–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-019-00214-z
McGraw, K. J. (2002). Environmental predictors of geographic variation in human mating preferences. Ethology, 108(4), 303–317. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0310.2002.00757.x
Noë, R., & Hammerstein, P. (1994). Biological markets: Supply and demand determine the effect of partner choice in cooperation, mutualism and mating. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 35(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00167053
Opree, S. J., Buijzen, M., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2014). Children’s advertising exposure, advertised product desire, and materialism: A longitudinal study. Communication Research, 41(5),717–735. https://doi.org/10.1117/0093650213479129.
Regan, P. C. (1998). What if you can’t get what you want? Willingness to compromise ideal mate selection standards as a function of sex, mate value, and relationship context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(12), 1294–1303. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672982412004
Sidelinger, R. J., & Booth-Butterfield, M. (2007). Mate value discrepancy as predictor of forgiveness and jealousy in romantic relationships. Communication Quarterly, 55(2), 207–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370701290426
Stewart-Williams, S., & Thomas, A. G. (2013). The ape that thought it was a peacock: does evolutionary psychology exaggerate human sex differences? Psychological Inquiry, 24(3), 137–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2013.804899
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. Oxford University Press.
Taylor, L. D. (2008). Cads, dads, and magazines: Women’s sexual preferences and articles about sex and relationships. Communication Monographs, 75(3), 240–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750802282710
Taylor, L. D. (2012). Cads and dads on screen: Do media representations of partner scarcity affect partner preferences among college-aged women? Communication Research, 39(4), 523–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211405647
Taylor, L. D. (2013). Male partner selectivity, romantic confidence, and media depictions of partner scarcity. Evolutionary Psychology, 11(1), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491301100104
Taylor, L. D. (2015). Men’s sexual selectivity, romantic confidence, and gender ratios in the media. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 23(1), 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/1060826514561987
Thomas, A. G., Jonason, P. K., Blackburn, J. D., Kennair, L. E. O., Lowe, R., Malouff, J., & Li, N. P. (2020). Mate preference priorities in the East and West: a cross-cultural test of the mate preference priority model. Journal of Personality, 88(3), 606–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12514
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 & Human Behavior, 39(1), 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.10.004
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual Selection & the Descent of Man (pp. 136–179). Aldine Publishing Company.
Watkins, C. D., DeBruine, L. M., Little, A. C., & Jones, B. C. (2012). Social support influences preferences for feminine facial cues in potential social partners. Experimental Psychology, 59(6), 340–347. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000162
Watkins, C. D., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., DeBruine, L. M., & Feinberg, D. R. (2012). Cues to the sex ratio of the local population influence women’s preferences for facial symmetry. Animal Behaviour, 83(2), 545–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.12.002
Weatherhead, P. J., & Robertson, R. J. (1979). Offspring quality and the polygyny threshold: The sexy son hypothesis. The American Naturalist, 113(2), 201–208. https://doi.org/10.1086/283379
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Taylor, L.D. Material Abundance Messages and Women’s Partner Trait Preferences: Effects of Exposure to Advertisements for Consumer Goods. Evolutionary Psychological Science 7, 165–173 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-020-00268-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-020-00268-4