IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ehbiol/v23y2016icp1-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What women want in their sperm donor: A study of more than 1000 women’s sperm donor selections

Author

Listed:
  • Whyte, Stephen
  • Torgler, Benno
  • Harrison, Keith L.

Abstract

Reproductive medicine and commercial sperm banking have facilitated an evolutionary shift in how women are able to choose who fathers their offspring, by notionally expanding women’s opportunity set beyond former constraints. This study analyses 1546 individual reservations of semen by women from a private Australian assisted reproductive health facility across a ten year period from 2006 to 2015. Using the time that each sample was available at the facility until reservation, we explore women’s preference for particular male characteristics. We find that younger donors, and those who hold a higher formal education compared to those with no academic qualifications are more quickly selected for reservation by women. Both age and education as proxies for resources are at the centre of Parental Investment theory, and our findings further build on this standard evolutionary construct in relation to female mate preferences. Reproductive medicine not only provides women the opportunity to become a parent, where previously they would not have been able to, it also reveals that female preference for resources of their potential mate (sperm donor) remain, even when the notion of paternal investment becomes redundant. These findings build on behavioural science’s understanding of large-scale decisions and human behaviour in reproductive medical settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Whyte, Stephen & Torgler, Benno & Harrison, Keith L., 2016. "What women want in their sperm donor: A study of more than 1000 women’s sperm donor selections," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 1-9.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ehbiol:v:23:y:2016:i:c:p:1-9
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ehb.2016.06.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X16300491
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ehb.2016.06.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raymond Fisman & Sheena S. Iyengar & Emir Kamenica & Itamar Simonson, 2006. "Gender Differences in Mate Selection: Evidence From a Speed Dating Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(2), pages 673-697.
    2. Soohyung Lee & Muriel Niederle, 2015. "Propose with a rose? Signaling in internet dating markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 731-755, December.
    3. Stephen Whyte & Benno Torgler, 2015. "Selection criteria in the search for a sperm donor: behavioural traits versus physical appearance," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 151-171, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephen Whyte & Robert C Brooks & Ho Fai Chan & Benno Torgler, 2021. "Sex differences in sexual attraction for aesthetics, resources and personality across age," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-19, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daiji Kawaguchi & Soohyung Lee, 2017. "Brides For Sale: Cross-Border Marriages And Female Immigration," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(2), pages 633-654, April.
    2. Rachel Dinh & Patrick Gildersleve & Chris Blex & Taha Yasseri, 2022. "Computational courtship understanding the evolution of online dating through large-scale data analysis," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 401-426, May.
    3. Nataf, Colette & Wallsten, Thomas S., 2013. "Love the one you’re with: The endowment effect in the dating market," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 58-66.
    4. Herrenbrueck, Lucas & Xia, Xiaoyu & Eastwick, Paul & Hui, Chin Ming, 2018. "Smart-dating in speed-dating: How a simple Search model can explain matching decisions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 54-76.
    5. Weiss, Yoram & Yi, Junjian & Zhang, Junsen, 2013. "Hypergamy, Cross-Boundary Marriages, and Family Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 7293, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Lanfei Shi & Siva Viswanathan, 2023. "Optional Verification and Signaling in Online Matching Markets: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1603-1621, December.
    7. Bruze, Gustaf, 2010. "New Evidence on the Causes of Educational Homogamy," Working Papers 10-18, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics.
    8. Ran Abramitzky & Adeline Delavande & Luis Vasconcelos, 2011. "Marrying Up: The Role of Sex Ratio in Assortative Matching," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 124-157, July.
    9. Olivetti, Claudia & Paserman, M. Daniele & Salisbury, Laura, 2018. "Three-generation mobility in the United States, 1850–1940: The role of maternal and paternal grandparents," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 73-90.
    10. Marianne Bertrand & Emir Kamenica & Jessica Pan, 2015. "Gender Identity and Relative Income within Households," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(2), pages 571-614.
    11. Ingela Alger & Donald Cox, 2013. "The evolution of altruistic preferences: mothers versus fathers," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 421-446, September.
    12. Gavrilova, Evelina, 2019. "A partner in crime: Assortative matching and bias in the crime market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 598-612.
    13. Zhang, Peilu & Zhang, Yinjunjie & Palma, Marco, 2018. "Social Norms and Competitiveness: My Willingness to Compete Depends on Who I am (supposed to be)," MPRA Paper 89727, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Tianshu Sun & Sean J. Taylor, 2020. "Displaying things in common to encourage friendship formation: A large randomized field experiment," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 237-271, September.
    15. Alvin E. Roth, 2010. "Marketplace Institutions Related to the Timing of Transactions," NBER Working Papers 16556, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Adda, Jérôme & Pinotti, Paolo & Tura, Giulia, 2020. "There's More to Marriage than Love: The Effect of Legal Status and Cultural Distance on Intermarriages and Separations," CEPR Discussion Papers 14432, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Maruyama, Shiko & Nakamura, Sayaka, 2018. "Why are women slimmer than men in developed countries?," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-13.
    18. Bosley, Stacie, 2016. "Student-crafted experiments “from the ground up”," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 1-7.
    19. Manuela Angelucci & Daniel Bennett, 2021. "Adverse Selection in the Marriage Market: HIV Testing and Marriage in Rural Malawi [Marrying Up: The Role of Sex Ratio in Assortative Matching]," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(5), pages 2119-2148.
    20. Ravi Bapna & Jui Ramaprasad & Galit Shmueli & Akhmed Umyarov, 2016. "One-Way Mirrors in Online Dating: A Randomized Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3100-3122, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Sperm donor market; Characteristics & preferences; Large scale decision making; Mate choice; Evolutionary psychology; Reproductive medicine;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • D10 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - General
    • Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ehbiol:v:23:y:2016:i:c:p:1-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622964 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.