IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0250151.html

Sex differences in sexual attraction for aesthetics, resources and personality across age

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Whyte
  • Robert C Brooks
  • Ho Fai Chan
  • Benno Torgler

Abstract

Because sexual attraction is a key driver of human mate choice and reproduction, we descriptively assess relative sex differences in the level of attraction individuals expect in the aesthetic, resource, and personality characteristics of potential mates. As a novelty we explore how male and female sexual attractiveness preference changes across age, using a dataset comprising online survey data for over 7,000 respondents across a broad age distribution of individuals between 18 and 65 years. In general, we find that both males and females show similar distribution patterns in their preference responses, with statistically significant sex differences within most of the traits. On average, females rate age, education, intelligence, income, trust, and emotional connection around 9 to 14 points higher than males on our 0–100 scale range. Our relative importance analysis shows greater male priority for attractiveness and physical build, compared to females, relative to all other traits. Using multiple regression analysis, we find a consistent statistical sex difference (males relative to females) that decreases linearly with age for aesthetics, while the opposite is true for resources and personality, with females exhibiting a stronger relative preference, particularly in the younger aged cohort. Exploring non-linearity in sex difference with contour plots for intelligence and attractiveness across age (mediated by age) indicates that sex differences in attractiveness preferences are driven by the male cohort (particularly age 30 to 40) for those who care about the importance of age, while intelligence is driven by females caring relatively more about intelligence for those who see age as very important (age cohort 40 to 55). Overall, many of our results indicate distinct variations within sex at key life stages, which is consistent with theories of selection pressure. Moreover, results also align with theories of parental investment, the gender similarities hypothesis, and mutual mate choice–which speaks to the fact that the broader discipline of evolutionary mate choice research in humans still contains considerable scope for further inquiry towards a unified theory, particularly when exploring sex-difference across age.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0250151
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250151
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0250151
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0250151&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0250151?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Whyte & Robert C. Brooks & Benno Torgler, 2019. "Sexual economic theory & the human mating market," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(57), pages 6100-6112, December.
    2. Becker, Gary S, 1985. "Human Capital, Effort, and the Sexual Division of Labor," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(1), pages 33-58, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Blau, Francine D & Kahn, Lawrence M, 1992. "The Gender Earnings Gap: Learning from International Comparisons," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 533-538, May.
    5. Hamermesh, Daniel S & Biddle, Jeff E, 1994. "Beauty and the Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1174-1194, December.
    6. Pfann, Gerard A. & Biddle, Jeff E. & Hamermesh, Daniel S. & Bosman, Ciska M., 2000. "Business success and businesses' beauty capital," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 201-207, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Eva Sierminska & Karan Singhal, 2023. "Does it pay to be beautiful?," World of Labour, LISER, pages 161-161, March.
    2. LIU Xing & SIERMINSKA Eva, 2014. "Evaluating the effect of beauty on labor market outcomes: A review of the literature," LISER Working Paper Series 2014-11, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER).
    3. Sile Padraigin O'Dorchai, 2008. "Do women gain or lose from becoming mothers?," Brussels Economic Review, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles, vol. 51(2/3), pages 243-268.
    4. Joseph T. Halford & Hung‐Chia S. Hsu, 2020. "Beauty is wealth: CEO attractiveness and firm value," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 529-556, November.
    5. Berggren, Niclas & Jordahl, Henrik & Poutvaara, Panu, 2006. "The Looks of a Winner: Beauty, Gender and Electoral Success," Ratio Working Papers 104, The Ratio Institute.
    6. Das, Jayoti & De Loach, Stephen B., 2011. "Mirror, mirror on the wall: The effect of time spent grooming on earnings," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 26-34, February.
    7. Hamermesh, Daniel S., 2006. "Changing looks and changing "discrimination": The beauty of economists," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 93(3), pages 405-412, December.
    8. Arunachalam, Raj & Shah, Manisha, 2010. "The Prostitute's Allure: Examining Returns to Beauty, Productivity and Discrimination," IZA Discussion Papers 5064, IZA Network @ LISER.
    9. Xiang Wei & Emily Ma & Pengfei Wang, 2017. "Leisure participation patterns and gender wage gap—evidence from Chinese manufacturing industry," China Finance and Economic Review, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-16, December.
    10. Seung Chan Ahn & Young Hoon Lee, 2014. "Beauty And Productivity: The Case Of The Ladies Professional Golf Association," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 32(1), pages 155-168, January.
    11. Andres Erosa & Luisa Fuster & Diego Restuccia, 2010. "A General Equilibrium Analysis of Parental Leave Policies," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 13(4), pages 742-758, October.
    12. Christian Pfeifer, 2012. "Physical attractiveness, employment and earnings," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(6), pages 505-510, April.
    13. French, Michael T. & Robins, Philip K. & Homer, Jenny F. & Tapsell, Lauren M., 2009. "Effects of physical attractiveness, personality, and grooming on academic performance in high school," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 373-382, August.
    14. Chen, Zhihong & Ge, Ying & Lai, Huiwen & Wan, Chi, 2013. "Globalization and Gender Wage Inequality in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 256-266.
    15. Wei-Bin ZHANG, 2014. "Gender Discrimination, Education and Economic Growth in a Generalized Uzawa-Lucas Two-Sector Model," Timisoara Journal of Economics and Business, West University of Timisoara, Romania, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 7(1), pages 1-34.
    16. Marianne Nordli Hansen, 1997. "The Scandinavian Welfare State Model: The Impact of the Public Sector on Segregation and Gender Equality," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 11(1), pages 83-99, March.
    17. Lu Cheng & Qingguo Ma & Yijin He & Yulin Tan & Linanzi Zhang & Wenwei Qiu, 2025. "Identification breeds equity: the regulation effect of group decision-making on beauty premium," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.
    18. Jane Waldfogel & Susan Harkness, 1999. "The Family Gap in Pay: Evidence from Seven Industrialized Countries," LIS Working papers 219, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    19. Eiji Yamamura & Ryohei Hayashi & Yoshiro Tsutsui & Fumio Ohtake, 2022. "Racers’ attractive looks, popularity, and performance: how do speedboat racers react to fans’ expectations?," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 597-623, October.
    20. Markus Gehrsitz, 2014. "Looks and Labor: Do Attractive People Work More?," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 28(3), pages 269-287, September.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0250151. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.