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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    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. Jane Waldfogel & Wendy Sigle-Rushton, 2006. "Motherhood and Women’s Earnings in Anglo-American, Continental European, and Nordic Countries," LIS Working papers 454, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    2. Eva Sierminska & Karan Singhal, 2023. "Does it pay to be beautiful?," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 161-161, March.
    3. Elif S. Filiz, 2022. "Does it Payoff to be Blond in a Non-Blond Neighborhood? Eye Color, Hair Color, Ethnic Composition and Starting Wages," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 48(1), pages 122-146, January.
    4. Gregor Schwerhoff & Ottmar Edenhofer & Marc Fleurbaey, 2020. "Taxation Of Economic Rents," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 398-423, April.
    5. Solomon W. Polachek & Jun Xiang, 2009. "The Gender Pay Gap across Countries: A Human Capital Approach," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 227, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. Price, Michael K., 2008. "Fund-raising success and a solicitor's beauty capital: Do blondes raise more funds?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 100(3), pages 351-354, September.
    9. GERGAUD, Olivier & GINSBURGH, Victor, 2010. "Success: talent, intelligence or beauty ?," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2010072, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    10. 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.
    11. Ying Cao & Feng Guan & Zengquan Li & Yong George Yang, 2020. "Analysts’ Beauty and Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 4315-4335, September.
    12. Berggren, Niclas & Jordahl, Henrik & Poutvaara, Panu, 2006. "The Looks of a Winner: Beauty, Gender and Electoral Success," Ratio Working Papers 104, The Ratio Institute.
    13. 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.
    14. Babin, J. Jobu & Chauhan, Haritima S. & Kistler, Steven L., 2024. "When pretty hurts: Beauty premia and penalties in eSports," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 726-741.
    15. 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.
    16. Godoy, Ricardo & Reyes-Garcia, Victoria & Huanca, Tomas & Tanner, Susan & Leonard, William R. & McDade, Thomas & Vadez, Vincent, 2005. "Do smiles have a face value? Panel evidence from Amazonian Indians," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 469-490, August.
    17. Dilmaghani, Maryam, 2020. "Beauty perks: Physical appearance, earnings, and fringe benefits," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    18. Hamermesh, Daniel S., 2006. "Changing looks and changing "discrimination": The beauty of economists," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 93(3), pages 405-412, December.
    19. Arunachalam, Raj & Shah, Manisha, 2010. "The Prostitute's Allure: Examining Returns to Beauty, Productivity and Discrimination," IZA Discussion Papers 5064, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Harkness, Susan & Waldfogel, Jane, 1999. "The family gap in pay: evidence from seven industrialised countries," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6481, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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.