1. 1 Psychology 320: Psychology of Gender and Sex Differences January 17 Lecture 37

2. 2 Office Hour Invitations January 17, 11:30-2:30, Kenny 3102 12332110 34694109 46905105 54174107 65646085 70503081 75884098

3. A little R&R …. (Review and Reflect) 3

4. 4 1. What characteristics do females and males desire in a mate? 2. Are there sex differences in the experience of love? Romantic Relationships

5. 5 2. review theories of sex differences in mate preferences. 3. discuss research findings that support and/or refute theories of sex differences in mate preferences. By the end of today’s class, you should be able to: 4. identify sex similarities in mate preferences. 1. identify sex differences in mate preferences.

6. 6 6. discuss sex differences and similarities in the experience of Sternberg’s components of love. 5. distinguish between Sternberg’s love types.

7. 7 What characteristics do females and males desire in a mate? Personal Ads: Women seeking men Educated, attractive, creative SWF, 29, 5’5” 120 lbs, long brown hair, seeks articulate SWPM, 29-39, 6’+, gentleman, higher education (Doctorate/Master’s a must), who enjoys politics, arts, medicine, and has sense of humour. Multilingual a plus. SF, 5’3”, 135 lbs, blond/brown, enjoys reading, music, concerts, hanging out with friends. Seeking SM, with good work ethic, but can also be romantic, spontaneous, for LTR.

8. 8 Personal Ads: Men seeking women SM, 29, 6’1”, 190 lbs, enjoys all outdoor athletic activities, stimulating conversation. Seeking well-built lady, 30-40, with sense of humour. Redheads a plus. Seeking attractive, down-to-earth, emotionally well-adjusted SF, late 20s-30s, independent not disinterested, sense of humour. Me: attractive, tall, fit, educated (master’s) employed, condo/car-owning SM, 32.

9. 9 Research suggests that females are more likely than males to emphasize resource potential, whereas males are more likely than females to emphasize physical attractiveness:

10. 10 Effect sizes (Feingold, 1990, 1992; also see Furnham, 2009; Schackelford, Schmitt & Buss, 2005):  Socioeconomic status: d = -.69.  Ambition: d = -.67.  Physical attractiveness: d = +.54.

11. 11 Explanations for sex differences in importance of resource potential and physical attractiveness: 1. Evolutionary theory: Emphasizes sex differences in reproductive capacity and minimal parental investment. 2. Social role theory: Emphasizes division of labour between males and females in traditional societies. 3. Social construction theory: Emphasizes social norms regarding desirable characteristics for the sexes.

12. 12 Although sex differences consistently emerge in the importance of resource potential and physical attractiveness, these characteristics are relatively unimportant to both sexes:

13. 13 Hatfield and Sprecher, 1995 (also see Furnham, 2009; Meeier et al., 2009; Toro-Morn & Sprecher, 2003)  Assessed mate preferences in Japan, Russia, and the US.  In all cultures, found that both sexes valued “internal” attributes (e.g., kind) more than “external” attributes (e.g., physically attractive).

14. Mate Preferences Among Males and Females in Japan, Russia, and the US (Hatfield & Sprecher, 1995) * Significant difference. Sex differences in “choosiness.” 14

15. 15 Moreover, research suggests that both sexes are attracted to individuals who possess attributes similar to their own. Thus, research supports the “similarity-attraction” hypothesis (vs. the “potential-attraction” hypothesis) for both sexes.

16. Anna Nicole Smith and J. Howard Marshall Donald and Melania Trump Hugh Hefner Crystal Harris 16

17. Danny DeVito and Rhea Perlman Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt Beyonce and Jay-Z 17

18. 18 Are there sex differences in the experience of love? Several theories of love have been proposed by psychologists. Among these theories are:

19. 19 1. Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love  Maintains that there are three components associated with love: passion, commitment, and intimacy.  Identifies 8 types of love based on the presence or absence of these components.

20. 20 Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love (Sternberg, 1986, 1997) Passion Intimacy Commitment

21. Size of triangle = Amount of love Shape of triangle = Type of love Intimacy CommitmentPassion Intimacy PassionCommitment 21

22. Sternberg’s Taxonomy of Kinds of Love (1986) 22

23. 23  Research has examined sex differences and similarities with respect to Sternberg’s components of love: Sternberg, 1997: F > M in intimacy, but F = M in commitment and passion.

24. 24 2. review theories of sex differences in mate preferences. 3. discuss research findings that support and/or refute theories of sex differences in mate preferences. By the end of today’s class, you should be able to: 4. identify sex similarities in mate preferences. 1. identify sex differences in mate preferences.

25. 25 6. discuss sex differences and similarities in the experience of Sternberg’s components of love. 5. distinguish between Sternberg’s love types.