A1 Refereed original research article in a scientific journal
A worldwide test of the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching
Authors: Eastwick, Paul W.; Sparks, Jehan; Finkel, Eli J.; Meza, Eva M.; Adamkovič, Matúš; Adu, Peter; Ai, Ting; Akintola, Aderonke A.; Al-Shawaf, Laith; Apriliawati, Denisa; Arriaga, Patrícia; Aubert-Teillaud, Benjamin; Baník, Gabriel; Barzykowski, Krystian; Batres, Carlota; Baucom, Katherine J.; Beaulieu, Elizabeth Z.; Behnke, Maciej; Butcher, Natalie; Charles, Deborah Y.; Chen, Jane Minyan; Cheon Jeong, Eun; Chittham, Phakkanun; Chwiłkowska, Patrycja; Cong, Chin Wen; Copping, Lee T.; Corral-Frias, Nadia S.; Ćubela Adorić, Vera; Dizon, Mikaela; Du, Hongfei; Ehinmowo, Michael I.; Escribano, Daniela A.; Espinosa, Natalia M.; Expósito, Francisca; Feldman, Gilad; Freitag, Raquel; Frias Armenta, Martha; Gallyamova, Albina; Gillath, Omri; Gjoneska, Biljana; Gkinopoulos, Theofilos; Grafe, Franca; Grigoryev, Dmitry; Groyecka-Bernard, Agata; Gunaydin, Gul; Ilustrisimo, Ruby; Impett, Emily; Kačmár, Pavol; Kim, Young-Hoon; Kocur, Mirosław; Kowal, Marta; Krishna, Maatangi; Labor, Paul Danielle; Lu, Jackson G.; Lucas, Marc Y.; Małecki, Wojciech P.; Malinakova, Klara; Meißner, Sofia; Meier, Zdeněk; Misiak, Michal; Muise, Amy; Novak, Lukas; O, Jiaqing; Özdoğru, Asil A.; Park, Haeyoung Gideon; Paruzel, Mariola; Pavlović, Zoran; Püski, Marcell; Ribeiro, Gianni; Roberts, S. Craig; Röer, Jan P.; Ropovik, Ivan; Ross, Robert M.; Sakman, Ezgi; Salvador, Cristina E.; Selcuk, Emre; Skakoon-Sparling, Shayna; Sorokowska, Agnieszka; Sorokowski, Piotr; Spasovski, Ognen; Stanton, Sarah C. E.; Stewart, Suzanne L. K.; Swami, Viren; Szaszi, Barnabas; Takashima, Kaito; Tavel, Peter; Tejada, Julian; Tu, Eric; Tuominen, Jarno; Vaidis, David; Vally, Zahir; Vaughn, Leigh Ann; Villanueva-Moya, Laura; Wisnuwardhan,i Dian; Yamada, Yuki; Yonemitsu, Fumiya; Žídková, Radka; Živná, Kristýna; Coles, Nicholas A.
Publisher: American Psychological Association (APA)
Publication year: 2025
Journal: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Journal name in source: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Volume: 128
Issue: 1
First page : 123
Last page: 146
ISSN: 0022-3514
eISSN: 1939-1315
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000524
Web address : http://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000524
Self-archived copy’s web address: https://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/detail/Publication/459112796
Ideal partner preferences (i.e., ratings of the desirability of attributes like attractiveness or intelligence) are the source of numerous foundational findings in the interdisciplinary literature on human mating. Recently, research on the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching (i.e., Do people positively evaluate partners who match vs. mismatch their ideals?) has become mired in several problems. First, articles exhibit discrepant analytic and reporting practices. Second, different findings emerge across laboratories worldwide, perhaps because they sample different relationship contexts and/or populations. This registered report—partnered with the Psychological Science Accelerator—uses a highly powered design (N = 10,358) across 43 countries and 22 languages to estimate preference-matching effect sizes. The most rigorous tests revealed significant preference-matching effects in the whole sample and for partnered and single participants separately. The “corrected pattern metric” that collapses across 35 traits revealed a zero-order effect of β = .19 and an effect of β = .11 when included alongside a normative preference-matching metric. Specific traits in the “level metric” (interaction) tests revealed very small (average β = .04) effects. Effect sizes were similar for partnered participants who reported ideals before entering a relationship, and there was no consistent evidence that individual differences moderated any effects. Comparisons between stated and revealed preferences shed light on gender differences and similarities: For attractiveness, men’s and (especially) women’s stated preferences underestimated revealed preferences (i.e., they thought attractiveness was less important than it actually was). For earning potential, men’s stated preferences underestimated—and women’s stated preferences overestimated—revealed preferences. Implications for the literature on human mating are discussed.
Downloadable publication This is an electronic reprint of the original article. |  |
Funding information in the publication:
Funding InformationBenjamin Aubert-Teillaud was supported by ANRT CIFRE-WWF grant 2020/0738; Albina Gallyamova and Dmitry Grigoryev were supported by Basic Research Program at HSE University, RF; Mirosław Kocur, Marta Kowal, Wojciech Małecki, Michal Misiak, S. Craig Roberts,Agnieszka Sorokowska, and Piotr Sorokowski were supported by IDN Being Human Lab (University of Wroclaw); Nicholas A. Coles was supported by John Templeton Foundation (#62295), U.S. National Science Foundation (#2235066); Robert M. Ross was supported by John Templeton Foundation (Grant ID: 62631) and Australian Research Council (Grant ID: DP180102384); Yuki Yamada was supported by JSPS KAKENHI: JP20H04581, JP21H03784, and JP22K18263; Zoran Pavlović was supported by Ministry of Science, Technological Development and Innovation of the Republic of Serbia (grant no. 451-03-47/2023-01/ 200163); Paul W. Eastwick was supported by National Science Foundation Grant BCS-1941440, and a UC Davis Small Research Grant; Katherine J. Baucom was supported by NIH K23DK115820; Ivan Ropovik was supported by NPO EXCELES: Systemic Risk Institute (LX22NPO5101); Matúš Adamkovič was supported by PRIMUS/24/SSH/017 and APVV-22-0458; Gul Gunaydin and Emre Selcuk were supported by Sabanci University Integration Grant B.A.CG-20-02170; Maciej Behnke was supported by Statutory funds of the Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, Adam Mickiewicz University,; Patrícia Arriaga was supported by UID/PSI/03125/2022; Pavol Kačmár was supported by VEGA 1/0853/21, APVV-19-0284.
