Content area
Abstract
How does one explain the apparent sex differences in mating psychology? Sociocultural psychologists argue women have a more pragmatic and conservative mating psychology than men because women have been traditionally excluded from access to resources. Men, in contrast, who have had reliable access to financial security, are more interested in casual sex and focused on the physical attractiveness of their mates than women. Evolutionary psychologists argue that sex differences in mating psychology are the result of different levels of obligatory investment to offspring. Women invest considerably more in their offspring than men do and, thus, women are more conservative in their mating behavior and more interested in men with status and resources to supplement her investment. Men, who are not obligated to invest in offspring, seek physically attractive mates and men are more likely to pursue low investment sexual encounters than women do. However, little work has attempted to simultaneously assess both of these approaches. In the present studies, I compare the relative effects and associations of both the sex of the participant and financial security on mating psychology. In Study 1 (N = 193), the sex of the participant was a more powerful predictor of mating psychology than self-perceived financial security. In two cases, financial security does appear to be related mating preferences: preferences for kind and attractive long-term mates and self-reported past sense of financial security were correlated and correlated stronger in men than in women. In Study 2 (N = 145), mating psychology was not particularly sensitive to manipulated variation in financial security. Where variation in financial security had an effect on mate choice, it suggests that men and women who experience limited financial security prioritize physical attractiveness in their short-term mates. They may do so as "bet-hedging" to offset their limited ability to invest in any resultant offspring. In sum, financial security appears to have minimal effects and associations on mating psychology despite the paramount role that sociocultural psychologists argue it has.
