Omitted evidence undermines sexual motives explanation for attractiveness bias

Marianne LaFrance; Alice H. Eagly

doi:10.1017/S0140525X16000522

Omitted evidence undermines sexual motives explanation for attractiveness bias

Marianne LaFrance, Alice H. Eagly

Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

Abstract

This commentary makes three points: (1) the existing evidence does not consistently favor the proposed sex difference in attractiveness preferences, nor the fitness-related outcomes of attractiveness; (2) the neglected association of perceived attractiveness and trustworthiness allowed the authors to incorrectly attribute many findings solely to attractiveness, and (3) the importance accorded attractiveness in mate preferences is culturally shaped and likely evolutionarily novel.

Original language	English (US)
Article number	e31
Journal	Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Volume	40
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16000522
State	Published - Jan 1 2017

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
Physiology
Behavioral Neuroscience

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1017/S0140525X16000522

Cite this

@article{f900d32fb5014ff4b6ea7a04abd55cc5,

title = "Omitted evidence undermines sexual motives explanation for attractiveness bias",

abstract = "This commentary makes three points: (1) the existing evidence does not consistently favor the proposed sex difference in attractiveness preferences, nor the fitness-related outcomes of attractiveness; (2) the neglected association of perceived attractiveness and trustworthiness allowed the authors to incorrectly attribute many findings solely to attractiveness, and (3) the importance accorded attractiveness in mate preferences is culturally shaped and likely evolutionarily novel.",

author = "Marianne LaFrance and Eagly, {Alice H.}",

year = "2017",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1017/S0140525X16000522",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "40",

journal = "Behavioral and Brain Sciences",

issn = "0140-525X",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Omitted evidence undermines sexual motives explanation for attractiveness bias

AU - LaFrance, Marianne

AU - Eagly, Alice H.

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - This commentary makes three points: (1) the existing evidence does not consistently favor the proposed sex difference in attractiveness preferences, nor the fitness-related outcomes of attractiveness; (2) the neglected association of perceived attractiveness and trustworthiness allowed the authors to incorrectly attribute many findings solely to attractiveness, and (3) the importance accorded attractiveness in mate preferences is culturally shaped and likely evolutionarily novel.

AB - This commentary makes three points: (1) the existing evidence does not consistently favor the proposed sex difference in attractiveness preferences, nor the fitness-related outcomes of attractiveness; (2) the neglected association of perceived attractiveness and trustworthiness allowed the authors to incorrectly attribute many findings solely to attractiveness, and (3) the importance accorded attractiveness in mate preferences is culturally shaped and likely evolutionarily novel.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016181784&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85016181784&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0140525X16000522

DO - 10.1017/S0140525X16000522

M3 - Review article

C2 - 28327236

AN - SCOPUS:85016181784

SN - 0140-525X

VL - 40

JO - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

JF - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

M1 - e31

ER -

Omitted evidence undermines sexual motives explanation for attractiveness bias

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this