|
|
|
Professor of Psychology Singapore
Mangement University Psychology Today blog |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My research
is broadly classified under 1) mate preferences and mating and 2) evolutionary
mismatch. In
examining mate preferences, I favor not only the use of effective
experimental methods that social psychologists have devised, but also the
incorporation of analytical tools from other disciplines. For instance, using
methods from microeconomics, my colleagues and I were able to address a
paradox in the mate choice literature: although social and evolutionary
psychologists have pointed out why physical attractiveness should be
important to men and status should be important to women, these
characteristics never show up at the top of the lists when people have
considered their ideal mates. By applying a budget allocation process and a
mate screening paradigm, we were able to effectively distinguish between
characteristics in a potential mate that are “necessities” and those
that are “luxuries.” Our studies revealed that when considering
long-term mates, men tend to prioritize finding a sufficient level of
physical attractiveness, and women tend to prioritize obtaining sufficient
social status. In other words, when looking for mates, most people ideally
would like to have well-rounded mates who are attractive, intelligent,
creative, financially well-off, etc. However, when choices are highly
constrained, men tend to treat physical attractiveness as a necessity whereas
women treat attractiveness as a luxury, and social status as a necessity (Li,
Bailey, Kenrick, & Linsenmeier, 2002; Li &
Kenrick, 2006). Budget allocation materials can be accessed in the above
link. Evolutionary
mismatch is a powerful framework that explains most if not all the modern
problems that individuals, groups, and societies are facing. For an
introduction to this interesting paradigm, check out Li, van Vugt, &
Collarelli (2018). |
|
|
|
|
