重新评估与伴侣关系相关的观念在女性偏好男性阳刚脸型中的作用。

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Evolutionary Psychology Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1177/14747049241262712
Junzhi Dong, Kathlyne Leger, Anthony J Lee, Yasaman Rafiee, Benedict C Jones, Victor K M Shiramizu
{"title":"重新评估与伴侣关系相关的观念在女性偏好男性阳刚脸型中的作用。","authors":"Junzhi Dong, Kathlyne Leger, Anthony J Lee, Yasaman Rafiee, Benedict C Jones, Victor K M Shiramizu","doi":"10.1177/14747049241262712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many researchers have proposed that women perceive men with masculine face shapes to be less suitable as parents and long-term partners than men with feminine face shapes, causing women to find masculine men more attractive for short-term than long-term relationships. However, recent work shows that results obtained using the type of experimentally manipulated stimuli that were employed in studies presenting evidence for these claims are not necessarily observed when natural (i.e., unmanipulated) face stimuli were used to suggest that the evidence for these claims may need to be revaluated. Consequently, we tested for possible relationships between ratings of natural male faces for parenting- and relationship-related traits and shape masculinity (Study 1) and also tested whether women's preferences for shape masculinity were stronger when natural male faces were rated for short-term relationships than when natural male faces were rated for long-term relationships (Studies 2 and 3). We saw no evidence for either of these predictions, instead finding that men with more attractive faces were perceived to be better parents and better long-term partners. Thus, our findings do not support the widely held view that masculine men are more attractive for short-term relationships because they are perceived to be unlikely to invest time and effort in their romantic partners and offspring.</p>","PeriodicalId":47499,"journal":{"name":"Evolutionary Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11184995/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Re-evaluating the Role of Partnership-Related Perceptions in Women's Preferences for Men with Masculine Face Shapes.\",\"authors\":\"Junzhi Dong, Kathlyne Leger, Anthony J Lee, Yasaman Rafiee, Benedict C Jones, Victor K M Shiramizu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14747049241262712\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Many researchers have proposed that women perceive men with masculine face shapes to be less suitable as parents and long-term partners than men with feminine face shapes, causing women to find masculine men more attractive for short-term than long-term relationships. However, recent work shows that results obtained using the type of experimentally manipulated stimuli that were employed in studies presenting evidence for these claims are not necessarily observed when natural (i.e., unmanipulated) face stimuli were used to suggest that the evidence for these claims may need to be revaluated. Consequently, we tested for possible relationships between ratings of natural male faces for parenting- and relationship-related traits and shape masculinity (Study 1) and also tested whether women's preferences for shape masculinity were stronger when natural male faces were rated for short-term relationships than when natural male faces were rated for long-term relationships (Studies 2 and 3). We saw no evidence for either of these predictions, instead finding that men with more attractive faces were perceived to be better parents and better long-term partners. Thus, our findings do not support the widely held view that masculine men are more attractive for short-term relationships because they are perceived to be unlikely to invest time and effort in their romantic partners and offspring.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47499,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evolutionary Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11184995/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evolutionary Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049241262712\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evolutionary Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049241262712","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多研究人员提出,女性认为男性脸型的男性比女性脸型的男性更不适合作为父母和长期伴侣,从而导致女性认为男性脸型的男性在短期关系中比长期关系中更有吸引力。然而,最近的研究表明,当使用自然的(即未被操纵的)脸部刺激时,使用实验操纵的刺激类型所得到的结果并不一定能证明这些说法,这表明这些说法的证据可能需要重新评估。因此,我们测试了自然男性面孔在养育子女和人际关系相关特质上的评分与形状男子气概之间可能存在的关系(研究 1),还测试了当自然男性面孔被评为短期关系时,女性对形状男子气概的偏好是否比自然男性面孔被评为长期关系时更强烈(研究 2 和 3)。我们没有发现上述任何一种预测的证据,相反,我们发现拥有更具吸引力面孔的男性被认为是更好的父母和更好的长期伴侣。因此,我们的研究结果并不支持人们普遍持有的观点,即男性化的男性在短期关系中更具吸引力,因为他们被认为不太可能在恋爱伴侣和后代身上投入时间和精力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Re-evaluating the Role of Partnership-Related Perceptions in Women's Preferences for Men with Masculine Face Shapes.

Many researchers have proposed that women perceive men with masculine face shapes to be less suitable as parents and long-term partners than men with feminine face shapes, causing women to find masculine men more attractive for short-term than long-term relationships. However, recent work shows that results obtained using the type of experimentally manipulated stimuli that were employed in studies presenting evidence for these claims are not necessarily observed when natural (i.e., unmanipulated) face stimuli were used to suggest that the evidence for these claims may need to be revaluated. Consequently, we tested for possible relationships between ratings of natural male faces for parenting- and relationship-related traits and shape masculinity (Study 1) and also tested whether women's preferences for shape masculinity were stronger when natural male faces were rated for short-term relationships than when natural male faces were rated for long-term relationships (Studies 2 and 3). We saw no evidence for either of these predictions, instead finding that men with more attractive faces were perceived to be better parents and better long-term partners. Thus, our findings do not support the widely held view that masculine men are more attractive for short-term relationships because they are perceived to be unlikely to invest time and effort in their romantic partners and offspring.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Evolutionary Psychology
Evolutionary Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
22
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evolutionary Psychology is an open-access peer-reviewed journal that aims to foster communication between experimental and theoretical work on the one hand and historical, conceptual and interdisciplinary writings across the whole range of the biological and human sciences on the other.
期刊最新文献
The Role of Intrasexual Competition and the Big 5 in the Perpetration of Digital Dating Abuse. The Relation Between War, Starvation, and Fertility Ideals in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Life History Perspective. Jealousy as Predicted by Allocation and Reception of Resources in an Economic Game. Sex Differences in the Etiology of Victimization in Adulthood. Paternal Filicide in Sweden: Background, Risk Factors and the Cinderella Effect.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1