• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

零接触情况下预测浪漫兴趣:特质感知中存在性别差异但兴趣预测因素中不存在性别差异的证据。

Predicting Romantic Interest at Zero Acquaintance: Evidence of Sex Differences in Trait Perception but Not in Predictors of Interest.

作者信息

Olderbak Sally G, Malter Frederic, Wolf Pedro Sofio Abril, Jones Daniel N, Figueredo Aurelio José

机构信息

Institute for Psychology and Pedagogy, Ulm University.

Munich Center for the Economics of Aging, Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.

出版信息

Eur J Pers. 2017 Jan-Feb;31(1):42-62. doi: 10.1002/per.2087. Epub 2017 Jan 6.

DOI:10.1002/per.2087
PMID:28736483
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5519305/
Abstract

We evaluated five competing hypotheses about what predicts romantic interest. Through a half-block quasi-experimental design, a large sample of young adults (i.e., responders; = 335) viewed videos of opposite-sex persons (i.e., targets) talking about themselves and responders rated the targets' traits and their romantic interest in the target. We tested whether similarity, dissimilarity, or overall trait levels on mate value, physical attractiveness, life history strategy, and the Big-Five personality factors predicted romantic interest at zero acquaintance, and whether sex acted as a moderator. We tested the responders' individual perception of the targets' traits, in addition to the targets' own self-reported trait levels and a consensus rating of the targets made by the responders. We used polynomial regression with response surface analysis within multilevel modeling to test support for each of the hypotheses. Results suggest a large sex difference in trait perception; when women rated men, they agreed in their perception more often than when men rated women. However, as a predictor of romantic interest, there were no sex differences. Only the responders' perception of the targets' physical attractiveness predicted romantic interest; specifically, responders' who rated the targets' physical attractiveness as higher than themselves reported more romantic interest.

摘要

我们评估了关于预测浪漫兴趣的五个相互竞争的假设。通过半街区准实验设计,一大群年轻人(即应答者;(n = 335))观看了异性(即目标对象)谈论自己的视频,应答者对目标对象的特质以及他们对目标对象的浪漫兴趣进行评分。我们测试了在零接触时,伴侣价值、外貌吸引力、生活史策略和大五人格因素方面的相似性、差异性或总体特质水平是否能预测浪漫兴趣,以及性别是否起调节作用。除了目标对象自己报告的特质水平和应答者对目标对象的共识评分外,我们还测试了应答者对目标对象特质的个人感知。我们在多层次建模中使用多项式回归和响应面分析来检验对每个假设的支持。结果表明,在特质感知方面存在很大的性别差异;当女性对男性进行评分时,她们的感知比男性对女性进行评分时更一致。然而,作为浪漫兴趣的预测指标,不存在性别差异。只有应答者对目标对象外貌吸引力的感知能预测浪漫兴趣;具体而言,将目标对象的外貌吸引力评为高于自己的应答者报告了更多的浪漫兴趣。

相似文献

1
Predicting Romantic Interest at Zero Acquaintance: Evidence of Sex Differences in Trait Perception but Not in Predictors of Interest.零接触情况下预测浪漫兴趣:特质感知中存在性别差异但兴趣预测因素中不存在性别差异的证据。
Eur J Pers. 2017 Jan-Feb;31(1):42-62. doi: 10.1002/per.2087. Epub 2017 Jan 6.
2
Detection of Psychopathic Traits in Emotional Faces.情绪面孔中精神病态特质的检测。
J Intell. 2021 Jun 4;9(2):29. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence9020029.
3
Relational mate value: consensus and uniqueness in romantic evaluations.关系伴侣价值:浪漫评价中的共识与独特性
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2014 May;106(5):728-51. doi: 10.1037/a0035884. Epub 2014 Mar 10.
4
Projection of Romantic and Sexual Desire in Opposite-Sex Friendships: How Wishful Thinking Creates a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.对异性友谊中浪漫与性欲望的投射:一厢情愿如何造就自我应验预言。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2016 Jul;42(7):864-78. doi: 10.1177/0146167216646077. Epub 2016 May 16.
5
The role of interpersonal trust and romantic experiences in mate copying.人际信任和浪漫经历在伴侣模仿中的作用。
Int J Psychol. 2022 Dec;57(6):727-734. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12867. Epub 2022 Jun 28.
6
Implicit and explicit preferences for physical attractiveness in a romantic partner: a double dissociation in predictive validity.对浪漫伴侣的身体吸引力的内隐和外显偏好:预测有效性的双重分离。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Nov;101(5):993-1011. doi: 10.1037/a0024061.
7
Individual differences in dissimilation: Do some people make more distinctions among targets' personalities than others?个体差异在异化上的体现:是否有些人比其他人更能区分目标人物的个性?
J Pers. 2024 Oct;92(5):1341-1355. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12893. Epub 2023 Nov 6.
8
The Role of Sexual and Romantic Attraction in Human Mate Preferences.性吸引和浪漫吸引在人类伴侣偏好中的作用。
J Sex Res. 2024 Feb;61(2):299-312. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2023.2176811. Epub 2023 Feb 16.
9
Perceptions of romantic partners' emotional suppression are more biased than accurate.人们对伴侣情绪压抑的看法往往存在偏差,而不是准确的。
Emotion. 2020 Dec;20(8):1485-1489. doi: 10.1037/emo0000679. Epub 2019 Sep 5.
10
A Comparison of Mate Preferences in Asexual and Allosexual Adults.无性恋者和异性恋者的择偶偏好比较。
Arch Sex Behav. 2024 Jan;53(1):17-24. doi: 10.1007/s10508-023-02723-2. Epub 2023 Oct 27.

引用本文的文献

1
A portable affective computing system for identifying mate preference.一种用于识别配偶偏好的便携式情感计算系统。
Sci Rep. 2024 Jul 31;14(1):17735. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-68772-2.
2
Is Mate Preference Recognizable Based on Electroencephalogram Signals? Machine Learning Applied to Initial Romantic Attraction.基于脑电图信号能否识别配偶偏好?机器学习应用于最初的浪漫吸引力研究。
Front Neurosci. 2022 Feb 11;16:830820. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2022.830820. eCollection 2022.
3
Roles of P300 and Late Positive Potential in Initial Romantic Attraction.P300和晚期正电位在初次浪漫吸引力中的作用。
Front Neurosci. 2021 Oct 14;15:718847. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2021.718847. eCollection 2021.
4
Mate preference and brain oscillations: Initial romantic attraction is associated with decreases in alpha- and lower beta-band power.伴侣偏好与脑电波:最初的浪漫吸引力与阿尔法和较低的贝塔波段功率降低有关。
Hum Brain Mapp. 2022 Feb 1;43(2):721-732. doi: 10.1002/hbm.25681. Epub 2021 Oct 6.
5
Detection of Psychopathic Traits in Emotional Faces.情绪面孔中精神病态特质的检测。
J Intell. 2021 Jun 4;9(2):29. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence9020029.
6
Inferring Sexually Transmitted Infection Risk From Attractiveness in Online Dating Among Adolescents and Young Adults: Exploratory Study.从青少年和年轻人在线约会中的吸引力推断性传播感染风险:探索性研究
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jun 9;22(6):e14242. doi: 10.2196/14242.

本文引用的文献

1
Constructing validity: New developments in creating objective measuring instruments.结构效度:客观测量工具的新发展。
Psychol Assess. 2019 Dec;31(12):1412-1427. doi: 10.1037/pas0000626. Epub 2019 Mar 21.
2
The Evolution of Mating Preferences and Major Histocompatibility Complex Genes.交配偏好与主要组织相容性复合体基因的进化
Am Nat. 1999 Feb;153(2):145-164. doi: 10.1086/303166.
3
Best research practices in psychology: Illustrating epistemological and pragmatic considerations with the case of relationship science.心理学最佳研究实践:以关系科学为例说明认识论和实用主义的考虑。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2015 Feb;108(2):275-97. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000007.
4
Fundamental Dimensions of Environmental Risk : The Impact of Harsh versus Unpredictable Environments on the Evolution and Development of Life History Strategies.环境风险的基本维度:恶劣环境与不可预测环境对生命史策略的进化和发展的影响。
Hum Nat. 2009 Jun;20(2):204-68. doi: 10.1007/s12110-009-9063-7.
5
Using the California Q-sort Measure of Life History Strategy to Predict Sexual Behavioral Outcomes.使用加利福尼亚生活史策略Q分类测量法预测性行为结果。
Arch Sex Behav. 2015 Aug;44(6):1705-11. doi: 10.1007/s10508-014-0445-5. Epub 2014 Dec 17.
6
Predicting romantic interest and decisions in the very early stages of mate selection: standards, accuracy, and sex differences.预测择偶早期阶段的浪漫兴趣和决策:标准、准确性及性别差异。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2014 Apr;40(4):540-50. doi: 10.1177/0146167213519481. Epub 2014 Feb 5.
7
Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection.伴侣偏好确实可以预测选择伴侣的早期阶段的吸引力和选择。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Nov;105(5):757-76. doi: 10.1037/a0033777. Epub 2013 Aug 5.
8
The predictive validity of ideal partner preferences: a review and meta-analysis.理想伴侣偏好的预测效度:综述和元分析。
Psychol Bull. 2014 May;140(3):623-665. doi: 10.1037/a0032432. Epub 2013 Apr 15.
9
The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown?双项量表的信度:皮尔逊、克伦巴赫还是斯皮尔曼-布朗?
Int J Public Health. 2013 Aug;58(4):637-42. doi: 10.1007/s00038-012-0416-3. Epub 2012 Oct 23.
10
Sexual dimorphism in stature (SDS), jealousy and mate retention.身高方面的性别二态性(SDS)、嫉妒心理与配偶挽留行为。
Evol Psychol. 2010 Oct 2;8(4):530-44. doi: 10.1177/147470491000800401.