Partner preferences across sexual orientations and biological sex

This study examined how partner preferences differ across interpersonal contexts (romantic attachment and relationship expectations) based on sexuality and biological sex. Participants completed measures of attachment and behavioral expectations for their romantic partners, cross‐sex friends, and same‐sex friends. The attachment anxiety results revealed an effect of sexuality: Single heterosexuals scored higher for their cross‐sex friends than same‐sex friends, single lesbian/gay individuals scored higher for same‐sex friends than cross‐sex friends, and bisexuals' attachment anxiety was equal regardless of friends' biological sex. The behavioral expectation results revealed an effect of biological sex indicating that, regardless of sexuality, women are preferred over men for emotional/social needs. Finally, an interaction revealed that lesbians have higher expectations for their girlfriends/wives than straight men have for theirs.     

Misperception of sexual and romantic interests in opposite‐sex friendships: Four hypotheses

Two online studies evaluated the misperception of sexual and romantic interests in established relationships and tested four hypotheses: a simple sex‐difference hypothesis, a projection hypothesis, a mate value hypothesis, and a mediation hypothesis. Two hundred thirty‐eight (Study 1) and 198 (Study 2) members of young adult opposite‐sex friendship dyads indicated their sexual and romantic interests in their friend and their perceptions of their friend’s sexual and romantic interests in them. Participants projected their own levels of sexual and romantic interests onto their opposite‐sex friend, mediating the following effects: males overperceived and females underperceived their friends’ sexual (but not romantic) interest, and participants of both sexes misperceived the sexual (but not romantic) interest of friends depending on the friends’ mate value.     

Touch attitudes in cross‐sex friendships: We're just friends

Results from this survey indicated that within heterosexual cross‐sex friendships, perceptions of friendship intimacy for females were more strongly tied to their positive attitudes toward: enacting and receiving more touch, enacting and receiving more safe haven (e.g., caretaking) touch, and perceiving touch as more sexually arousing, when compared to males. Females were more motivated not to touch their cross‐sex friends in public regardless of intimacy perceptions and did not positively perceive safe haven touch if they did not have a romantic partner. It is argued that males' and females' attitudes toward touch in cross‐sex friendships diverge due to evolved differences related to parental investment and the manner in which they are socialized to perceive their roles in cross‐sex friendships.     

Shifting toward cooperative tendencies and forgiveness: How partner‐focused prayer transforms motivation

Several studies tested whether partner‐focused prayer shifts individuals toward cooperative tendencies and forgiveness. In Studies 1 and 2, participants who prayed more frequently for their partner were rated by objective coders as less vengeful. Study 3 showed that, compared to partners of targets in the positive partner thought condition, the romantic partners of targets assigned to pray reported a positive change in their partner's forgiveness. In Study 4, participants who prayed following a partner's “hurtful behavior” were more cooperative with their partners in a mixed‐motive game compared to participants who engaged in positive thoughts about their partner. In Study 5, participants who prayed for a close relationship partner reported higher levels of cooperative tendencies and forgiveness.     

Poaching,promiscuity, and deceit: Combatting mating rivalry in same‐sex friendships

If humans faced recurrently over evolutionary history the adaptive problem of competition with same‐sex friends for mates, they may have evolved psychological mechanisms designed to prevent and combat mating rivalry with same‐sex friends. Four studies were conducted to test hypotheses about the design of these mechanisms. In Studies 1 and 2 (N= 406 and N= 342, respectively) we found that, as predicted, people experience more upset in response to imagined rivalry from a friend than from a stranger. In Study 3 (N= 455), in which a between‐subjects design was utilized, we found that women's, but not men's, willingness to become friends with a member of the same sex is lower when the person is described as sexually promiscuous. In Study 4 (N= 169) we found that people report being deceived by friends about mating rivalry more often than they themselves report engaging in deceit about rivalry, and women more than men deceive each other about how sexually experienced and promiscuous they are. Discussion addresses implications of the findings and the use of an evolutionary approach for understanding conflict in same‐sex friendship.     

Sex differences in reactions to outperforming same‐sex friends

The current studies were designed to examine whether female adolescents have more negative reactions than male adolescents to achieving more than their same‐sex friends. In Study 1, 51 females and 48 males from grades 8 and 10 were administered questions assessing their reactions to performing better than their closest same‐sex friends in four domains. Across domains, females reported more negative reactions than males. Further, compared with males, female participants believed that their same‐sex friends would have more negative reactions if they performed better than their friends. In Study 2, 48 females and 49 males age 18 years were asked how they felt about performing better than and equal to their closest same‐sex friends in the domains of romance and academics in both hypothetical and actual situations. Females reported feeling more positive when they received the same outcomes as opposed to better outcomes than their friends. Males did not differ in the valence of their responses to the two outcomes. The implications for sex differences in achievement and friendship are discussed.     

Gender and relationships: Influences on agentic and communal behaviors

The present research examined the moderating influence of situations involving friends and romantic partners on gender differences in interpersonal behaviors reflecting agency and communion. Behavior was studied in three situations varying in social role and dyadic gender composition: same‐sex friendships, opposite‐sex friendships, and romantic relationships. To obtain multiple events representing each relationship situation, participants recorded information about their interpersonal interactions during a 20‐day period using an event‐contingent recording procedure. Results indicated gender differences consistent with gender stereotypes when men and women were interacting with same‐sex friends; men with men were more dominant and women with women were more agreeable. In interactions with romantic partners, gender differences in communal behavior were opposite to gender stereotypes; women were less agreeable and more quarrelsome than men with their romantic partners. Results are considered in reference to developmental socialization theory, social role theory, and studies of gender differences in marital relationships.     

Preference for Same‐ Versus Cross‐Sex Friendships1

How is preferring same‐ vs. cross‐sex friendships related to one's perceptions of these friendships? In Phase 1, college students (N = 122) listed qualities they valued in their same‐ and cross‐sex friends. In Phase 2, survey items constructed from the responses were administered to 231 students who indicated a preference for same‐ vs. cross‐sex friendship. Those who reported a preference for opposite‐sex friends rated these friendships as higher in closeness, trust, caring, having common interests, and providing narcissistic benefits, compared to those who reported a preference for same‐sex friends. Results demonstrate that gender differences often associated with close friendships are greatly attenuated and sometimes reversed when preference for same‐ vs. cross‐sex friendship is included as a moderating variable.     

Who Do We Tell and Whom Do We Tell On? Gossip as a Strategy for Status Enhancement1

College students ranked the interest value of 12 different gossip scenarios; likelihood of spreading the gossip; and the people to whom they would be most likely to tell the gossip, depending on whether the gossip was about male or female professors, relatives, friends, acquaintances, strangers, or a same‐sex rival or a romantic partner. Damaging, negative news about rivals and positive news about friends and lovers was especially prized and likely to be passed on. Aside from romantic partners, males and females were more interested in information about same‐sex others than about opposite‐sex others. Overall, men were most likely to confide in their romantic partners, but females were equally likely to share gossip with their lovers and their same‐sex friends.     

Exploring the effects of social anxiety similarity in newly developed same‐sex friendships

In studying the interpersonal consequences of social anxiety (SA), researchers generally have neglected to account for partner levels of SA. Therefore, in the current study, we examined how SA similarity would influence interpersonal closeness and uncertainty during the early stages of friendship development. Fifty‐six same‐sex friend pairs completed measures of SA, closeness, and uncertainty after knowing each other for approximately 1 month and then again 6 weeks later. Although higher levels of SA at Time 1 were related to more uncertainty, similarity had no effect on closeness or uncertainty at Time 1. However, friends matched on SA experienced increased closeness and decreased uncertainty over the 6 weeks, suggesting SA similarity may become increasingly important as friendships develop.     

The reciprocal cycle of self‐concealment and trust in romantic relationships

We propose that perceived partner concealment, self‐concealment from one's partner (i.e., keeping secrets from one's partner), and trust in one's partner form a reciprocal cycle in romantic relationships. In Study 1, participants in a romantic relationship (N = 94) completed a two‐time point survey within a span of 8 to 10 weeks. Results revealed that perceived partner concealment was associated with a loss of trust in partner, and low trust in partner was associated with an increase in self‐concealment from one's partner. Furthermore, the association between perceived partner concealment and self‐concealment from one's partner was mediated by trust. In Study 2, couples (N = 50) completed daily records for 14 consecutive days. Multilevel analyses indicated that on the days the individuals reported more self‐concealment, their partners reported lower trust in them. Moreover, on the days the partners reported lower trust, the partners also reported higher self‐concealment. These findings suggest that self‐concealment in romantic relationships can create a reciprocal cycle that involves loss of trust and more self‐concealment between partners, which would slowly deteriorate the relationship well‐being. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Stable same‐sex friendships with higher achieving partners promote mathematical reasoning in lower achieving primary school children

This study was designed to investigate friend influence over mathematical reasoning in a sample of 374 children in 187 same‐sex friend dyads (184 girls in 92 friendships; 190 boys in 95 friendships). Participants completed surveys that measured mathematical reasoning in the 3rd grade (approximately 9 years old) and 1 year later in the 4th grade (approximately 10 years old). Analyses designed for dyadic data (i.e., longitudinal actor‐partner interdependence model) indicated that higher achieving friends influenced the mathematical reasoning of lower achieving friends, but not the reverse. Specifically, greater initial levels of mathematical reasoning among higher achieving partners in the 3rd grade predicted greater increases in mathematical reasoning from 3rd grade to 4th grade among lower achieving partners. These effects held after controlling for peer acceptance and rejection, task avoidance, interest in mathematics, maternal support for homework, parental education, length of the friendship, and friendship group norms on mathematical reasoning.     

Facial and self‐report questionnaire measures capture different aspects of romantic partner preferences

Romantic relationship researchers often use self‐report measures of partner preferences based on verbal questionnaires. These questionnaires show that partner preferences involve an evaluation in terms of underlying factors of vitality–attractiveness, status‐resources, and warmth–trustworthiness. However, when people first encounter a potential partner, they can usually derive a wealth of impressions from their face, and little is known about the relationship between verbal self‐reports and impressions derived from faces. We conducted four studies investigating potential parallels and differences between facial impressions and verbal self‐reports. Study 1 showed that when evaluating highly variable everyday face images in a context that does not require considering them as potential partners, participants can reliably perceive the traits and factors that are related to partner preferences. However, despite being capable of these nuanced evaluations, Study 2 found that when asked to evaluate images of faces as potential romantic partners, participants’ preferences become dominated by attractiveness‐related concerns. Study 3 confirmed this dominance of facial attractiveness using morphed face‐like images. Study 4 showed that attractiveness dominates partner preferences for faces even when task instructions imply that warmth–trustworthiness or status–resources should be of primary importance. In contrast to verbal questionnaire measures of partner preferences, evaluations of faces focus heavily on attractiveness, whereas questionnaire self‐reports tend on average to prioritize warmth–trustworthiness over attractiveness. Evaluations of faces and verbal self‐report measures therefore capture different aspects of partner preferences.     

Extended contact through cross‐group romantic relationships

Cross‐group romantic relationships are an extremely intimate and often maligned form of intergroup contact. Yet, according to intergroup contact theory, these relationships have the potential to improve the intergroup attitudes of others via extended contact. This study combines the interpersonal and intergroup literatures to examine the outcomes associated with knowing a partner in a cross‐group romantic relationship. Results suggest that cross‐group romantic partners encounter greater disapproval toward their relationships than same‐group partners and, as a result, their relationships are perceived more negatively. Nevertheless, extended contact with cross‐group partners, controlling for participants' cross‐group friendships and romantic relationships, predicts more positive attitudes toward cross‐group dating and positive intergroup attitudes in general, mediated by perceived ingroup norms toward cross‐group relationships.     

Impact of attachment style on responses to accommodative dilemmas among same‐sex couples

Drawing upon Goffman (1963), we examined the impact of attachment style on responses to accommodative dilemmas among couples with “discredited” identities (i.e., lesbian and gay male couples). Specifically, we tested the hypothesis that individuals in same‐sex romantic relationships involving two securely attached partners would be more likely to engage in accommodation (i.e., in response to a partner’s anger or criticism, would behave constructively) than would individuals in same‐sex romantic relationships involving at least one insecurely attached partner. As expected, results from 58 gay male couples yielded a significant main effect for attachment style pairing on responses to accommodative dilemmas. However, results from 53 lesbian couples yielded a marginal interaction effect involving partner (i.e., Partner 1 versus Partner 2) and attachment style pairing on responses to accommodative dilemmas. Implications for the study of personality characteristics and interpersonal behavior among lesbian and gay male couples are discussed.     

Relationship maintenance across platonic and non-platonic cross-sex friendships in emerging adults

Prior research examining maintenance in cross-sex friendships focuses heavily on platonic (i.e., nonsexually active) friendships with limited research examining sexually involved cross-sex friendships (i.e., “friends with benefits relationships”). In this study, we investigated differences in relational maintenance behaviors between sexually and nonsexually active cross-sex friendships types. In an online survey, 531 emerging adult participants from large southwestern and southeastern universities identified either a friends with benefits or platonic opposite sex friendship and then completed items asking them to report the frequency with which they enacted each of 36 relationship maintenance behaviors. Overall, participants involved in casual sex friendships engaged in the least, and those who transitioned from a friends-with-benefits relationship to a romantic relationship engaged in the most frequent relationship maintenance. Platonic friendships employed more frequent maintenance than casual-sex friendships but less than either true friends with benefits or participants who transitioned to a romantic relationship.     

Dynamics of perceived social network support for same‐sex versus mixed‐sex relationships

Individuals in mixed‐sex (n = 248) and same‐sex (n = 159) romantic relationships completed several online questions for each member of their social network, including the member's perceived support for their romantic relationship. Those in same‐sex relationships perceived less support for their relationship, but only from family members, not from friends. Levels of relationship support were lower among subjectively more distant network members than among closer network members. As hypothesized, associations between perceived support for the relationship and relationship, mental, and physical well‐being were weaker for those in same‐sex compared to mixed‐sex relationships. Principles of social network management and attributional ambiguity were used to explain the findings.     

For better and for worse: everyday social comparisons between romantic partners

The authors examined the frequency, direction, and impact of social comparisons between romantic partners. Comparisons were expected to occur on a daily basis, owing to regular interactions between partners. To the extent that one empathizes and shares outcomes with one's partner, one might respond more positively to upward than to downward comparisons. Study 1a was an experience-sampling study in which participants reported comparisons made to their spouse over 2 weeks. Study 1b examined reactions to the most significant comparisons made during the experience-sampling study. Participants reported making comparisons to their romantic partner more than once a day on average and experienced more positive responses to upward than to downward comparisons. Study 2 demonstrated that participants empathized and shared outcomes with their partner to a greater extent than with a friend. Study 3 confirmed that participants responded more positively to upward than to downward comparisons even for domains high in self-relevance and even when the comparison had negative self-evaluative implications. These results suggest that, owing to higher levels of empathy and shared fate with partners, comparisons function differently in romantic than in other relationships.     

Receptivity to sexual offers as a function of sex,socioeconomic status,physical attractiveness,and intimacy of the offer

The present research examined sex differences in the willingness to accept hypothetical sexual offers by different potential partners. In 2 experiments, participants were asked to imagine that 1 person with moderate socioeconomic status (SES) and moderate physical attractiveness was their current partner. In Experiment 1, 2 potential partners were either depicted as physically attractive or as having a high SES. For each of the 2 partners, American participants were asked to report their willingness to date, to kiss, to make out, to have sexual intercourse, and to leave their current partners. Results revealed that men always reported a greater willingness to accept the offer when the potential partner was physically attractive. Given a short‐term involvement, women also preferred the potential partner who was physically attractive. In contrast, given a long‐term involvement, they were equally willing to accept the offer of potential partners with high SES or with high physical attractiveness. In addition, whereas men reported a very similar willingness toward all kinds of offers, women reported a greater willingness to accept a less intimate, as opposed to an intimate, sexual offer. In a second experiment, these results were replicated with German respondents.     

Relationship work among young adult couples: Romantic,social, and physiological considerations

We examined romantic, social, and physiological variables associated with partners discussing romantic challenges together and with friends, a process known as relationship work (RW). Actor‐partner interdependence models examining 71 heterosexual, young adult couples and their friends suggested social network approval, friendship quality, and partners' perspective taking were each associated with partners' RW patterns. Skin conductance activity readings revealed males universally experienced greater physiological arousal when discussing romantic problems than females. Unexpectedly, both males and females experienced greater skin conductance activity when discussing romantic challenges with friends than with partners. Males were more likely to discuss romantic challenges with friends when their female partners experienced greater baseline skin conductance activity. Findings inform researchers regarding links between romantic, social, and physiological functioning.