Literature DB >> 12713744

Variable preferences for sexual dimorphism in height as a strategy for increasing the pool of potential partners in humans.

Bogusław Pawłowski1.   

Abstract

Human mate preferences are known to be related to a number of morphological traits. Those relating to female waist-to-hip ratio or body mass index and to male height appear to be distinctive mate-choice criteria and are known to be related to reproductive success. In addition to absolute height, a possibly important mate-choice criterion may be relative height, i.e. the extent of sexual dimorphism in stature (SDS = male height/female height) between oneself and a potential partner. Here, I demonstrate that people adjust their preferences for SDS in relation to their own height in order to increase the potential pool of partners. This causes nonlinearity in assortative mating in relation to height and shows that in relation to intrapopulational SDS both men and women are responsible for stabilizing selection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12713744      PMCID: PMC1691293          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2294

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  17 in total

1.  Tall men have more reproductive success.

Authors:  B Pawlowski; R I Dunbar; A Lipowicz
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-01-13       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Validity and reliability of self-reported stature and weight of US adolescents.

Authors:  J H Himes; A Faricy
Journal:  Am J Hum Biol       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.937

3.  Genetic and environmental influences on morphological characteristics.

Authors:  C Susanne
Journal:  Ann Hum Biol       Date:  1975-07       Impact factor: 1.533

4.  Standards for children's height at ages 2-9 years allowing for heights of parents.

Authors:  J M Tanner; H Goldstein; R H Whitehouse
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1970-12       Impact factor: 3.791

5.  Height and sexual dimorphism of stature among human societies.

Authors:  J P Gray; L D Wolfe
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  1980-09       Impact factor: 2.868

6.  Human assortative mating for height: non-linearity and heteroscedasticity.

Authors:  I C McManus; C G Mascie-Taylor
Journal:  Hum Biol       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 0.553

Review 7.  Assortative mating with respect to physical characteristics.

Authors:  J N Spuhler
Journal:  Soc Biol       Date:  1982 Spring-Summer

8.  Reported versus measured adult statures.

Authors:  J H Himes; A F Roche
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  1982-07       Impact factor: 2.868

9.  Women's height, reproductive success and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in modern humans.

Authors:  Daniel Nettle
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-09-22       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Comparison of self-reported and measured height and weight.

Authors:  M Palta; R J Prineas; R Berman; P Hannan
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1982-02       Impact factor: 4.897

View more
  18 in total

1.  Human homogamy in facial characteristics: does a sexual-imprinting-like mechanism play a role?

Authors:  Saori Nojo; Satoshi Tamura; Yasuo Ihara
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  2012-09

2.  MHC-assortative facial preferences in humans.

Authors:  S Craig Roberts; Anthony C Little; L Morris Gosling; Benedict C Jones; David I Perrett; Vaughan Carter; Marion Petrie
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2005-12-22       Impact factor: 3.703

Review 3.  Mate Choice and the Persistence of Maternal Mortality.

Authors:  Santosh Jagadeeshan; Alyssa K Gomes; Rama S Singh
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2018-12-13       Impact factor: 3.060

4.  Body height, immunity, facial and vocal attractiveness in young men.

Authors:  Ilona Skrinda; Tatjana Krama; Sanita Kecko; Fhionna R Moore; Ants Kaasik; Laila Meija; Vilnis Lietuvietis; Markus J Rantala; Indrikis Krams
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2014-10-18

5.  From preferred to actual mate characteristics: the case of human body shape.

Authors:  Alexandre Courtiol; Sandrine Picq; Bernard Godelle; Michel Raymond; Jean-Baptiste Ferdy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-09-27       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Penis size interacts with body shape and height to influence male attractiveness.

Authors:  Brian S Mautz; Bob B M Wong; Richard A Peters; Michael D Jennions
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Parental height differences predict the need for an emergency caesarean section.

Authors:  Gert Stulp; Simon Verhulst; Thomas V Pollet; Daniel Nettle; Abraham P Buunk
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Preference for women's body mass and waist-to-hip ratio in Tsimane' men of the Bolivian Amazon: biological and cultural determinants.

Authors:  Piotr Sorokowski; Krzysztof Kościński; Agnieszka Sorokowska; Tomas Huanca
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-22       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Are human mating preferences with respect to height reflected in actual pairings?

Authors:  Gert Stulp; Abraham P Buunk; Thomas V Pollet; Daniel Nettle; Simon Verhulst
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Preferred and actual relative height among homosexual male partners vary with preferred dominance and sex role.

Authors:  Jaroslava Varella Valentova; Gert Stulp; Vít Třebický; Jan Havlíček
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.