This study aims to investigate assortative mating based on mate value from male perspective. Male participants (132 Brazilian and 106 American) evaluated hypothetical “stimulus” males described in terms of physical attractiveness, social skills, and social status (each varied in high or low levels). Participants rated each stimulus and each stimulus' preferred mating partner on nine traits. The results showed that (1) positive assortative mating was expected in romantic relationships; (2) the stimulus ratings did not vary independently, suggesting that mate value (...) is the result of the interaction of the characteristics of individuals; and (3) that participants expected physically attractive and healthier female partners to pair with high-status male stimuli. The American and Brazilian mating expectations were similar, minor differences indicate that Brazilian participants considered men with high levels of social skills to be more ambitious and intelligent; American participants expected men of high status to be healthier; Brazilians expect men of high status to have more attractive faces, while Americans expected these men to possess more attractive bodies; and Brazilian participants assigned more attractive bodies to men of lower status. These differences reflect the influence of economic and cultural factors on the local environment. The study contributes to the understanding of the construction of market value and reveals that male expectations are in line with human mating preferences. The investigation of mating expectations can be a rich approach to investigate socio-cultural aspects that are related to mating in different cultures. (shrink)

Income inequality has been empirically linked to interpersonal competition and risk-taking behaviors, but a separate line of findings consistently shows that individuals have inaccurate perceptions of the actual levels of income inequality in society. How can inequality be both consistently misperceived and yet a reliable predictor of behavior? The present study extends both these lines of research by evaluating if the scope of input used to assess income inequality (i.e., at the national, state, county, or postal code level) can account (...) for perception discrepancies and if actual/perceived inequality is associated with female intrasexual competition. Female participants recruited online from the general US population (_n_ = 691) provided demographic information, measures of perceived income inequality, and measures of intrasexual competition attitudes and behavior. Actual and perceived income inequality (at any level) did not predict negative attitudes toward other women or female weighting of physical appearance as a desirable trait. Perceived income inequality and actual county-level inequality was, however, predictive of female competition in the form of self-sexualization clothing choice. Further analyses found that age and importance placed on physical attractiveness also predicted women’s clothing choices. Perceptions of income inequality were predicted not by actual Gini indices, but by beliefs about the levels of poverty and income gaps. These results highlight the importance of better understanding the proximate cues by which people perceive environmental features such as inequality, and how those cues are used to adjust interpersonal behaviors. (shrink)

In response to crises, people sometimes prioritize fewer specific identifiable victims over many unspecified statistical victims. How other factors can explain this bias remains unclear. So two experiments investigated how complying with public health recommendations during the COVID19 pandemic depended on victim portrayal, reflection, and philosophical beliefs (Total N = 998). Only one experiment found that messaging about individual victims increased compliance compared to messaging about statistical victims—i.e., "flatten the curve" graphs—an effect that was undetected after controlling for other factors. (...) However, messaging about flu (vs. COVID19) indirectly reduced compliance by reducing perceived threat of the pandemic. Nevertheless, moral beliefs predicted compliance better than messaging and reflection in both experiments. The second experiment’s additional measures revealed that religiosity, political preferences, and beliefs about science also predicted compliance. This suggests that flouting public health recommendations may be less about ineffective messaging or reasoning than philosophical differences. (shrink)