Kenrick Keefe:Age preferences in mates eral findings and lead to new predictions.Evolutionary attractiveness"overvalued"by males,and economic re- theorists have not generated enough data to distinguish sources "overvalued"by females? between the social psychological and evolutionary expla- Economic models generally explain mate selection in nations of this phenomenon,however,nor have they terms of historically arbitrary normative pressures.As considered how age preferences interact with other fac- one author puts it,"traditionally,in our society,males tors that emerge from social psychological studies of have been valued for their economic success,and females attraction.We present data collected with different for their physical attractiveness"(Brehm,1985,p.76, methods,across different generations,and from several emphasis ours).Similarly,Cameron et al.(1977)explain different cultures suggesting that human mate selection is their finding that females prefer older,taller,high status based,in part,on the partner's reproductive potential males as the result of "traditional sex-role specifica- and,in part,on the partner's similarity to the subject. tions...frequently valued as sex appropriate in Ameri- can society,"which specify that women should "look up to"their male partners(p.29,emphasis ours). 1.1.Social exchange and the preference Along similar lines,Deutsch et al.(1986)speculated for similar mates about Sontag's(1979)suggestion that there is a "double Prevailing social psychological models of mating prefer- standard of aging"in our society: ence adopt a view of relationships as a form of economic .with increasing age women's sexual desirability is exchange (see,for example,Clark Reis 1988;Huston thought to decrease,and women's sexual desire and Levinger 1978;and Walster et al.1978).These economic interest are considered increasingly inappropri- models see potential partners as seeking an equitable ate. ..Even the standards of physical attractiveness bargain in a marketplace of mate competition.For exam- differ for men and women....Those for men are less ple,Cameron et al.(1977)observed that the singles stringent and less connected to youth,whereas for advertisements they examined in their research sug- women any sign of advancing age is an indication of gested a"heterosexual stock market."They also observed diminished attractiveness....This equation offemale that:The ads in this paper read a little bit like the ask-bid beauty with youthfulness may reflect the more general columns of the New York Stock Exchange.Potential ideal of femininity as a childlike state.(pp.771-72) partners seek to strike bargains which maximize their Although social psychologists do not usually examine rewards in the exchange of assets."(Cameron et al.1977, cross-cultural data,the above quotes reveal a tacit as- p.28) sumption that there are other societies in which gender According to these models,a common mechanism for differences in mate preference are fundamentally differ- achieving equity in the exchange process is to choose a ent from those found in our society.Along these lines, partner who is similar to oneself.Social psychologists who Rosenblatt(1974,p.87)advanced the following reason- study relationships often quote Erving Goffman's state- ing:"I suspect that female beauty is more important ment that:"A proposal of marriage in our society tends to where women have little control over whom they marry be a way in which a man sums up his social attributes and and little power in the family,and that feminine attrac- suggests to a woman that hers are not so much better as to tiveness is not noticeably more important than male preclude a merger or partnership in these matters." attractiveness where women have as much say as men (Goffman 1952,p.456) about whom they marry and about what goes on in their To support these models,social psychological theorists families. frequently point out that mates are matched on a great variety of characteristics(Antill 1983;Byrne 1971;Critelli 1.1.1.Problems for normative social exchange models.A Waid 1980;Hendrick 1981).These include physical number of findings pose difficulties for an explanation of attractiveness,wealth,religion,personality,political at- mate selection that is limited to the norms peculiar to our titudes,degree of psychopathology,and even personal society.We have reviewed several of these problems habits.Social psychological theorists invoke economic elsewhere (Kenrick Trost 1989);two are summarized exchange to explain the similarity findings.Partners pre- below: sumably attempt to match themselves with others who 1.Cross-cultural research indicates that males and have similar social value.Note that "economic exchange' females in other cultures differ in ways that are consistent does not refer solely to the exchange of money;indi- with the gender differences found in our own society.For viduals'economic value is assumed to be based on social, instance,females in different cultures value social status physical,and intellectual assets,as well as their financial in males more than do males,and males in different status.In fact,a woman's social economic value may bear cultures value a potential mate's physical attractiveness only a slight relation to her wealth,as is discussed in more more than do females(e.g.,Buss 1989;Symons 1979;see detail below. also multiple book review BBS 3(2)1980).Given the great The exceptions to the principle that"like prefers like" variability of many human characteristics from culture to are few and worthy of careful examination.One consis- culture,finding invariance across cultures is evidence tent exception to the principle is the finding that females that supports a species-specific,rather than a culture- are attracted to older males,whereas males are attracted specific,explanation(Plutchik 1980). to younger females (Bolig et al.1984;Cameron et al. 2.Comparisons across mammalian species reveal a 1977;Harrison Saeed 1977).Economic models at- number of sex differences that parallel those found in tribute this age preference complementarity to gender humans.For example,dominance is more important for discrepancies in social value.Females presumably ex- male than for female attractiveness in a number of other change youth and physical attractiveness for economic primate species(Sadalla et al.1987;Trivers 1985)and has security (Brehm 1985).But why are youth and physical been linked to the hormone testosterone in humans and 76 BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (1992)15:1