Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Norman Li, Michael Bailey, D. Kenrick (2002)
The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: testing the tradeoffs.Journal of personality and social psychology, 82 6
Catalina Toma, Jeffrey Hancock, N. Ellison (2008)
Separating Fact From Fiction: An Examination of Deceptive Self-Presentation in Online Dating ProfilesPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34
(2015)
Preferred mate characteristics in young adults
L. Sharabi, J. Caughlin (2018)
Deception in online dating: Significance and implications for the first offline dateNew Media & Society, 21
Vladas Griskevicius, J. Tybur, Jill Sundie, R. Cialdini, G. Miller, D. Kenrick (2007)
Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: when romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals.Journal of personality and social psychology, 93 1
Jeffrey Hancock, Catalina Toma (2009)
Putting Your Best Face Forward: The Accuracy of Online Dating PhotographsJournal of Communication, 59
A. Hayes (2013)
Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach
W. Tooke, Lori Camire (1991)
Patterns of deception in intersexual and intrasexual mating strategiesEthology and Sociobiology, 12
Fiona Ross (2019)
DeceptionUnderstanding Perversion In Clinical Practice
W. Rowatt, Michael Cunninghan, P. Druen (1998)
Deception to Get a DatePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24
Brian Bird, J. Carré, Jennifer Knack, Steven Arnocky (2016)
Threatening Men's Mate Value Influences Aggression Toward an Intrasexual Rival: The Moderating Role of Narcissism.The American journal of psychology, 129 2
Jessica Greenebaum (2012)
Managing ImpressionsHumanity & Society, 36
M. Haselton, D. Buss, V. Oubaid, A. Angleitner (2005)
Sex, Lies, and Strategic Interference: The Psychology of Deception Between the SexesPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31
D. Buss, T. Shackelford (2008)
Attractive Women Want it All: Good Genes, Economic Investment, Parenting Proclivities, and Emotional Commitment1Evolutionary Psychology, 6
Steven Arnocky, A. Ribout (2014)
Perceived mate availability influences intrasexual competition, jealousy and mate-guarding behaviorJournal of Evolutionary Psychology, 12
Donald Symons (1989)
Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 culturesBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 12
Steven Arnocky, Marlena Pearson, T. Vaillancourt (2015)
Health, Anticipated Partner Infidelity, and Jealousy in Men and WomenEvolutionary Psychology, 13
J. Edlund, Brad Sagarin (2014)
The Mate Value ScalePersonality and Individual Differences, 64
Eden Davis, K. Fingerman (2016)
Digital Dating: Online Profile Content of Older and Younger Adults.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences, 71 6
J. Simpson, S. Gangestad (1992)
Sociosexuality and Romantic Partner ChoiceJournal of Personality, 60
(2008)
Do humans prefer altruistic mates ? Testing a link between sexual selection and altruism towards non-relatives
Günter Hitsch, Ali Hortaçsu, D. Ariely (2010)
What makes you click?—Mate preferences in online datingQuantitative Marketing and Economics, 8
Nicole Ellison, Jeffrey Hancock, Catalina Toma (2012)
Profile as promise: A framework for conceptualizing veracity in online dating self-presentationsNew Media & Society, 14
M. Tagler (2010)
Sex Differences in Jealousy: Comparing the Influence of Previous Infidelity Among College Students and AdultsSocial Psychological and Personality Science, 1
S. Stieger, Tina Eichinger, Britta Honeder (2009)
Can Mate Choice Strategies Explain Sex DifferencesSocial Psychology, 40
C. Harris (2002)
Sexual and Romantic Jealousy in Heterosexual and Homosexual AdultsPsychological Science, 13
Yael Sela, Justin Mogilski, T. Shackelford, Virgil Zeigler‐Hill, B. Fink (2017)
Mate Value Discrepancy and Mate Retention Behaviors of Self and Partner.Journal of personality, 85 5
D. Waynforth (2001)
Mate choice trade-offs and women’s preference for physically attractive menHuman Nature, 12
P. Smith (1871)
The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to SexGlasgow Medical Journal, 3
Steven Arnocky (2018)
Self-Perceived Mate Value, Facial Attractiveness, and Mate Preferences: Do Desirable Men Want It All?Evolutionary Psychology, 16
R. Oda, Akari Okuda, Mia Takeda, K. Hiraishi (2014)
Provision or Good Genes? Menstrual Cycle Shifts in Women's Preferences for Short-Term and Long-Term Mates' Altruistic BehaviorEvolutionary Psychology, 12
Joseph Henrich, Steven Heine, A. Norenzayan (2010)
The weirdest people in the world?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33
C. Colby (1973)
The weirdest people in the world
D. Buss (1988)
The evolution of human intrasexual competition: tactics of mate attraction.Journal of personality and social psychology, 54 4
David Markowitz, Jeffrey Hancock (2018)
Deception in Mobile Dating ConversationsJournal of Communication, 68
R. Stower, Anthony Lee, Toneya McIntosh, Morgan Sidari, James Sherlock, B. Dixson (2019)
Mating Strategies and the Masculinity Paradox: How Relationship Context, Relationship Status, and Sociosexuality Shape Women’s Preferences for Facial Masculinity and BeardednessArchives of Sexual Behavior, 49
D. Farrelly (2013)
Altruism as an Indicator of Good Parenting Quality in Long-Term Relationships: Further Investigations Using the Mate Preferences Towards Altruistic Traits ScaleThe Journal of Social Psychology, 153
L. Penke, J. Asendorpf (2008)
Beyond global sociosexual orientations: a more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships.Journal of personality and social psychology, 95 5
Bettina Zengel, J. Edlund, Brad Sagarin (2013)
Sex differences in jealousy in response to infidelity: Evaluation of demographic moderators in a national random samplePersonality and Individual Differences, 54
Wendy Iredale, M. Vugt, Robin Dunbar (2008)
Showing Off in Humans: Male Generosity as a Mating SignalEvolutionary Psychology, 6
Jennifer Gibbs, N. Ellison, Rebecca Heino (2006)
Self-Presentation in Online PersonalsCommunication Research, 33
D. Wood, C. Brumbaugh (2009)
Using revealed mate preferences to evaluate market force and differential preference explanations for mate selection.Journal of personality and social psychology, 96 6
Guenter Hitsch, Ali Hortaçsu (2005)
What Makes You Click: An Empirical Analysis of Online Dating ⁄
N. Ellison, Rebecca Heino, Jennifer Gibbs (2006)
Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating EnvironmentJ. Comput. Mediat. Commun., 11
Ciaran Docherty, Anthony Lee, Amanda Hahn, L. DeBruine, B. Jones (2019)
Do more attractive women show stronger preferences for male facial masculinity?Evolution and Human Behavior
Steven Arnocky, Shafik Sunderani, W. Gomes, T. Vaillancourt (2014)
Anticipated Partner Infidelity and Men's Intimate Partner Violence: The Mediating Role of AnxietyEvolutionary Behavioral Sciences
O. Abramova, Annika Baumann, Hanna Krasnova, Peter Buxmann (2016)
Gender Differences in Online Dating: What Do We Know So Far? A Systematic Literature Review2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS)
(2019)
Tinder v eHarmony: A preliminary analysis of sociosexuality across online dating platforms
T. Clarkson, Morgan Sidari, Rosanna Sains, Meredith Alexander, Melissa Harrison, Valeriya Mefodeva, Samuel Pearson, Anthony Lee, B. Dixson (2020)
A multivariate analysis of women's mating strategies and sexual selection on men's facial morphologyRoyal Society Open Science, 7
D. Pager, Lincoln Quillian (2005)
Walking the Talk? What Employers Say Versus What They DoAmerican Sociological Review, 70
Jennifer Gibbs, N. Ellison, Rebecca Heino (2006)
The Role of Anticipated Future Interaction, Self-Disclosure, and Perceived Success in Internet Dating
Lei Chang, Yan Wang, T. Shackelford, D. Buss (2011)
Chinese mate preferences: Cultural evolution and continuity across a quarter of a centuryPersonality and Individual Differences, 50
Sex differences in mate preferences are well established. It is also well understood that humans often seek to manipulate their standing on important mate-value traits. Yet, there is a paucity of work examining potential sex differences in response to deception along these important dimensions. In Study 1, a sample of 280 undergraduates (123 females) responded to a hypothetical online dating scenario asking participants to rank how upset they would be if deceived about a date’s attractiveness, occupation, or volunteerism. Women ranked occupation deception as more upsetting than men did, and men ranked attractiveness deception as more upsetting than women did. Given potential measurement differences between forced-choice and continuous response options, Study 2 randomly assigned 364 undergraduates (188 females) to one of the deceptions conditions and asked them to report their level of upset and willingness to go on the date using a continuous response scale. Women were more likely than men to cancel the date if the deception involved volunteerism or occupation. There was no significant sex difference in the attractiveness condition. Neither mate value nor sociosexuality moderated the sex difference in the levels of upset due to the deception. Together, these findings demonstrate that women and men exhibit differences in the degree to which they become upset by opposite sex deceptions in online dating, regardless of self-perceived mate value and sociosexuality, in alignment with evolved sex differences in mate preferences.
Archives of Sexual Behavior – Springer Journals
Published: Nov 1, 2021
Keywords: Online dating; Dating deception; Sex differences; Mate-value; Sociosexual orientation; Mate preferences
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.