Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30816069›Full record

ArticleEvolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior

Self-Perceived Mate Value Is Poorly Predicted by Demographic Variables.

Zsófia Csajbók, Jan Havlíček, Zsolt Demetrovics, Mihály Berkics

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Zsófia Csajbók1 Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5800-1597
Jan Havlíček1 Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Zsolt Demetrovics3 Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.
Mihály Berkics3 Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6748-2804

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mate value is a construct that can be measured in various ways, ranging from complex but difficult-to-obtain ratings all the way to single-item self-report measures. Due to low sample sizes in previous studies, little is known about the relationship between mate value and demographic variables. In this article, we tested the Mate Value Scale, a relatively new, short, 4-item self-report measure in two large samples. In the first sample of over 1,000, mostly college-age participants, the scale was found to be reliable and correlated with criterion variables in expected ways. In the second, larger sample, which included over 21,000 participants, we have tested for differences across demographics. Contrary to theoretical expectations and previous findings with smaller samples, the differences were either very small (sexual orientation, age, education) or small (sex, socioeconomic status, relationship status) in terms of their effect size. This suggests that the scale is not measuring "objective" mate value (as understood either in terms of fitness or actual mating decisions by potential partners on the "market"), but a self-perception of it, open to social comparison, relative standards, possibly even biases, raising questions about measuring self-perceived versus objective mate value.

Indexed as

Self ConceptSocial PerceptionAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsSexual PartnersYoung Adultdemographicsmate preferencesmate valuepsychometricsself-perception

Identifiers

PMID30816069
PMCPMC10481051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.