ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Partner preferences for resources adapt to income and gender economic inequality.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Partner preferences for resources adapt to income and gender economic inequality.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
For over three decades, scholars have contested whether sex differences in ideal partner preferences for age, resources, and physical attractiveness result chiefly from evolution or cultural gender inequality. Here, we test a perspective compatible with each of these competing views: partner preferences for resources adapt strategically, such that they become stronger for the sex that is poorer and individuals who are poorer, as such preferences are more useful to these individuals. Our preregistered experiment placed 602 people from five countries in one of 45 virtual ecologies, varying participants' personal income and their local gender economic inequality. Results show that people exhibit stronger ideal partner preferences for resources when they are poorer and when their sex is poorer. This pattern was evident in three different measures of stated partner preferences for resources, namely, ranked preferences and rated preferences for resource-relevant traits (e.g., whether a potential partner has a good job), and importance placed on dating or marrying up, financially. Preferences regarding age gaps were, surprisingly, unaffected, even though older age is associated with access to resources in naturally varying populations. Consistent with our theoretical perspective, which expects ideal partner preferences will adapt primarily to environmental variables that alter the fitness of those preferences, sex differences in stated preferences for physical attractiveness in romantic partners were largely unaffected. These results are discussed in the context of behavioral ecology, which offers a framework to interpret both our results and the mixed findings of past literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.