1

Education as an attraction factor in the partner of the opposite sex

(Summarized paper)

Published in Russian: Chmykhova E.V., Davydov D.G. Education as an attraction factor in the partner of

the opposite sex // VOPROSY PSIKHOLOGII. 2013. (5): 44-53.

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1723.5360

Ekaterina V. Chmykhova,

PhD, Deputy Vice Rector and Head of Research and

Innovation Department, Modern University for the

Humanities, Moscow

echmyhova@campus.muh.ru

Denis G. Davydov,

PhD, Head of Laboratory of Behavioral Attitudes,

Research and Innovation Department, Modern

University for the Humanities, Moscow

ddavydov@muh.ru

Keywords: attraction; social perception; sex role selection; choice of partner;

education, mate selection

Common sense and evolutional psychology suggest that a person's educational status affects their attractiveness for people of the opposite sex. It is believed that women tend to choose better educated partners while to men appearance is more important than education. This hypothesis was tested in an experiment which consisted in appraising photographs of people of the opposite sex accompanied by a short description which included, among other things, the person's education. The findings show that the choice is mainly affected by the educational status of the chooser. People with a higher education and people without one tend to choose likewise partners. Gender differences have also been discovered. Men without a higher education tended to avoid women with a university degree, while educated women confidently chose educated partners. The choices of educated men and women without a higher education were less obvious. They don't exclude the possibility of having a partner whose educational status is different from theirs. The authors believe that the findings must be interpreted from the social psychological point of view.

'The laws of sexual attraction' have been stirring up the minds of poets,

philosophers and scientists for centuries. There are different scientific approaches

to this exciting issue. According to the evolutionary psychology, a mate’s

attractiveness is directly influenced by his/her educational level (Skopek, J.,

Schulz, F. & Blossfeld, H.-P., 2011; Stevens, G., Owens, D. & Schaefer, E. C.,

1990). Intelligence was one of the directions the ancient humans evolved in. For

centuries, women preferred the men who were able to ensure resources and

2

protection due to their advanced intellectual capacity (Palmer J., Palmer L., 2007.

Therefore, it can be presumed, that today, as a thousand years ago, men with high-

level intelligence are more attractive to women.

Another approach to this problem is the Social-cognitive theory, which has a

focus on social perception, i.e. the process of how we build up images of other

persons. Normally, our perception is automatic, without logical elaboration. Some

personality traits, named 'central' (Asch, S.E. 1946), could become crucial in

building up the integral image of an person (Hock R., 2003). It can be suggested

that intelligence is one of these traits, of course, if it is of value to the subject of

perception.

Inspired by evolutionary approach several experiments were carried out to

estimate the influence of intelligence on the choice of the opposite sex mate. The

study by Rosenberg J., Tunney R.J., 2008 showed, that men use uncommon and

complicated words when they see young pretty women. According to the authors,

genesis of linguistic ability was influenced by the sexual selection - as the one way

to show intelligence. In another study, it was found that men demonstrate their

humor ability in order to be attractive to a woman (Howrigan D.P.,

MacDonald K.B, 2008). Also, surveys of the men’s marriage ads show that the

higher the declared education level, the more feedback they get(Pawlowski B.,

Koziel S., 2002).

As to the men’s preferences, evolutionary psychology suggests the key role to

a woman’s appearance, as an indicator of her health and fertility. Empirical

reseach of the men’s preferences are more contradictory (Aronson E ., Wilson Т.,

Akert R.,2004). Some experiments show that the mate’s intelligence and her

education is not so important, as visual attractiveness (Elder, G. H.,1969). It was

found that women's ads declaring a higher level of education very rarely attract

men (Pawlowski B., Koziel S., 2002). In another study the role of intelligence is

estimated almost equally by men and women (D.M. Buss, 2005). Probably it

depends on how an individual considers possible relations – as short-term or as

3

long-term. (Norman P.L. Douglas T. K., 2006). It might also be due to the

educational level of the respondents.

Thus, it can be presumed, that women are more education-oriented and prefer

well-educated men. Men focus on physical attractiveness, paying little attention to

the education level. In addition, the intentions and the level of education of the

subject are also important.

To test the hypothesis how the educational level affects the mate’s

attractiveness a laboratory factorial experiment was carried out. The sample group

included 120 unmarried participants (60 females and 60 males), aged 20 – 29.

There were four groups, 30 individuals each: 1) men with university degree or

senior university students; 2) women with university degree or senior university

students; 3) men without university education; 4) girls without university

education.

The experimental toolset included 6 photos of the opposite sex individuals

with the short caption specifying whether they have university education or not. In

fact, the captions did not represent the actual educational level of these individuals.

In total, four sets were used – two for women (A and B) and two for men (C and

D). The experimental toolsets for each of the gender groups were made up of the

same photos but differed in the captions. The toolset C for men included three

photos with the caption informing that these three girls had university education,

and the other three photos with the caption informing that those three girls didn’t.

In the set D the captions to photos switched places - the girls captioned on photos

as having university education, now were captioned as not having it. The sets for

women were developed in the same way. One set was shown to the half of the

male\female respondents, and the other set was shown to the other half (see Tab.

1).

Table 1. The sample design and plan of the experimental toolsets presentation

4

Experimental groups

Sets for men Photos women with captions

Sets for women

Photos men with captions

'А'

## 1, 2, 3

mentioned

university

education,

## 4, 5, 6

mentioned as

not having

university

education

'B'

## 4, 5, 6

mentioned

university

education,

##1, 2, 3

mentioned as

not having

university

education,

'C'

## 1, 2, 3

mentioned

university

education,

## 4, 5, 6

mentioned as not

having

university

education

'D'

## 4, 5, 6

mentioned

university

education,

## 1, 2, 3

mentioned as not

having

university

education

Men

With

university

education

15 indiv. 15 indiv. - -

Without

university

education

15 indiv. 15 indiv. - -

Women

With

university

education

- - 15 indiv. 15 indiv.

Without

university

education

- - 15 indiv. 15 indiv.

The respondents were asked to estimate attractiveness of the individuals on the

photos, ranking them in three items, which suggested to imagine the estimated

mate in both short-term and long-term relations. The first item was worded as

follows: ‘Please point the person you would like to give your phone number to’.

The respondent chose one photo from the 6 offered, the experimenter took it away,

having entered its number in the protocol. After that, the respondent chose from

the remaining 5 photos, and the same procedure went on up to the last choice.

Then the set of photos was offered again, and the respondent was asked to do the

following: “Please choose who would you go out with, to the cinema, theatre,

café or club?” Having made the ranking, the respondent was given the third item:

'Who would you spend your holiday with?'

Thus, the factorial plan of the experiment 2х2х2 ( 'nesting') was carried out.

The attributed educational level of the individuals on the photos was the first

factor, the second factor was the gender of the respondents, and the third factor

5

was the educational level of the respondents. In three ranking items each individual

on the photo was estimated 90 times as “having university education” and 90 time

as 'not having university education'. The data were processed by the statistical

software package IBM SPSS Statistics 20.

in preference of the mates with university education or without it are

presented in the Table 2. The less marked are the preference differences in the

short-term outlook (to give the phone number). In the long-term outlook (to spend

holiday together) the differences in attractiveness of the individuals with university

education are somewhat more considerable.

Table 2 displays that the inequality in the preferences of the partners

with/without university education were less than expected in both men's and

women's group. However, it should be noted that the gaps are less in the short term

('to leave telephone number for possible dating'). The differences in the

attractiveness of people with university education and without university education

were slightly more in the long term ('to spend holiday together'). The last item of

choice for women was more important - differences expressed here is clearer.

Table 2. Potential mate’s attractiveness ranking by men and women

(lower rank means higher attractiveness).

Ranking of the

mate’s

attractiveness

University

education in

captions to photos

Male participants Female participants

Ranks

Mean Std.Dev.

t-test

Sig. (2-

tailed)*

Ranks

Mean Std.Dev.

t-test

Sig. (2-

tailed)*

1st ranking

'to give the phone

number”

mentioned 3,51 ,79

p=0,893

3,44 ,79

p=,537

not mentioned 3,48 ,80 3,57 ,81

2nd

ranking ‘to spend

an evening together’

mentioned 3,36 ,91

p=,222

3,41 ,83

p=,381

not mentioned 3,64 ,91 3,59 ,83

3rd

ranking

'to spend holiday

together”

mentioned 3,37 ,98

p=,294

3,24 ,93

p=,019

not mentioned 3,64 ,97 3,80 ,88

6

Total for three

choices ranks

mentioned 3,41 ,77

p=,381

3,36 ,73

p=,126

not mentioned 3,59 ,77 3,66 ,73

* Paired Samples t-test

As it can see at tab.3, preferences in a mate’s choice depend on the educational

level of the respondents themselves. Respondents without university education

prefer mates without higher education either, Respondents with university

education prefer well-educated mates. Thus, subjects with a university education

have a greater gap in the selection, and the variance is less. This can be explained

that they have clear views and the level of education is more important for their

perception.

Table 3. Potential mate’s attractiveness ranking by the respondents with different

educational levels (lower rank means higher attractiveness).

Ranking of the

mate’s attractiveness

University education at

captions to photos

Participants without

university education

Participants

with university

education t-test*

Sig. (2-tailed) Ranks

Mean Std.Dev.

Ranks

Mean Std.Dev.

1st ranking

'to give the phone

number”

mentioned 3,79 ,68 3,16 ,77 p=,000

not mentioned 3,21 ,68 3,85 ,79 p=,000

2nd ranking “to

spend an evening

together”

mentioned 3,88 ,78 2,88 ,63 p=,000

not mentioned 3,12 ,78 4,12 ,63 p=,000

3rd ranking

'to spend holiday

together”

mentioned 3,88 ,82 2,73 ,71 p=,000

not mentioned 3,15 ,80 4,29 ,66 p=,000

Total value of the

three choices ranks

mentioned 3,85 ,66 2,93 ,52 p=,000

not mentioned 3,16 ,66 4,09 ,51 p=,000

* Independent Samples Test

If we consider the participants’ gender and educational level simultaneously, it will

allow to make the difference in choice strategies more clear (Table 4., Fig. 1).

7

Table 4. Comparison of the potential mate’s attractiveness ranking by the participants of

different gender and educational level (lower rank means higher attractiveness)

Рotential mate’s

attractiveness ranking

Participants without university education Participants with university education

Male Female Male Female

Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev. Mean Std.Dev. 1

st ranking: mates with

university education 3,86 ,57 3,73 ,77 3,17 ,84 3,16 ,71

1st ranking: mates without

university education 1 3,14 ,57 3,27 ,77 3,82 ,86 3,88 ,74

t-test Sig. (2-tailed) p=,002 p=,108 p=,043 p=,010

2nd

ranking: mates with

university education 3,93 ,77 3,82 ,80 2,78 ,63 2,99 ,63

2nd

ranking: mates without

university education 3,07 ,77 3,18 ,80 4,22 ,63 4,01 ,63

t-test Sig. (2-tailed) p=,004 p=,035 p=,000 p=,000

3rd ranking: mates with

university education 3-е 4,04 ,79 3,71 ,84 2,70 ,65 2,77 ,78

3rd ranking: mates without

university education 3-е 2,98 ,77 3,32 ,80 4,30 ,65 4,28 ,68

t-test Sig. (2-tailed) p=,001 p=,202 p=,000 p=,000

Total for three ranking of

mates with university

education

3,94 ,62 3,76 ,70 2,88 ,50 2,97 ,54

Total value of the three

choice ranks of mates without

university education

3,06 ,62 3,26 ,69 4,11 ,50 4,06 ,52

t-test Sig. (2-tailed) p=,001 p=,059 p=,000 p=,000

The table 4 and the Fig. 1 show, that the mate’s demonstrated educational level is

the key factor in choosing - both men and women seek after the akin. Men without

university education evidently avoid women with university education - these

preferences get more intensive in the 2nd

and 3rd

ranking (relevance for close

relations). In contrast, men with university education show the opposite tendency

- in all items they prefer more educated mates.

Figure 1. Comparison of the ranking of the potential mates photos by the participants of

different gender and educational level (lower rank means higher attractiveness)

8

Women show a trend similar with the men’s, choosing partners, with or

without university education respectively (although the distinction are less and

variances are large). Some indifference to the education level of partners

demonstrate women without university education.

The experimental findings confirm, that an educational level is a significant

factor of building of the mate’s integral image. When choosing a mate, both men

and women compare the mate’s education with their own level. On the one hand,

the educational level is one of the central parameters of an personality perception

and affects his\her attractiveness. On the other hand, an individual’s own

educational level determines the mate’s choice in many respects. Probably, when

choosing a possible mate of the opposite sex, an individual is guided not only by

the 'benefits', but by the 'costs' as well. This aspect is often missed when using the

simple ranking method. The factorial experiment allowed to demonstrate, that

education can be both attractive and repulsive.

9

Gender differences have also been discovered. Men without a university

education tended to avoid women with a university degree, while high educated

women confidently chose educated partners. The choices of educated men and

women without a university education were less obvious. They don't exclude the

possibility of having a partner whose educational status is different from theirs.

The experimental findings can’t be interpreted only on the basis of the

evolutionary approach to the sexual selection, they demand participation of the

social cognitive theories.

References

Aronson, Elliot, Wilson, Timothy D., & Akert, Robin M. (2007). Social

psychology (6th ed. ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice-Hall.

Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. J Abnorm Psychol, 41,

258-290.

Buss D.M. (2005) The handbook of evolutionary psychology / - Hoboken, N.J.:

John Wiley & Sons.

Elder, G. H. (1969). Appearance and education in marriage mobility. American

Sociological Review, 34, 4, pp. 519-533.

Howrigan D.P., MacDonald K.B. Humor as a mental fitness indicator //

Evolutionary Psychology. 2008. V. 6 (3). P. 652–666.

Norman P.L. Douglas T. K. Sex Similarities and Differences in Preferences for

Short-Term Mates: What, Whether, and Why. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology. 2006, Vol. 90, No. 3, 468–489

Palmer, Jack A., & Palmer, Linda K. (2001). Evolutionary psychology : the

ultimate origins of human behavior. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Pawlowski B., Koziel S. The impact of traits offered in personal advertisement on

response rates. // Evolution and Human Behavior. 2002. 23. P. 139-149.

Rosenberg J., Tunney R.J. Human vocabulary use as display // Evolutionary

Psychology. 2008. V. 6 (3). P. 538–549.

Skopek, J., Schulz, F. & Blossfeld, H.-P. (2011). Who contacts whom?

Educational homophily in onlinemate selection. European Sociological Review,

27, 2, pp. 180-195.

Stevens, G., Owens, D. & Schaefer, E. C. Education and attractiveness in marriage

choices // Social Psychology Quarterly. 1990. V. 53. N 1. Р. 62—70.

10