Abstract
Objective
An array of literature spanning economics, sociology, biology, and psychology suggests that the availability of romantic partners has profound consequences for individuals and the societies in which they live. Here we build on this growing body of research to understand how variation in mate availability—operationalized via experimental imbalances in the ratio of men to women (the sex ratio)—affect women’s willingness to enhance their physical and sexual attractiveness to men.
Methods
Using a series of three treatments, with four replicate stimuli nested within each treatment conditions, we experimentally manipulated the sex ratio of the dating environment for 334 women, giving them the impression that romantic partners were either abundant, scarce, or balanced relative to competitors. We measured women’s satisfaction with their body image, their interest in enhancing their sexual attractiveness to men, their acceptance of cosmetic surgery, and their overall belief that they were a high-quality romantic partner (their mate value; a potential moderator of the sex ratio effect).
Results
Contrary to expectations, we found no evidence that sex ratios affected women’s enhancement of their physical and sexual attractiveness, but we did find that individual differences in mate value robustly covaried with all three outcome variables.
Conclusions
Results raise the possibility that female self-sexualization does not covary with the relative availability of mates, but that it is reliably associated with individual differences in mate value.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adimora, A. A., Schoenbach, V. J., Taylor, E. M., Khan, M. R., Schwartz, R. J., & Miller, W. C. (2013). Sex ratio, poverty, and concurrent partnerships among men and women in the United States: A multilevel analysis. Annals of Epidemiology, 23(11), 716–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2013.08.002.
Allen, J., & Gervais, S. . (2012). The drive to be sexy: Prejudice and core motivations in women’s self-sexualization. In Psychology of prejudice: Interdisciplinary perspectives on contemporary issues2 (pp. 77–112). Nova science publishers. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287367345_The_drive_to_be_sexy_Prejudice_and_core_motivations_in_women’s_self-sexualization
Arnocky, S. (2018). Self-perceived mate value, facial attractiveness, and mate preferences: Do desirable men want it all? Evolutionary Psychology, 16(1), 147470491876327. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704918763271.
Arnocky, S., & Piché, T. (2014). Cosmetic surgery as Intrasexual competition : The mediating role of social cosmetic surgery as Intrasexual competition : The mediating role of social comparison. Psychology, 5, 1197–1205. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2014.510132.
Arnocky, S., Sunderani, S., Miller, J. L., & Vaillancourt, T. (2012). Jealousy mediates the relationship between attractiveness comparison and females’ indirect aggression. Personal Relationships, 19(2), 290–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2011.01362.x.
Arnocky, S., Ribout, A., Mirza, R. S., & Knack, J. M. (2014). Perceived mate availability influences intrasexual competition, jealousy and mate-guarding behavior. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 12(1), 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1556/JEP.12.2014.1.3.
Arnocky, S., Perilloux, C., Cloud, J. M., Bird, B. M., & Thomas, K. (2016). Envy mediates the link between social comparison and appearance enhancement in women. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2(2), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-015-0037-1.
Atari, M., Barbaro, N., Sela, Y., Shackelford, T. K., & Chegeni, R. (2017). Consideration of cosmetic surgery as part of women’s benefit-provisioning mate retention strategy. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01389.
Attwood, F. (2006). Sexed up: Theorizing the Sexualization of culture. Sexualities, 9(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460706053336.
Balshine-Earn, S. (1996). Reproductive rates, operational sex ratios and mate choice in St. Peter’s fish. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 39(2), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002650050272.
Barber, N. (1999). Women’s dress fashions as a function of reproductive strategy. Sex Roles, 40(5–6), 459–471. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018823727012.
Baumgardner, J., & Richards, A. (2004). Feminism and femininity: Or how we learned to stop worrying and love the thong. In A. Harris (Ed.), e Girl: Culture, Power and Identity (pp. 59–67). Routledge.
Berggren, N., Jordahl, H., & Poutvaara, P. (2017). The right look: Conservative politicians look better and voters reward it. Journal of Public Economics, 146(5383), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.12.008.
Blake, K. R., & Brooks, R. C. (2018). High mate value men become more accepting of intimate partner abuse when primed with gender equality. Frontiers in Sociology, 3, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2018.00028.
Blake, K. R., Bastian, B., Denson, T. F., Grosjean, P., & Brooks, R. C. (2018). Income inequality not gender inequality positively covaries with female sexualization on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(35), 8722–8727. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717959115.
Brase, G. L., & Guy, E. C. (2004). The demographics of mate value and self-esteem. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(2), 471–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00117-X.
Buss, D. M. (1988a). From vigilance to violence: Tactics of mate retention in American undergraduates. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 291–317.
Buss, D. M. (1988b). The evolution of human Intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(4), 616–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.616.
Buss, D., & Schmitt, D. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100(2), 204–232.
Cash, T. F., Fleming, E. C., Alindogan, J., Steadman, L. & Whitehead, A. (2002). Beyond body image as a trait: the development and validation of the body image states scale. Eating Disorders, 10(2), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/10640260290081678.
Campbell, A. (2006). Feminism and evolutionary psychology. In J. H. Barkow (Ed.), Missing the revolution: Darwinism for social scientists. Oxford University Press.
Chmielewski, M., & Kucker, S. C. (2019). An MTurk crisis? Shifts in Data Quality and the Impact on Study Results. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619875149.
Choi, D., & DeLong, M. (2019). Defining female self Sexualization for the twenty-first century. Sexuality & Culture., 23, 1350–1371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-019-09617-3.
Durante, K. M., Griskevicius, V., Simpson, J. A., Cantú, S. M., & Tybur, J. M. (2012). Sex ratio and women’s career choice: Does a scarcity of men lead women to choose briefcase over baby? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(1), 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027949.
Edlund, J. E., & Sagarin, B. J. (2014). The mate value scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 64, 72–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PAID.2014.02.005.
Emlen, S. T., & Oring, L. W. (1977). Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science (New York, N.Y.), 197(4300), 215–223. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.327542.
Finkel, E. J., Eastwick, P. W., & Matthews, J. (2007). Speed-dating as an invaluable tool for studying romantic attraction: A methodological primer. Personal Relationships, 14(1), 149–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00146.x.
Fisher, M., & Cox, A. (2011). Four strategies used during intrasexual competition for mates. Personal Relationships, 18(1), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01307.x.
Fisher, M., Cox, A., Bennett, S., & Gavric, D. (2008). Components of self-perceived mate value. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2(4), 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0099347.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T.-A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding Women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(2), 173–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x.
Fromhage, L., & Jennions, M. D. (2016). Coevolution of parental investment and sexually selected traits drives sex-role divergence. Nature Communications, 7(1), 12517. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12517.
Fussell, N. J., & Stollery, B. T. (2012). Between-sex differences in romantic jealousy: Substance or spin? A qualitative analysis. Evolutionary Psychology: An International Journal of Evolutionary Approaches to Psychology and Behavior, 10(1), 136–172.
Gill, R. (2012). The Sexualisation of culture? Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(7), 483–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2012.00433.x.
Guttentag, M., & Secord, P. F. (1983). Too many women? : The sex ratio question. Sage Publications.
Gwynne, D. T., & Simmons, L. W. (1990). Experimental reversal of courtship roles in an insect. Nature, 346(6280), 172–174. https://doi.org/10.1038/346172a0.
Henderson-King, D., & Henderson-King, E. (2005). Acceptance of cosmetic surgery: Scale development and validation. Body Image, 2(2), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2005.03.003.
Hill, S. E., & Durante, K. M. (2011). Courtship, competition, and the pursuit of attractiveness: Mating goals facilitate health-related risk taking and strategic risk suppression in women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(3), 383–394. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210395603.
Kandrik, M., Jones, B. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2015). Scarcity of female mates predicts regional variation in men’s and women’s sociosexual orientation across US states. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36(3), 206–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.11.004.
Karsay, K., Knoll, J., & Matthes, J. (2018). Sexualizing media use and self-objectification: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42(1), 9–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684317743019.
Kokko, H., & Jennions, M. D. (2008). Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 21(4), 919–948. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01540.x.
Liss, M., Erchull, M. J., & Ramsey, L. R. (2011). Empowering or oppressing? Development and exploration of the enjoyment of Sexualization scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210386119.
Maestripieri, D., Henry, A., & Nickels, N. (2017). Explaining financial and prosocial biases in favor of attractive people: Interdisciplinary perspectives from economics, social psychology, and evolutionary psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40(19). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16000340.
Mills, S. C., & Reynolds, J. D. (2003). Operational sex ratio and alternative reproductive behaviours in the European bitterling, Rhodeus sericeus. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 54(2), 98–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-003-0616-1.
Ostroff, C. (1993). Comparing correlations based on individual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 569–582. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.569.
Peterson, Z. D. (2010). What is sexual empowerment? A multidimensional and process-oriented approach to adolescent girls’sexual empowerment. Sex Roles, 62(5–6), 307–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9725-2.
Pollet, T. V., & Nettle, D. (2009). Market forces affect patterns of polygyny in Uganda. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(7), 2114–2117. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0810016106.
Pollet, T. V., Tybur, J. M., Frankenhuis, W. E., & Rickard, I. J. (2014). What can cross-cultural correlations teach us about human nature? Human Nature, 25(3), 410–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-014-9206-3.
Pröhl, H. (2005). Clutch loss affects the operational sex ratio in the strawberry poison frog Dendrobates pumilio. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 58(3), 310–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-005-0915-9.
Ramsey, L. R., & Marotta, J. A. (2017). Sexualized, objectified, but not satisfied. Enjoying sexualization relates to lower relationship satisfaction through perceived partner-objectification., 34(2), 258–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407516631157.
Rosvall, K. A. (2011). Intrasexual competition in females: Evidence for sexual selection? Behavioral Ecology : Official Journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology, 22(6), 1131–1140. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arr106.
Santelli, J. S., Lowry, R., Brener, N. D., & Robin, L. (2000). The association of sexual behaviors with socioeconomic status, family structure, and race/ethnicity among US adolescents. American Journal of Public Health, 90(10), 1582–1588. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.90.10.1582.
Sarwer, D. B., Wadden, T. A., Pertschuk, M. J., & Whitaker, L. A. (1998). Body image dissatisfaction and body dysmorphic disorder in 100 cosmetic surgery patients. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 101(6), 1644–1649. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199805000-00035.
Schacht, R., & Mulder, M. B. (2015). Sex ratio effects on reproductive strategies in humans. Royal Society Open Science, 2. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.140402.
Schacht, R., Kramer, K. L., Székely, T., & Kappeler, P. M. (2017). Adult sex ratios and reproductive strategies: A critical re-examination of sex differences in human and animal societies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 372(1729), 20160309. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0309.
Schmitt, D. P., Alcalay, L., Allik, J., Angleitner, A., Ault, L., Austers, I., Bennett, K. L., Bianchi, G., Boholst, F., Borg Cunen, M. A., Braeckman, J., Brainerd, E. G., Caral, L. G. A., Caron, G., Martina Casullo, M., Cunningham, M., Daibo, I., De Backer, C., De Souza, E., et al. (2004). Patterns and universals of mate poaching across 53 nations: The effects of sex, culture, and personality on romantically attracting another Person’s partner. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(4), 560–584. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.4.560.
Smolak, L., Murnen, S. K., & Myers, T. A. (2014). Sexualizing the self: What college women and men think about and do to be sexy. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38(3), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684314524168.
Stone, E. (2017). Do women compete for mates when men are scarce ?: Sex ratio imbalances and Women’s mate competition. The Oxford Handbook of Women and Competition, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199376377.013.16.
Uecker, J. E., & Regnerus, M. D. (2010). Bare market: Campus sex ratios, romantic relationships, and sexual behavior. The Sociological Quarterly, 51(3), 408–435. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2010.01177.x.
Weir, L. K., Grant, J. W. A., & Hutchings, J. A. (2011). The influence of operational sex ratio on the intensity of competition for mates. The American Naturalist, 177(2), 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1086/657918.
Wolff, H., Chong, H., & Auffhammer, M. (2011). Classification, detection and consequences of data error: Evidence from the human development index. Economic Journal, 121(553), 843–870. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2010.02408.x.
Yatsenko, B. O. (2014). How do I look ? The impact of compliments on self-perceived attractiveness. Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse, 5(2013), 1–7.
Yost, M. R., & McCarthy, L. (2012). Girls Gone Wild? Heterosexual women’s Same-Sex Encounters at College Parties. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684311414818.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge Anish Sharma and Gabriela Cavaler da Silva for help with methods and data collection.
Funding
This study was funded by in part by Australian Research Council Discovery Grant (DP160100459).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Lindsie Arthur declares that she has no conflict of interest. Robert Brooks declares that he has no conflict of interest. Khandis Blake declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Source Framework – Data Repository Link https://osf.io/px9q2/
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(PDF 185 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arthur, L.C., Brooks, R.C. & Blake, K.R. Female Self-Sexualization Covaries with Mate Value but Not Mate Availability. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology 6, 277–291 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40750-020-00133-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40750-020-00133-5