Searching for the Next Best Mate

  • Peter M. Todd
Part of the Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems book series (LNE, volume 456)


How do we humans go about choosing a mate? Do we shop for them, checking prices and values and selecting the best? Do we apply for them, wooing several and taking the best that accepts us in return? Or do we screen them, testing one after another in succession until the right one comes along? Economists and other behavioral scientists have analyzed these mate-choice approaches to find their optimal algorithmic solutions; but what people really do is often quite different from these optima. In this paper, we analyze the third approach of mate choice as applicant screening and show through simulation analyses that a traditional optimal solution to this problem-the 37% rude-can be beaten along several dimensions by a class of simple “satisficing” algorithms we call the Take the Next Best mate choice rules. Thus, human mate search behavior should not necessarily be compared to the lofty optimal ideal, but instead may be more usefully studied through the development and analysis of possible “fast and frugal” mental mechanisms.


Sexual Selection Mate Choice Potential Mate Sequential Search Pied Flycatcher 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alatalo, R. V., Carlson, A., Si Lundberg, A. (1988). The search cost in mate choice of the pied flycatcher. Animal Behaviour, 36(1),289–291.Google Scholar
  2. Andersson, M. (1994). Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bateson, P.P.G. (Ed.) (1983). Mate choice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Becker, G. (1991). A treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  6. Corbin, R. M. (1980). The secretary problem as a model of choice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 21(1), 1–29.Google Scholar
  7. Cronin, H. (1991). The ant and the peacock: Altruism and sexual selection from Darwin to today. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex (2 vols.). London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  9. Ferguson, T.S. (1989). Who solved the secretary problem? Statistical Science, 4, 282–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frey, B. S., and Eichenberger, R. (1996). Marriage paradoxes. Rationality and Society, 8(2), 187–206.Google Scholar
  11. Gale, D., and Shapley, L. (1962). College admissions and the stability of marriage. American Mathematical Monthly, 69, 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gianini-Pettitt, J. (1979). Optimal selection based on relative ranks with a random number of individuals. Advances in Applied Probability, 11, 720–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gigerenzer, G., and Goldstein, D. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103(4), 650–669.Google Scholar
  14. Gilbert, J.P, and Mosteller, F. (1966). Recognizing the maximum of a sequence. American Statistical Association Journal, 61, 35–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harrison, G.W., and McCabe, K.A. (1996). Stability and preference distortion in resource matching: An experimental study of the marriage problem. In R.M. Isaac (Ed.), Research in experimental economics, vol. 8. Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hey, J. D. (1982). Search for rules for search. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 65–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hey, J. D. (1987). Still searching. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 8, 137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Martin, A., and Moon, P. (1992). Purchasing decisions, partial knowledge, and economic search: Experimental and simulation evidence. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 5(4),253–266.Google Scholar
  19. Miller, G. F. (in press). Sexual selection in human evolution: Review and prospects. To appear in C. Crawford and D. Krebs (Eds.), Evolution and human behavior: Ideas, issues, and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Miller, G. F., and Todd, P. M. (1995). The role of mate choice in biocomputation: Sexual selection as a process of search, optimization, and diversification. In W. Banzhaf and F. H. Eeckman (Eds.), Evolution and biocomputation: Computational models of evolution. (Lecture notes in computer science 899, pp. 169–204.) Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  21. Mosteller, F. (1987). Fifty challenging problems in probability with solutions.Google Scholar
  22. New York: Dover. (Reprint of the 1965 Addison-Wesley edition.) Pomiankowski, A. (1987). The costs of choice in sexual selection. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 128, 195–218.Google Scholar
  23. Quine, M.P., and Law, J.S. (1996). Exact results for a secretary problem. Journal of Applied Probability, 33, 630–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rapoport, A., and Tversky, A. (1970). Choice behaviour in an optimal stopping task. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 5, 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ridley, M. (1993). The red queen: Sex and the evolution of human nature. London: Viking.Google Scholar
  26. Roth, A. E., and Sotomayor, M. (1990). Two-sided matching: A study in game-theoretic modeling and analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Sethuraman, R., Cole, C., and Jain, D. (1994). Analyzing the effect of information format and task on cutoff search strategies. Journal of Consumer Psychology 3(2),103–136.Google Scholar
  28. Sullivan, M. S. (1994). Mate choice as an information gathering process under time constraint: Implications for behaviour and signal design. Animal Behaviour, 47(1), 141–151.Google Scholar
  29. Todd, P. M., and Miller, G. F. (1993). Parental guidance suggested: How parental imprinting evolves through sexual selection as an adaptive learning mechanism. Adaptive Behavior, 2(1),5–47.Google Scholar
  30. Todd, P. M., and Miller, G. F. (in press). Biodiversity through sexual selection. To appear in C. Langton (Ed.), Artificial Life V. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter M. Todd
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Adaptive Behavior and CognitionMax Planck Institute for Psychological ResearchMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations