It is commonly asserted that intelligence is more significant than physical appearance when selecting a life partner; however, the sincerity of this belief is called into question by recent research. The findings indicate that, despite professing a preference for intelligence, both women and their parents often opt for the more physically attractive candidate when faced with a choice, even if the less attractive individual is characterized as more intelligent.

Cultural norms frequently position parents as influential figures in their daughters' partner selection, with an emphasis on traits that indicate long-term stability, such as intelligence and financial security. Although both women and their parents express a strong appreciation for intelligence and downplay the importance of physical attractiveness, previous studies have largely depended on self-reported preferences rather than actual decision-making scenarios.

Differences in mate selection between daughters and parents

Examining the discrepancies in mate selection between daughters and their parents, Madeleine A. Fugère and her research team conducted an experiment to evaluate whether these professed values are reflected in real-life choices. Participants were required to navigate challenging decisions between intelligence and physical attractiveness in potential partners.

From an evolutionary standpoint, physical attractiveness is regarded as a signal of genetic fitness, whereas intelligence is associated with the ability to acquire resources and invest in offspring. Women generally prioritize physical attractiveness more than their parents do, who may minimize its importance due to worries about the long-term stability of an attractive partner.

Study:

To investigate these preferences, researchers conducted a study involving 201 daughters (ages 18-33) and 187 parents, primarily mothers, recruited from a university and social media platforms. Participants assessed the importance of intelligence and attractiveness in a long-term partner before engaging in a controlled experiment to evaluate potential mates.

The researchers utilized two pre-rated photographs of males, one deemed more attractive than the other, each paired with either high or low intelligence ratings, resulting in four distinct combinations. Participants rated the traits and suitability of the assigned male as a long-term partner. In the concluding phase, they were asked to choose between their assigned male and an alternative from a different condition, providing explanations for their choices for themselves (daughters) or on behalf of their daughters (parents).

Findings:

The research revealed a discrepancy between expressed preferences and actual selections. Although both daughters and parents asserted that intelligence was their primary criterion, a significant majority opted for physical attractiveness, with 72.6% of daughters and 59.6% of parents choosing the more attractive partner, irrespective of intelligence. There was a consensus between daughters and parents 73.8% of the time; however, when it came to making a choice, daughters tended to favour attractiveness, while parents emphasized intelligence, likely due to their focus on long-term stability and resources.

Participants rationalized their decisions based on the circumstances presented. When the attractive individual also possessed intelligence, intelligence was frequently highlighted as the determining factor. Conversely, in situations where attractiveness and intelligence were at odds, daughters favoured physical appearance, while parents prioritized intelligence.

This study underscores the gap between professed preferences and actual mate selection, indicating that attractiveness exerts a greater influence than individuals are willing to acknowledge. Furthermore, it suggests that the conflict between parents and offspring regarding mate choice is less pronounced than anticipated, as their preferences often align. A notable limitation of the study is its reliance on hypothetical scenarios rather than actual relationships, which may influence how participants assessed their trade-offs.

Read Also: Always Blaming Others? Your Screentime Might Be the Culprit, Says Study