In a world that often emphasizes superficial qualities, a recent study has unveiled a refreshing perspective on human relationships and preferences. Researchers have found that, regardless of sexual orientation, individuals prioritize intelligence and kindness over physical attractiveness, health, or socioeconomic status when choosing a partner.
This study, conducted in Brazil and published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, not only sheds light on the universal nature of these preferences but also highlights the subtle nuances that sexual orientation and gender bring to the dynamics of partner choice.
Previous studies have underscored the importance of certain traits like kindness, intelligence, health, physical attractiveness, and socioeconomic status in choosing a partner. These traits are seen as crucial in not only ensuring the biological quality of offspring but also in providing benefits like resource access, physical protection, and social standing.
Despite these insights, little attention has been given to how these preferences may vary across different cultures, especially in Latin America, and how individual differences, such as sexual orientation, might influence these preferences. To fill these gaps, a team of researchers conducted the current study.
“Choosing a romantic partner is a very ordinary, but also extremely intriguing process,” said study author Joao Francisco Goes Braga Takayanagi of the Institute of Psychology at the University of Sao Paulo.
“We may know immediately that we are attracted to someone, but we might not know exactly why we are attracted to them, or even if that attraction is any proof that they will be a good match for us. I am fascinated by relationship science because it helps us understand something that is universal, but also quite mysterious and important to all of us.”
The study’s participants were 778 cisgender Brazilians, aged 18 to 64, encompassing a broad spectrum of sexual orientations: heterosexual, bisexual, and homosexual men and women. These participants were recruited via social media platforms such as Facebook, Whatsapp, and Instagram.
The centerpiece of the study was the budgeted mate design task in which the participants constructed their ideal partner based on a set of predetermined traits: intelligence, kindness, physical attractiveness, health, and socioeconomic status. Participants were presented with three distinct budget scenarios: low, medium, and high, each providing a finite amount of points they could allocate across the five traits to craft their ideal mate.
This setup forced participants to prioritize certain traits over others, revealing the relative value they place on each characteristic when resources are limited. For example, with a high budget, participants might feel more liberty to allocate points evenly, showcasing a balanced preference. On the other hand, a low budget scenario would compel them to make tough decisions, highlighting which traits they deem essential in a partner.
Intelligence and kindness emerged as the paramount traits desired by participants, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender. This universal appeal suggests a deep-rooted evolutionary significance, where cognitive capacity and emotional warmth are prized.
Despite the universal appeal of intelligence and kindness, the researchers uncovered variations in how these and other traits were valued when examining the data through the lenses of sex and sexual orientation. Heterosexual men, for instance, displayed a unique emphasis on physical attractiveness, rating this trait significantly higher than their counterparts. This finding aligns with evolutionary theories that suggest physical appearance as a key indicator of fertility and health, traits that have historically been prioritized by males in mate selection.
Conversely, individuals attracted to men (including heterosexual women, homosexual men, and bisexual individuals) showed a higher preference for socioeconomic status. This preference can be interpreted through the lens of evolutionary biology, where access to resources has been a critical consideration for females in ensuring offspring survival. Interestingly, the study also found that preference for kindness was particularly pronounced among bisexual individuals.
“The main takeaway of this study is that intelligence and kindness are the most desired traits of a partner, even in comparison to beauty, money or health,” Takayanagi told PsyPost. “This is true for both men and women and across the sexual orientation spectrum – although heterosexual men do place a premium on their partner’s physical attractiveness.”
“Also, social status seems to be especially important for men’s appeal, since both heterosexual women and gay men valued this trait more in relation to other groups. Still, if you want to attract more potential partners, working on your brains and personality seems to be your best bet.”
The budgeted mate design task revealed that preferences for intelligence and kindness became even more pronounced under higher budget scenarios, suggesting that when individuals have more ‘resources’ at their disposal, they choose to ‘invest’ more heavily in these traits. The importance placed on physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status, in contrast, decreased as the budget increased, indicating these traits might be considered less essential when individuals are less constrained in their choices.
The researchers also observed a diminishing return pattern for physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status. Beyond a specific threshold of physical appeal and financial standing, individuals placed less emphasis on these traits compared to others.
Another layer of complexity was added by examining how individual characteristics, such as sociosexuality (openness to casual sex), attachment styles, and homogamy (the tendency to prefer partners who are similar to oneself), influenced trait preferences.
Participants with a higher sociosexuality score, indicating a greater openness to casual sexual relationships, showed a pronounced preference for physical attractiveness in potential partners. Individuals with higher levels of insecure attachment (either anxious or avoidant attachment styles) placed greater importance on a partner’s socioeconomic status. Finally, participants generally showed a preference for partners who matched their own levels of kindness and intelligence, indicating a tendency towards seeking similarity in these crucial traits.
However, the study is not without its limitations. “An important caveat of this study is that it was based on people’s reported preferences, and what they say they like may not match exactly what they are actually looking for,” Takayanagi noted.
“Even it is not perfect, this method allows us to survey a bigger sample and get a more general feeling of people’s likes and dislikes than we would otherwise. But studies using real-life settings, like speed dating events or relationship apps, are essential to understand the gap between reported preferences and actual behavior.”
The study, “What Do Different People Look for in a Partner? Effects of Sex, Sexual Orientation, and Mating Strategies on Partner Preferences,” was authored by Joao Francisco Goes Braga Takayanagi, Jose de Oliveira Siqueira, Paulo Sergio Panse Silveira, and Jaroslava Varella Valentova.