In eight of them, men rotated among women while women remained seated (in the manner of universally observed speed-dating format), and in the other seven, women rotated among men while men remained seated.
We find some solace by reminding ourselves that parties and bars are not exactly perfect research environments.
That has always been the case, without exception, and that is why the sex differences in mate selectivity are deeply genetically encoded in male and female human nature, which is why it is culturally universal.
How can evolutionary psychology account for Finkel and Eastwick’s novel findings?
Women’s greater selectivity in mate choice ultimately stems from the sexual asymmetry in reproductive biology, which has remained constant for millions of years, long before we were humans or even apes.
Simply put, women are choosier than men in mate choice because they are the ones who get pregnant and must nurse the offspring for years afterwards. Finkel and Paul Eastwick for the discussion about their article, and, especially, for allowing me to talk about it in my blog rather than insisting on doing so themselves in theirs.
It is true that people at parties can often form real relationships with real futures, and this external validity makes such social gatherings ideal sources of data on real-life mating behaviour (Eastwick & Finkel, in press).