How do we choose each other?

Modern research confirms that over the past millennia, our nature has not undergone significant changes and, choosing a man for a serious relationship, a woman largely prefers his social status, while for a man, the key advantages are the youth and physical attractiveness of a woman.

On the other hand, social role theory, first proposed by the American psychologist Alice Eagly, challenges this view. The scientist claims that today it is social rather than biological prerequisites that are in the first place. Women are indeed still attracted to men who have material and power resources, but only if society does not encourage women’s business abilities. As soon as the situation changes and everyone gets equal opportunities, the social status of a man fades into the background, and his youth, personal qualities and external attractiveness begin to play a more prominent role.

• «I choose partners of the same type»

“In a modern Western-style society, both partners earn and form a common budget,” says Otterbein University psychology professor (USA), clinical psychologist Noam Spencer (Noam Shpancer). “Women work on an equal footing with men, and men appreciate independence and professionalism in women more than before. The ability to cook well and manage a household — all that was important in the 50s of the last century, is no longer put at the forefront. These global social changes show how changing cultural norms affect what we value and find attractive.” What else influences our choice?

Human presence in our lives

The more time people spend together, the more likely they are to like each other. And although we all know examples when forced close communication gives rise to quarrels and mutual rejection, this is rather an exception that confirms the rule. It is the ability to constantly see each other — one of the reasons for the emergence of novels, for example, at work. Constant contact throughout the day can lead us first to friendship, and then to a deeper feeling.

• Why s/he: how we choose each other

Attractive appearance

We each have our own idea of ​​attractiveness. It is certainly influenced by the standards of beauty that are characteristic of the time and society in which we live, but the choice is largely determined by our unconscious. It is it that «reads» this or that image as the most attractive and close. If the appearance of the partner suits us, we tune in to get to know him better, study him and thus complete the portrait.¹.

Care and kindness

Studies show that the presence of social competence, that is, education and the ability to communicate, carefully listening to the interlocutor and showing interest in him, as well as human warmth, is especially valued when choosing a partner.². “Kind and well-disposed people are a priori perceived as more attractive and win the “choice marathon,” says Noam Spencer.

Personal matches

We are attracted to those with whom we have a lot in common. This means that highly educated people are drawn to those who also value new knowledge, bright extroverts are unlikely to be close to reclusive introverts, and supporters of ultra-left views are more likely to find understanding among their like-minded people. For almost every one of the parameters: personal qualities, beliefs, accumulated experience, social environment — we choose the representative of the opposite sex that most matches with us. On the one hand, it is really easier for us to communicate and trust those who speak the same language with us, sharing our views and interests. “On the other hand, when we fall in love with such a person, we do a lot of psychological transfer,” explains Noam Spencer. “This person is beautiful, and he is so similar to me … So, I myself am beautiful,” our unconscious whispers to us. And who among us would refuse to be the best?

¹ J. Langlois et al. «Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review», Psychological Bulletin, 2000, vol. 126.

² S. Fiske et al. «Universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence», Trends in Cognitive Sciences, vol. 11.