A Worldwide Test of the Predictive Validity of Ideal Partner Preference-Matching
Authors: Eastwick Paul Wolfe , Sparks Jehan , Finkel Eli , Meza Eva , Adamkovic Matus , Adu Peter , Ai Ting , Akintola Aderonke A. , Al-Shawaf Laith , Apriliawati Denisa , Arriaga Patrícia , Aubert-Teillaud Benjamin , Baník Gabriel , Barzykowski Krystian , Batres Carlota , Baucom Katherine , Beaulieu Elizabeth Z. , Behnke Maciej , Butcher Natalie , Charles Deborah Yazhini , Chen Jane M. , Cheon Jeong Eun , Chittham Phakkanun , Chwiłkowska Patrycja , Cong Chin Wen , Copping Lee , Corral-Frías Nadia Saraí , Adoric Vera Cubela , Dizon Mikaela , Du Hongfei , Ehinmowo Michael Ibukun , Escribano Daniela A. , Espinosa Natalia , Expósito Francisca , Feldman Gilad , Freitag Raquel Meister Ko. , Frias-Armenta Martha , Gallyamova Albina , Gillath Omri , Gjoneska Biljana , Gkinopoulos Theofilos , Grafe Franca , Grigoryev Dmitry , Groyecka-Bernard Agata , Gunaydin Gul , Ilustrisimo Ruby D. , Impett Emily , Kačmár Pavol , Kim Young Hoon , kocur miroslaw , Kowal Marta , Krishna Maatangi , Labor Paul Danielle , Lu Jackson G. , Lucas Marc Yancy , Małecki W. P. , Malinakova Klara , Meißner Sofia , Meier Zdenek , Misiak Michał , Muise Amy , Novák Lukas , O Jiaqing , Özdoğru Asil Ali , Park Haeyoung Gideon , Paruzel-Czachura Mariola , Pavlović Zoran , Püski Marcell , Ribeiro Gianni , Roberts S. Craig , Röer Jan Philipp , Ropovik Ivan , Ross Robert M , Sakman Ezgi , Salvador Cristina , Selcuk Emre , Skakoon-Sparling Shayna , Sorokowska Agnieszka , Sorokowski Piotr , Spasovski Ognen , Stanton Sarah C. E. , Stewart Suzanne , Swami Viren , Szaszi Barnabas , Takashima Kaito , Tavel Petr , Tejada Julian , Tu Eric , Tuominen Jarno , Vaidis David C. , Vally Zahir , Vaughn Leigh Ann , Villanueva-Moya Laura , Wisnuwardhani Dian , Yamada Yuki , Yonemitsu Fumiya , Zidkova Radka , Živná Kristýna , Coles Nicholas Alvaro 
Published: February 2023

Ideal partner preferences (i.e., ratings of the desirability of attributes like attractiveness or intelligence) are the source of numerous foundational findings in the interdisciplinary literature on human mating. Recently, research on the predictive validity of ideal partner preference-matching (i.e., do people positively evaluate partners who match versus mismatch their ideals?) has become mired in several problems. First, articles exhibit discrepant analytic and reporting practices. Second, different findings emerge across laboratories worldwide, perhaps because they sample different relationship contexts and/or populations. This registered report—partnered with the Psychological Science Accelerator—uses a highly powered design (N = 10,358) across 43 countries and 22 languages to estimate preference-matching effect sizes. The most rigorous tests revealed significant preference-matching effects in the whole sample and for partnered and single participants separately. The “corrected pattern metric” that collapses across 35 traits revealed a zero-order effect of β = .19 and an effect of β = .11 when included alongside a normative preference-matching metric. Specific traits in the “level metric” (interaction) tests revealed very small (average β = .04) effects. Effect sizes were similar for partnered participants who reported ideals before entering a relationship, and there was no consistent evidence that individual differences moderated any effects. Comparisons between stated and revealed preferences shed light on gender differences and similarities: For attractiveness, men’s and (especially) women’s stated preferences underestimated revealed preferences (i.e., they thought attractiveness was less important than it actually was). For earning potential, men’s stated preferences underestimated—and women’s stated preferences overestimated—revealed preferences. Implications for the literature on human mating are discussed.