Neue Forschungsergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass die Bereitschaft eines potenziellen Partners, Sie vor körperlichen Gefahren zu schützen, ein Hauptgrund für die Anziehungskraft ist und oft seine tatsächliche körperliche Stärke überwiegt. Wenn Frauen männliche Verabredungen bewerteten, wirkte sich die Weigerung, Schutz zu bieten, als schwerwiegender Nachteil für die Attraktivität aus.
New psychology research identifies a simple trait that has a huge impact on attractiveness
7 Kommentare
I’ve linked to the news release in the post above. In this comment, for those interested, here’s the link to the peer reviewed journal article:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513825000947
From the linked article:
**New research suggests that a potential partner’s willingness to protect you from physical danger is a primary driver of attraction, often outweighing their actual physical strength**. The findings indicate that these preferences likely stem from evolutionary adaptations to dangerous ancestral environments, persisting even in modern, relatively safe societies. This study was published in the journal Evolution and Human Behavior.
The data revealed that discovering a person is willing to protect significantly increased their attractiveness rating as a romantic partner or friend. This effect appeared consistent regardless of the partner’s described physical strength. The findings suggest that the intent to defend an ally is a highly valued trait in itself. In contrast, partners who stepped away from the threat saw a sharp decline in their desirability ratings compared to the control condition.
The researchers also uncovered distinct patterns based on gender, particularly regarding the penalty for unwillingness. **When women evaluated male dates, a refusal to protect acted as a severe penalty to attractiveness**. The ratings for unwilling men dropped precipitously, suggesting that for women seeking male partners, a lack of protective instinct is effectively a dealbreaker.
Men also valued willingness in female partners, but they were more lenient toward unwillingness. When men evaluated female dates who stepped away from the threat, the decline in attractiveness was less severe than what women reported for unwilling men. This asymmetry aligns with evolutionary theories regarding sexual dimorphism and the historical division of risk in physical conflicts.
„study shows people are less attracted to people who would watch them get beaten up“
Self-report for measuring attraction seems less than reliable.
They argue the results are speaking to an evolutionary preference, but its more like the social stigma around cowardice speaks to an evolutionary preference and people are reporting a concurrence with those norms in their attraction rankings.
Attraction as a pure emotion is not based in rationality, and mostly either subconscious, or hard to be reliably aware of. it seems to me that social factors are likely to heavily prime these attraction self-reports and results like these are pretty superficial.
Ok like, I know we are supposed to say „everything should be tested, no matter how obvious!“
But I can’t not be thinking this only got studied because some weak professor was that insecure and wanted to cope.
Not saying women want to date a guy who’s gonna stand there and watch her get beaten up, but I am saying I’ve got some questions for whoever decided to spend their time on this.
That might be true for me. I dated guys who could fight, but I also made sure to avoid problems. I didn’t want them fighting.
Don’t we all just generally prefer friends, relatives, and partners who protect and defend each other, and prefer to avoid troublemakers and people we can’t rely on?
Protect me from what? How would I know? It’s not like physical threats just crop up routinely in my life.