Introduction

        All known societies have some form of socially approved sexual and economic union between men and women, that is marriage (Ember & Ember, 1996). In our own society, over 90% of us will attempt to maintain a long-term relationship through the institution of marriage (Buss & Schmitt, 1996).

        Researchers have long explored human mate selection and have offered many theories to explain this phenomena. Different theorists have taken different approaches to tap into the questions surrounding mate selection. Examples of these theories include evolutionary drives, social learning, environmental conditioning, etc. All mating theories hold that human mating is strategic and choices are made either consciously or unconsciously to capitalize on some entity, match, or balance (Buss & Schmitt, 1993; 1996).

        One way researchers have studied mating behavior is from an evolutionary perspective. Evolutionists theorize that humans choose partners in order to maximize and enhance reproductive success (Sprecher, Sullivan, & Hatfield, 1994). Obviously, men and women are biologically different. They contribute to reproduction and invest in offspring in dissimilar ways. Because of these differences, men and women select partners on different premises in an effort to solve adaptive problems of reproduction inherent in their sex (Feingold, 1992; Buss & Schmitt, 1993). According to this perspective, females' reproductive obligation is to find a male who will be able to contribute to the survival and protection of herself and her young (Buss & Schmitt, 1993) and males' primary focus in mating is to impregnate as many women as possible enabling him to produce attractive, healthy, numerous offspring (Feingold, 1992). To achieve these biological goals:

• Women are more concerned with the quality as opposed to the quantity of their offspring; therefore females will be more selective sexually than men (Buss & Schmitt, 1993).

• Women will choose men who are intelligent, physically strong, ambitious, and prestigious. (Feingold, 1992).

•  Men seek females who signal fertility. Qualities that serve as cues to a woman's ability to reproduce are attractiveness, youthfulness, and permissiveness (Feingold, 1992).

•  Men tend to prefer women at least five years younger than themselves. Townsend and Roberts (1993)

• en place more importance on beauty than women do (Buss & Schmitt, 1993, 1996; Feingold, 1992; Goode, 1996; Landolt, Lalumiers, & Quinsey, 1995).

• Men select women based on sexual exclusiveness. (Buss & Schmitt, 1993, 1996).

• Men are more likely to engage in casual sex and have relations with a variety of partners (Buss & Schmitt, 1993).

• Females will choose financial resources when forced to make a trade off between physical attractiveness and financial resources, whereas males tend to trade financial resources for physical beauty (Landolt, Lalumiers, & Quinsey, 1995).

        One of the central contentions of evolutionary theory is that females select males who have physical, intellectual, and economic potential to ensure the survival of herself and her offspring. Exceptions would be females who do not select males with these characteristics. These include (a) females who are completely capable of supporting themselves and their children and (b) women who are resource dependent and who select males that do not match the stereotypical resource provider image. The purpose of this study is to determine whether females of these descriptions exist in sufficiently large proportions to verify or refute this aspect of the evolutionary perspective of mate selection.

        Mate selection processes and rituals are not only fascinating but of immense importance. Understanding what brings us together as men and women is at the very core of human relationships and communication between the sexes. It is also important from a biological standpoint to understand how our species adapts and survives generation after generation. Moreover, understanding how women select mates as a function of their own resources will lend itself to better understanding of mate selection and of the evolutionary theory itself.

        The limitation of the study is the sample. Using only females from Arkansas greatly reduces the utility of the findings. Results may not generalize to other women or women in other professions. Another limitation is that participants will be volunteers. Volunteer bias may influence results.
 

        According to the evolutionary perspective, females' reproductive obligation is to find a male who will be able to contribute to the survival and protection of herself and her young (Buss & Schmitt, 1993). Qualities that will enhance the chances of obtaining a male who is capable of meeting these needs are intelligence, physical strength, ambition, and prestige. If a male possesses these qualities, it is more likely that he will have and be able to defend resources that are of use to the female. In addition, these qualities signal that he will possess finances to support their offspring. (Feingold, 1992).

        There is some evidence to support the notion that women will seek these qualities. Researchers have found that women place more importance on socioeconomic status than their male counterparts (Townsend & Roberts, 1993). In Buss and Schmitt's study (1993), they found that women consistently rated the quality "unable to support me financially" as highly undesirable. In addition to these findings, a study on campus prestige at a Midwestern university, demonstrated that males in the most prestigious fraternities dated significantly more than males in the less prestigious Greek organizations (Whitbeck & Hoyt, 1991). This finding presents further evidence that women seek men with prestige and status. Finally, a study conducted by Goode (1996) supported the notion that women place more importance on financial/ occupational success than on attractiveness. Goode placed personal ads in a newspaper. The ads featured a "handsome cabdriver" and a "successful, average looking lawyer." The cabdriver ad, which demonstrated low socioeconomic status, received 15 responses, whereas the more financially resourceful lawyer received 64 responses.

        This theory contends that because women are more concerned with the quality as opposed to the quantity of their offspring, females will be more selective sexually than men (Buss & Schmitt, 1993). Females conceive internally and invest more heavily in offspring. In addition, women encounter more biological and personal risks associated with fertilization: conception, gestation, delivery, and lactation. Because of these problems, evolutionary theory predicts that women will be more sexually discriminate than men will (Feingold, 1992).

        There is some evidence to back up the claims that women are choosier than men are. A study by Buss and Schmitt (1993) asked college males and females about characteristics desired in a sexual partner. Females repeatedly rated the importance of each characteristic higher than males in every category. In the same study, it was found that more males than females were seeking short-term sexual relations. Women also frowned on sexual permissiveness on the part of their partner. Evolutionists expostulate that this is because a male partner who mates with another female risks the possibility of impregnating her, which threatens the other female's access to the male's resources (Feingold, 1992). Stated another way, the female would have to share resources that she needs.

        Males' primary focus in mating, according to this perspective, is to impregnate as many women as possible enabling him to produce attractive, healthy, numerous offspring. To achieve this, men seek females who signal fertility. Qualities that serve as cues to a women's ability to reproduce are attractiveness, youthfulness, and permissiveness (Feingold, 1992).

        There is research to confirm men's preference for younger women. In a study conducted by Sprecher et al. (1994), it was found that men prefer to marry women who are at least five years younger than themselves and the preferred age gap increases as men get older. Likewise, Townsend and Roberts (1993) found that age negatively affected men's rating of a woman.

        A plethora of research exists to demonstrate that men place more importance on beauty than women do (Buss & Schmitt, 1993, 1996; Feingold, 1992; Goode, 1996; Landolt, Lalumiers, & Quinsey, 1995). In a study using law students, men were more likely than women to agree on who is attractive because men focus on one aspect of beauty, that is outer appearance. Women could not agree because women's view of attractiveness encompassed a host of other variables, such as personality. The study also showed that women rated as less attractive were more likely to never marry than women rated as attractive. However, there was no difference exhibited in the marriage rates of men rated as attractive or unattractive (Townsend & Roberts, 1993).

        Researchers have found repeatedly that men are more likely to engage in casual sex and have relations with a variety of partners. In a study conducted on a college campus, an unknown woman approached men for sex and an unknown man approached women for sex. Seventy-five percent of the men consented, however not one woman consented to sex with the unknown partner. While males prefer a partner who is sexually permissive to them, they also desire a mate who is sexually exclusive to them or even chaste. This, according to the evolutionary theory, is because maternity is 100% certain, but men can never be entirely sure of paternity. Men are attracted to this sexually exclusive attribute to solve their historical problem of questionable paternity. This has been shown in a study where men rate the qualities "loyalty" and "faithful" higher than any other quality, excluding attractiveness (Buss & Schmitt, 1993, 1996).

        Surely, if every human had his/ her way, s/ he would choose a mate that is good looking and well off financially. However, when the sexes are forced to make tradeoffs, gender differences in mate selection emerge more clearly. A potential partner's high status is more likely to compensate for low physical attractiveness when females select partners than when men are selecting partners. On the other hand, when men are selecting they are more apt to let high physical attractiveness make up for low status in their mate choices (Townsend & Roberts, 1993). These trends are beneficial to the continuation of the species.
 

        To gain greater insight into evolutionary theory, the researcher will employ methods similar to the methodology used by Landolt, Lalumiere, and Quinsey in their 1993 study. These researchers presented freshmen introductory psychology students pictures of attractive and unattractive potential partners accompanied by descriptions describing the partners' career, earning potentials, and prestige. Females tended to pick males who were financially secure and males tended to choose females who were physically attractive. Methods in the present study will employ more varying degrees of physical attractiveness, prestige, and financial resources. The present study will use only females and is concerned to what degree females' selection is influenced by their own potential earning power and prestige.

• · Will women who are self-supporting still choose men who are financially stable or would women be less likely to trade good looks for resources if they had their own resources?

• · Are there women who are not financially independent that do not choose the stereotypical resource provider image? How does their socioeconomic status affect their choice of potential mates?

        Women from Little Rock, Arkansas enrolled in medical school and enrolled in law school will be used for the study. These schools were chosen because law and medical professions tend to carry a great potential for prestige and earning power.

        Women shopping at McCain mall will be recruited for the population to measure financially dependent females.

        Ads for the study will be placed in hallways, student newspaper, vending areas, and classrooms. To obtain participants for the financially dependent female population, females' participation will be solicited by a researcher.

        Volunteer participants will be paid five dollars. Participants will be shown several pictures and descriptions of men possessing varying degrees of physical attractiveness, earning potential, and prestige. The females have the following choices:

• The male is physically attractive and is accompanied by a description of high prestige and earning potential.

• The male is not physically attractive and is accompanied by a description of high prestige and earning potential.

• The male is physically attractive and is accompanied by a description of low prestige and earning potential.

• The male is not physically attractive and is accompanied by a description of low prestige and earning potential.

        The male partner choices will be costumed in appropriate apparel indicative of their occupation. For example, a business suit for high paying/ prestigious jobs and restaurant uniform for low paying/ less prestigious job.

        Descriptions will include the partners' ambitions, salary, and position. What defines high and low financial success will be predetermined by the panel mentioned above and by the U.S. Bureau.

        After viewing pictures and descriptions, participants will be asked to fill out a questionnaire regarding age, sexual orientation, and their mate selection. In addition, the questionnaire will ask women to report their perceptions of their own financial stability and confidence they have of their economic future. Responses to these questions will be quantified by the use of a Likert-type scale of 1-5 with five being the highest stability/ most confident. Only heterosexual women will be used in analysis of results. The length of the session is not projected to last over 30 minutes.

        Data collected will be analyzed and reported using a 2x4 chi-square analysis. The two categories of financially independent women and the financially dependent women will be compared in the chi-square on the frequency of occurence of four types of male selection possibilities.  Descriptive statistics will be used to profile the characteristics of participants.

    A protocol will be prepared and submitted to the Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research. An exempt status protocol will be requested since there is no risk to the subjects of financial, social or reputational harm and no peronal identities will be linked to the data.

        Buss, D.M., & Schmitt, D.P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human dating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232.

        Buss, D.M., & Schmitt, D.P. (1996). Strategic self-promotion and competitors derogation: Sex and context effects of mate selection attraction tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1183-2000.

        Ember, C.R., & Ember, M. (1996). Cultural Anthropology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

        Feingold, A. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 125-139.

        Goode, L.G. (1996). Gender and courtship entitlement. Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 150-159.

        Landolt, M.A., Lalumiere, M.L., & Quinsey, V.L. (1995). Sex differences in intra-sex variation in human mating tactics: An evolutionary approach. Ethnology and Sociobiology, 16(1), 3-23.

        Sprecher, Susan, Sullivan, Quinton, & Hatfield, Elaine (1994). Mate selection preferences: Gender differences examined in a national sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1074-1080.

        Townsend, J.M., & Roberts, L.W. (1993). Gender differences in mate selection among law students: Divergence and convergence of criteria. Journal of Psychology, 29, 507-528.

        Whitbeck, L.B., & Hoyt, D.R. (1991). Campus prestige and dating behaviors. College Student Journal, 25, 457-469.