FAKE STUDY i made on women preferring unattractive men

Zenis

Zenis

Fire
Joined
Aug 14, 2023
Posts
23,279
Reputation
34,000
Revealed Partner Preference in Long-Term Mate Selection: Evidence for a Female Preference Toward Non-Conventional Male Facial Attractiveness
Dr. Laura K. Chen¹  ·  Dr. James O. Obileke²  ·  Dr. Stephanie R. Marchand¹
¹Harwick University, Dept. of Psychology ²Univ. of Montfield, Centre for Relationship Studies
Received: April 4, 2026Accepted: May 28, 2026Published: June 22, 2026
DOI: 10.3167/jers.2026.0144018 | Peer-reviewed | n = 4,213
68%
of women rated long-term partners below conventional attractiveness norms
4,213
participants across 11 countries (ages 19–64)
2.4×
greater relationship satisfaction in the non-conventional group

Abstract
Conventional models of mate selection predict that physical attractiveness — particularly facial symmetry, strong jawline, and height — should be the dominant driver of women's long-term partner preferences. This multi-national, pre-registered study challenges that assumption. Using standardised attractiveness ratings from 2,800 blind independent raters, we demonstrate that women in committed relationships of two or more years overwhelmingly partner with men who score below conventional attractiveness thresholds. Critically, relationship satisfaction and self-reported partner "warmth" scores were significantly higher in this group. We introduce the Warmth-Signal Proxy (WSP) hypothesis to account for this finding and discuss implications for evolutionary models of human mating.
Introduction
Evolutionary frameworks from Darwin onward have proposed that women, as the higher-investing sex in reproduction, should preferentially select mates with strong phenotypic indicators of genetic fitness — symmetrical facial features, prominent secondary sexual characteristics, and physical stature. However, an accumulating literature in long-term vs. short-term mating strategy research suggests that context profoundly shapes these preferences (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000; Li et al., 2011).
The present study moves beyond self-reported preference data — a long-standing limitation — toward revealed preferences: observing the actual partners women in stable relationships have chosen, and rating those partners' appearance independently and blindly. We predicted, based on a pilot study (Chen et al., 2024, n=312), that we would replicate the inverse attractiveness pattern in a large international sample.
Methodology

Recruitment​

Women aged 19–64 in relationships ≥ 2 years recruited via stratified sampling across Canada, USA, UK, Germany, Brazil, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Nigeria, France, and Sweden.

Attractiveness Rating​

Participants submitted standardised frontal facial photos of their partners. Photos were rated by 2,800 blind raters (50% female) using the Harwick Facial Attractiveness Scale (HFAS-R2), a validated 10-point instrument.

Relationship Measures​

Satisfaction assessed via the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS-7) and a custom 12-item "Perceived Partner Warmth" inventory developed and pre-registered by the team.

Pre-registration​

Full pre-registration filed on OSF (osf.io/xh4m9) prior to data collection. Analysis plan, exclusion criteria, and primary hypotheses all specified in advance.
Results
Distribution of partner attractiveness scores (HFAS-R2) vs. reported relationship satisfaction quintile
Partners rated "highly attractive"
(HFAS ≥ 7.5)
18%
Partners rated "conventionally attractive"
(HFAS 5.5–7.4)
14%
Partners rated "average"
(HFAS 4.0–5.4)
27%
Partners rated "below average"
(HFAS 2.5–3.9)
29%
Partners rated "unconventionally attractive"
(HFAS < 2.5)
12%
† Bars in dark navy represent groups with significantly higher DAS-7 satisfaction scores (p < .001). Light blue bars did not reach significance threshold after Bonferroni correction.
68% of partnered women in our sample had selected men who scored below the HFAS midpoint of 5.5. More strikingly, the two lowest-scoring attractiveness groups reported relationship satisfaction scores averaging 1.8–2.4 standard deviations above those in the highest attractiveness group (F(4,4208) = 41.7, p < .0001, η² = .038).
"What we observe is not that women find these men unattractive by their own standards — they clearly do not. What the data show is that conventional third-party attractiveness ratings, which emphasise facial symmetry and masculine phenotype, systematically fail to capture what women in long-term relationships are actually selecting for."
— Dr. Laura K. Chen, lead author
The Warmth-Signal Proxy (WSP) Hypothesis
We propose that features traditionally coded as "unattractive" by raters — softer jaw structure, asymmetrical features, close-set eyes, prominent noses — may function as reliable signals of prosocial, cooperative orientation in long-term partners. In a mate-guarding context, perceived lower "market value" may be associated with higher partner fidelity and investment, a dynamic consistent with the Asymmetrical Benefit Model (Koenig & Stieglitz, 2019).
Supplementary analyses found that women who scored higher on attachment security were the most likely to partner with low-HFAS men (r = .41, p < .001), suggesting this preference pattern is linked to stable attachment and long-term relationship orientation rather than low self-esteem or limited choice.
Discussion
Our findings add substantially to the literature suggesting a divergence between stated short-term and enacted long-term partner preferences. The WSP hypothesis offers a parsimonious explanation: when selecting for partnership rather than genetic contribution alone, women's preferences shift toward facial features that co-vary with warmth, reliability, and cooperative personality — traits that third-party attractiveness raters are not asked to, and cannot, evaluate from a photograph.
Limitations include reliance on HFAS ratings, which were developed on North American samples and may carry cultural bias. Cross-cultural replication with region-specific rating panels is recommended. Future work should also examine whether this pattern holds across same-sex partnerships and in non-WEIRD populations.
References
  1. Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating. American Psychologist, 55(6), 573–592.
  2. Li, N. P., Yong, J. C., Tov, W., et al. (2011). Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1281–1302.
  3. Koenig, B., & Stieglitz, J. (2019). Asymmetric investment and long-term partner fidelity in humans. Evolution & Human Behavior, 40(4), 310–320.
  4. Chen, L. K., Obileke, J. O., & Marchand, S. R. (2024). Pilot investigation of revealed partner appearance preferences (n=312). OSF Preprints.
  5. Harwick Facial Attractiveness Scale, Revised 2 (HFAS-R2). (2021). Harwick University Psychometrics Lab. Technical Manual.
  6. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and Family, 38(1), 15–28.
© 2026 Journal of Evolutionary Relationship Science. Published under CC BY 4.0. Correspondence: [email protected] | Data and materials: osf.io/xh4m9 | Funding: Social Sciences Research Council of Canada (SSRCC grant #2024-RS-4417)
 
  • JFL
  • +1
  • Love it
Reactions: Nectar, silently_said, pleasevanity and 6 others
Revealed Partner Preference in Long-Term Mate Selection: Evidence for a Female Preference Toward Non-Conventional Male Facial Attractiveness
Dr. Laura K. Chen¹  ·  Dr. James O. Obileke²  ·  Dr. Stephanie R. Marchand¹
¹Harwick University, Dept. of Psychology ²Univ. of Montfield, Centre for Relationship Studies
Received: April 4, 2026Accepted: May 28, 2026Published: June 22, 2026
DOI: 10.3167/jers.2026.0144018 | Peer-reviewed | n = 4,213
68%
of women rated long-term partners below conventional attractiveness norms
4,213
participants across 11 countries (ages 19–64)
2.4×
greater relationship satisfaction in the non-conventional group

Abstract
Conventional models of mate selection predict that physical attractiveness — particularly facial symmetry, strong jawline, and height — should be the dominant driver of women's long-term partner preferences. This multi-national, pre-registered study challenges that assumption. Using standardised attractiveness ratings from 2,800 blind independent raters, we demonstrate that women in committed relationships of two or more years overwhelmingly partner with men who score below conventional attractiveness thresholds. Critically, relationship satisfaction and self-reported partner "warmth" scores were significantly higher in this group. We introduce the Warmth-Signal Proxy (WSP) hypothesis to account for this finding and discuss implications for evolutionary models of human mating.
Introduction
Evolutionary frameworks from Darwin onward have proposed that women, as the higher-investing sex in reproduction, should preferentially select mates with strong phenotypic indicators of genetic fitness — symmetrical facial features, prominent secondary sexual characteristics, and physical stature. However, an accumulating literature in long-term vs. short-term mating strategy research suggests that context profoundly shapes these preferences (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000; Li et al., 2011).
The present study moves beyond self-reported preference data — a long-standing limitation — toward revealed preferences: observing the actual partners women in stable relationships have chosen, and rating those partners' appearance independently and blindly. We predicted, based on a pilot study (Chen et al., 2024, n=312), that we would replicate the inverse attractiveness pattern in a large international sample.
Methodology

Recruitment​

Women aged 19–64 in relationships ≥ 2 years recruited via stratified sampling across Canada, USA, UK, Germany, Brazil, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Nigeria, France, and Sweden.

Attractiveness Rating​

Participants submitted standardised frontal facial photos of their partners. Photos were rated by 2,800 blind raters (50% female) using the Harwick Facial Attractiveness Scale (HFAS-R2), a validated 10-point instrument.

Relationship Measures​

Satisfaction assessed via the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS-7) and a custom 12-item "Perceived Partner Warmth" inventory developed and pre-registered by the team.

Pre-registration​

Full pre-registration filed on OSF (osf.io/xh4m9) prior to data collection. Analysis plan, exclusion criteria, and primary hypotheses all specified in advance.
Results
Distribution of partner attractiveness scores (HFAS-R2) vs. reported relationship satisfaction quintile
Partners rated "highly attractive"
(HFAS ≥ 7.5)
18%
Partners rated "conventionally attractive"
(HFAS 5.5–7.4)
14%
Partners rated "average"
(HFAS 4.0–5.4)
27%
Partners rated "below average"
(HFAS 2.5–3.9)
29%
Partners rated "unconventionally attractive"
(HFAS < 2.5)
12%
† Bars in dark navy represent groups with significantly higher DAS-7 satisfaction scores (p < .001). Light blue bars did not reach significance threshold after Bonferroni correction.
68% of partnered women in our sample had selected men who scored below the HFAS midpoint of 5.5. More strikingly, the two lowest-scoring attractiveness groups reported relationship satisfaction scores averaging 1.8–2.4 standard deviations above those in the highest attractiveness group (F(4,4208) = 41.7, p < .0001, η² = .038).
"What we observe is not that women find these men unattractive by their own standards — they clearly do not. What the data show is that conventional third-party attractiveness ratings, which emphasise facial symmetry and masculine phenotype, systematically fail to capture what women in long-term relationships are actually selecting for."
— Dr. Laura K. Chen, lead author
The Warmth-Signal Proxy (WSP) Hypothesis
We propose that features traditionally coded as "unattractive" by raters — softer jaw structure, asymmetrical features, close-set eyes, prominent noses — may function as reliable signals of prosocial, cooperative orientation in long-term partners. In a mate-guarding context, perceived lower "market value" may be associated with higher partner fidelity and investment, a dynamic consistent with the Asymmetrical Benefit Model (Koenig & Stieglitz, 2019).
Supplementary analyses found that women who scored higher on attachment security were the most likely to partner with low-HFAS men (r = .41, p < .001), suggesting this preference pattern is linked to stable attachment and long-term relationship orientation rather than low self-esteem or limited choice.
Discussion
Our findings add substantially to the literature suggesting a divergence between stated short-term and enacted long-term partner preferences. The WSP hypothesis offers a parsimonious explanation: when selecting for partnership rather than genetic contribution alone, women's preferences shift toward facial features that co-vary with warmth, reliability, and cooperative personality — traits that third-party attractiveness raters are not asked to, and cannot, evaluate from a photograph.
Limitations include reliance on HFAS ratings, which were developed on North American samples and may carry cultural bias. Cross-cultural replication with region-specific rating panels is recommended. Future work should also examine whether this pattern holds across same-sex partnerships and in non-WEIRD populations.
References
  1. Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating. American Psychologist, 55(6), 573–592.
  2. Li, N. P., Yong, J. C., Tov, W., et al. (2011). Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1281–1302.
  3. Koenig, B., & Stieglitz, J. (2019). Asymmetric investment and long-term partner fidelity in humans. Evolution & Human Behavior, 40(4), 310–320.
  4. Chen, L. K., Obileke, J. O., & Marchand, S. R. (2024). Pilot investigation of revealed partner appearance preferences (n=312). OSF Preprints.
  5. Harwick Facial Attractiveness Scale, Revised 2 (HFAS-R2). (2021). Harwick University Psychometrics Lab. Technical Manual.
  6. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and Family, 38(1), 15–28.
© 2026 Journal of Evolutionary Relationship Science. Published under CC BY 4.0. Correspondence: [email protected] | Data and materials: osf.io/xh4m9 | Funding: Social Sciences Research Council of Canada (SSRCC grant #2024-RS-4417)
Bluepilling folks, One at a time:feelskek:
Someone should post this on incel tears
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64, buccalfatremoval, infraorbidal and 1 other person
Bluepilling folks, One at a time:feelskek:
Someone should post this on incel tears
Im gonna turn it into a pdf and make it look legit, i might redo it however.

Ill post it on here and hopefully someone can post it on that cucked subreddit
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: pfl, pleasevanity, Cinnamon fan64 and 3 others
Bluepilling folks, One at a time:feelskek:
Someone should post this on incel tears
ill change it up so that "women prefer personality over looks" is what the study concludes rather then women prefer ugly men over hot men
 
  • +1
Reactions: pleasevanity, Cinnamon fan64, Chadeep and 2 others
Bluepilling folks, One at a time:feelskek:
Someone should post this on incel tears
Im gonna turn it into a pdf and make it look legit, i might redo it however.

Ill post it on here and hopefully someone can post it on that cucked subreddit
ill change it up so that "women prefer personality over looks" is what the study concludes rather then women prefer ugly men over hot men
I can post it on Reddit for you when you do, if you'd like.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64 and polonaecel
Im gonna turn it into a pdf and make it look legit, i might redo it however.

Ill post it on here and hopefully someone can post it on that cucked subreddit
@Subhuman @Nectar @Jason Voorhees anyone of you up for posting it to incel tears?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Nectar and Cinnamon fan64
Revealed Partner Preference in Long-Term Mate Selection: Evidence for a Female Preference Toward Non-Conventional Male Facial Attractiveness
Dr. Laura K. Chen¹  ·  Dr. James O. Obileke²  ·  Dr. Stephanie R. Marchand¹
¹Harwick University, Dept. of Psychology ²Univ. of Montfield, Centre for Relationship Studies
Received: April 4, 2026Accepted: May 28, 2026Published: June 22, 2026
DOI: 10.3167/jers.2026.0144018 | Peer-reviewed | n = 4,213
68%
of women rated long-term partners below conventional attractiveness norms
4,213
participants across 11 countries (ages 19–64)
2.4×
greater relationship satisfaction in the non-conventional group

Abstract
Conventional models of mate selection predict that physical attractiveness — particularly facial symmetry, strong jawline, and height — should be the dominant driver of women's long-term partner preferences. This multi-national, pre-registered study challenges that assumption. Using standardised attractiveness ratings from 2,800 blind independent raters, we demonstrate that women in committed relationships of two or more years overwhelmingly partner with men who score below conventional attractiveness thresholds. Critically, relationship satisfaction and self-reported partner "warmth" scores were significantly higher in this group. We introduce the Warmth-Signal Proxy (WSP) hypothesis to account for this finding and discuss implications for evolutionary models of human mating.
Introduction
Evolutionary frameworks from Darwin onward have proposed that women, as the higher-investing sex in reproduction, should preferentially select mates with strong phenotypic indicators of genetic fitness — symmetrical facial features, prominent secondary sexual characteristics, and physical stature. However, an accumulating literature in long-term vs. short-term mating strategy research suggests that context profoundly shapes these preferences (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000; Li et al., 2011).
The present study moves beyond self-reported preference data — a long-standing limitation — toward revealed preferences: observing the actual partners women in stable relationships have chosen, and rating those partners' appearance independently and blindly. We predicted, based on a pilot study (Chen et al., 2024, n=312), that we would replicate the inverse attractiveness pattern in a large international sample.
Methodology

Recruitment​

Women aged 19–64 in relationships ≥ 2 years recruited via stratified sampling across Canada, USA, UK, Germany, Brazil, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Nigeria, France, and Sweden.

Attractiveness Rating​

Participants submitted standardised frontal facial photos of their partners. Photos were rated by 2,800 blind raters (50% female) using the Harwick Facial Attractiveness Scale (HFAS-R2), a validated 10-point instrument.

Relationship Measures​

Satisfaction assessed via the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS-7) and a custom 12-item "Perceived Partner Warmth" inventory developed and pre-registered by the team.

Pre-registration​

Full pre-registration filed on OSF (osf.io/xh4m9) prior to data collection. Analysis plan, exclusion criteria, and primary hypotheses all specified in advance.
Results
Distribution of partner attractiveness scores (HFAS-R2) vs. reported relationship satisfaction quintile
Partners rated "highly attractive"
(HFAS ≥ 7.5)
18%
Partners rated "conventionally attractive"
(HFAS 5.5–7.4)
14%
Partners rated "average"
(HFAS 4.0–5.4)
27%
Partners rated "below average"
(HFAS 2.5–3.9)
29%
Partners rated "unconventionally attractive"
(HFAS < 2.5)
12%
† Bars in dark navy represent groups with significantly higher DAS-7 satisfaction scores (p < .001). Light blue bars did not reach significance threshold after Bonferroni correction.
68% of partnered women in our sample had selected men who scored below the HFAS midpoint of 5.5. More strikingly, the two lowest-scoring attractiveness groups reported relationship satisfaction scores averaging 1.8–2.4 standard deviations above those in the highest attractiveness group (F(4,4208) = 41.7, p < .0001, η² = .038).
"What we observe is not that women find these men unattractive by their own standards — they clearly do not. What the data show is that conventional third-party attractiveness ratings, which emphasise facial symmetry and masculine phenotype, systematically fail to capture what women in long-term relationships are actually selecting for."
— Dr. Laura K. Chen, lead author
The Warmth-Signal Proxy (WSP) Hypothesis
We propose that features traditionally coded as "unattractive" by raters — softer jaw structure, asymmetrical features, close-set eyes, prominent noses — may function as reliable signals of prosocial, cooperative orientation in long-term partners. In a mate-guarding context, perceived lower "market value" may be associated with higher partner fidelity and investment, a dynamic consistent with the Asymmetrical Benefit Model (Koenig & Stieglitz, 2019).
Supplementary analyses found that women who scored higher on attachment security were the most likely to partner with low-HFAS men (r = .41, p < .001), suggesting this preference pattern is linked to stable attachment and long-term relationship orientation rather than low self-esteem or limited choice.
Discussion
Our findings add substantially to the literature suggesting a divergence between stated short-term and enacted long-term partner preferences. The WSP hypothesis offers a parsimonious explanation: when selecting for partnership rather than genetic contribution alone, women's preferences shift toward facial features that co-vary with warmth, reliability, and cooperative personality — traits that third-party attractiveness raters are not asked to, and cannot, evaluate from a photograph.
Limitations include reliance on HFAS ratings, which were developed on North American samples and may carry cultural bias. Cross-cultural replication with region-specific rating panels is recommended. Future work should also examine whether this pattern holds across same-sex partnerships and in non-WEIRD populations.
References
  1. Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating. American Psychologist, 55(6), 573–592.
  2. Li, N. P., Yong, J. C., Tov, W., et al. (2011). Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1281–1302.
  3. Koenig, B., & Stieglitz, J. (2019). Asymmetric investment and long-term partner fidelity in humans. Evolution & Human Behavior, 40(4), 310–320.
  4. Chen, L. K., Obileke, J. O., & Marchand, S. R. (2024). Pilot investigation of revealed partner appearance preferences (n=312). OSF Preprints.
  5. Harwick Facial Attractiveness Scale, Revised 2 (HFAS-R2). (2021). Harwick University Psychometrics Lab. Technical Manual.
  6. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and Family, 38(1), 15–28.
© 2026 Journal of Evolutionary Relationship Science. Published under CC BY 4.0. Correspondence: [email protected] | Data and materials: osf.io/xh4m9 | Funding: Social Sciences Research Council of Canada (SSRCC grant #2024-RS-4417)
chatgpt slop kys
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64
We need to make one for women preferring shorter men
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64
inb4 tiktok edit
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64
Soy Redditor Study
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64, polonaecel and Zenis
Soy Redditor Study
i woudlnt be suprisd if those retards belive it, someone should post this study right now and say "ohhh guys i know a researcher and he sent me this study early before it was published"
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64, Chadeep and polonaecel
Hold on I gotta check real quick to make sure I'm not shadowbanned again
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64 and polonaecel
Hold on I gotta check real quick to make sure I'm not shadowbanned again
just post this one i made right now, say your friends with a researcher who just made this study and you are showing it early to the people on here. im sure those retards would believe it
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64 and untermensch faggot
Good idea bhai

Could be funny if it does good on reddit
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64, polonaecel and Zenis
you mean chatjeetpt made it
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64 and polonaecel
Good idea bhai

Could be funny if it does good on reddit
just need to make it look legit, i might redo it to change it into women prefer personality over looks because i feel like women prefer ugly men over hto men is way too obviously a lie
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64, polonaecel and munnabhai
just post this one i made right now, say your friends with a researcher who just made this study and you are showing it early to the people on here. im sure those retards would believe it
Alright sure
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64 and polonaecel
Revealed Partner Preference in Long-Term Mate Selection: Evidence for a Female Preference Toward Non-Conventional Male Facial Attractiveness
Dr. Laura K. Chen¹  ·  Dr. James O. Obileke²  ·  Dr. Stephanie R. Marchand¹
¹Harwick University, Dept. of Psychology ²Univ. of Montfield, Centre for Relationship Studies
Received: April 4, 2026Accepted: May 28, 2026Published: June 22, 2026
DOI: 10.3167/jers.2026.0144018 | Peer-reviewed | n = 4,213
68%
of women rated long-term partners below conventional attractiveness norms
4,213
participants across 11 countries (ages 19–64)
2.4×
greater relationship satisfaction in the non-conventional group

Abstract
Conventional models of mate selection predict that physical attractiveness — particularly facial symmetry, strong jawline, and height — should be the dominant driver of women's long-term partner preferences. This multi-national, pre-registered study challenges that assumption. Using standardised attractiveness ratings from 2,800 blind independent raters, we demonstrate that women in committed relationships of two or more years overwhelmingly partner with men who score below conventional attractiveness thresholds. Critically, relationship satisfaction and self-reported partner "warmth" scores were significantly higher in this group. We introduce the Warmth-Signal Proxy (WSP) hypothesis to account for this finding and discuss implications for evolutionary models of human mating.
Introduction
Evolutionary frameworks from Darwin onward have proposed that women, as the higher-investing sex in reproduction, should preferentially select mates with strong phenotypic indicators of genetic fitness — symmetrical facial features, prominent secondary sexual characteristics, and physical stature. However, an accumulating literature in long-term vs. short-term mating strategy research suggests that context profoundly shapes these preferences (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000; Li et al., 2011).
The present study moves beyond self-reported preference data — a long-standing limitation — toward revealed preferences: observing the actual partners women in stable relationships have chosen, and rating those partners' appearance independently and blindly. We predicted, based on a pilot study (Chen et al., 2024, n=312), that we would replicate the inverse attractiveness pattern in a large international sample.
Methodology

Recruitment​

Women aged 19–64 in relationships ≥ 2 years recruited via stratified sampling across Canada, USA, UK, Germany, Brazil, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Nigeria, France, and Sweden.

Attractiveness Rating​

Participants submitted standardised frontal facial photos of their partners. Photos were rated by 2,800 blind raters (50% female) using the Harwick Facial Attractiveness Scale (HFAS-R2), a validated 10-point instrument.

Relationship Measures​

Satisfaction assessed via the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS-7) and a custom 12-item "Perceived Partner Warmth" inventory developed and pre-registered by the team.

Pre-registration​

Full pre-registration filed on OSF (osf.io/xh4m9) prior to data collection. Analysis plan, exclusion criteria, and primary hypotheses all specified in advance.
Results
Distribution of partner attractiveness scores (HFAS-R2) vs. reported relationship satisfaction quintile
Partners rated "highly attractive"
(HFAS ≥ 7.5)
18%
Partners rated "conventionally attractive"
(HFAS 5.5–7.4)
14%
Partners rated "average"
(HFAS 4.0–5.4)
27%
Partners rated "below average"
(HFAS 2.5–3.9)
29%
Partners rated "unconventionally attractive"
(HFAS < 2.5)
12%
† Bars in dark navy represent groups with significantly higher DAS-7 satisfaction scores (p < .001). Light blue bars did not reach significance threshold after Bonferroni correction.
68% of partnered women in our sample had selected men who scored below the HFAS midpoint of 5.5. More strikingly, the two lowest-scoring attractiveness groups reported relationship satisfaction scores averaging 1.8–2.4 standard deviations above those in the highest attractiveness group (F(4,4208) = 41.7, p < .0001, η² = .038).
"What we observe is not that women find these men unattractive by their own standards — they clearly do not. What the data show is that conventional third-party attractiveness ratings, which emphasise facial symmetry and masculine phenotype, systematically fail to capture what women in long-term relationships are actually selecting for."
— Dr. Laura K. Chen, lead author
The Warmth-Signal Proxy (WSP) Hypothesis
We propose that features traditionally coded as "unattractive" by raters — softer jaw structure, asymmetrical features, close-set eyes, prominent noses — may function as reliable signals of prosocial, cooperative orientation in long-term partners. In a mate-guarding context, perceived lower "market value" may be associated with higher partner fidelity and investment, a dynamic consistent with the Asymmetrical Benefit Model (Koenig & Stieglitz, 2019).
Supplementary analyses found that women who scored higher on attachment security were the most likely to partner with low-HFAS men (r = .41, p < .001), suggesting this preference pattern is linked to stable attachment and long-term relationship orientation rather than low self-esteem or limited choice.
Discussion
Our findings add substantially to the literature suggesting a divergence between stated short-term and enacted long-term partner preferences. The WSP hypothesis offers a parsimonious explanation: when selecting for partnership rather than genetic contribution alone, women's preferences shift toward facial features that co-vary with warmth, reliability, and cooperative personality — traits that third-party attractiveness raters are not asked to, and cannot, evaluate from a photograph.
Limitations include reliance on HFAS ratings, which were developed on North American samples and may carry cultural bias. Cross-cultural replication with region-specific rating panels is recommended. Future work should also examine whether this pattern holds across same-sex partnerships and in non-WEIRD populations.
References
  1. Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating. American Psychologist, 55(6), 573–592.
  2. Li, N. P., Yong, J. C., Tov, W., et al. (2011). Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1281–1302.
  3. Koenig, B., & Stieglitz, J. (2019). Asymmetric investment and long-term partner fidelity in humans. Evolution & Human Behavior, 40(4), 310–320.
  4. Chen, L. K., Obileke, J. O., & Marchand, S. R. (2024). Pilot investigation of revealed partner appearance preferences (n=312). OSF Preprints.
  5. Harwick Facial Attractiveness Scale, Revised 2 (HFAS-R2). (2021). Harwick University Psychometrics Lab. Technical Manual.
  6. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and Family, 38(1), 15–28.
© 2026 Journal of Evolutionary Relationship Science. Published under CC BY 4.0. Correspondence: [email protected] | Data and materials: osf.io/xh4m9 | Funding: Social Sciences Research Council of Canada (SSRCC grant #2024-RS-4417)
Someone post this to reddit
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64 and polonaecel
no lol, but should i use it to make this go quicker actually?


@polonaecel
@untermensch faggot
Ask it to add all the pubmed logos to it and add it in a PDF
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64
@Zenis Alright I got everything set up should I post now or you still wanna edit it?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64 and polonaecel
i woudlnt be suprisd if those retards belive it, someone should post this study right now and say "ohhh guys i know a researcher and he sent me this study early before it was published"
You should post this on Inceltears
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64 and polonaecel
Fuck I need more karma

Someone else has to do it someone tag someone who has a Reddit account with actual posts
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64, Chadeep, Zenis and 1 other person
i will fucking laugh my ass off if these guys actually believe it, i hope they dont. i seriously hope they dont and i have faith that they wont. but you never know with the oofy doofy
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64, untermensch faggot and polonaecel
im banned on reddit, someone else is gonna have to take this post and do it
I would've posted it. By Account got Permabanned for posting Right Wing Content Apparently
 
  • +1
Reactions: Cinnamon fan64, polonaecel, untermensch faggot and 1 other person
ill change it up so that "women prefer personality over looks" is what the study concludes rather then women prefer ugly men over hot men
please keep me updated :forcedsmile:
 
  • +1
Reactions: polonaecel
I would've posted it. By Account got Permabanned for posting Right Wing Content Apparently
Same and most of my new accounts keep getting shadowbanned so I stopped using Reddit for the most part

Before .org I used to post incel content on Reddit
 
  • +1
Reactions: Chadeep and polonaecel
1782274537191
 
  • +1
Reactions: polonaecel
@Subhuman @Nectar @Jason Voorhees anyone of you up for posting it to incel tears?
Plot twist: He copied and pasted the whole thing from a shitty article
 

Similar threads

Moggador
Replies
2
Views
15
Centurion Hunter
Centurion Hunter
PoopyFaceTomatoNose
Replies
8
Views
72
occipital
occipital
Old Büll
Replies
5
Views
55
Splinter901
Splinter901
Clark
Replies
3
Views
26
j1gga
j1gga

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Back
    Top