» Articles » PMID: 36972495

Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample

Overview
Journal Evol Psychol
Publisher Sage Publications
Date 2023 Mar 27
PMID 36972495
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Sexual double standards are social norms that impose greater social opprobrium on women versus men or that permit one sex greater sexual freedom than the other. This study examined sexual double standards when choosing a mate based on their sexual history. Using a novel approach, participants (N = 923, 64% women) were randomly assigned to make evaluations in long-term or short-term mating contexts and asked how a prospective partner's sexual history would influence their own likelihood of having sex (short-term) or entering a relationship (long-term) with them. They were then asked how the same factors would influence the appraisal they would make of male and female friends in a similar position. We found no evidence of traditional sexual double standards for promiscuous or sexually undesirable behavior. There was some evidence for small sexual double standard for self-stimulation, but this was in the opposite direction to that predicted. There was greater evidence for sexual hypocrisy as sexual history tended to have a greater negative impact on suitor assessments for the self rather than for same-sex friends. Sexual hypocrisy effects were more prominent in women, though the direction of the effects was the same for both sexes. Overall, men were more positive about women's self-stimulation than women wee, particularly in short-term contexts. Socially undesirable sexual behavior (unfaithfulness, mate poaching, and jealous/controlling) had a large negative impact on appraisals of a potential suitor across all contexts and for both sexes. Effects of religiosity, disgust, sociosexuality, and question order effects are considered.

Citing Articles

Sex Differences in Perception of Economic and Dating Access.

Hall R, Blake K, Chan H, Torgler B, Whyte S Evol Psychol. 2025; 23(1):14747049241310154.

PMID: 39924930 PMC: 11808775. DOI: 10.1177/14747049241310154.

References
1.
Gomez Berrocal M, Vallejo-Medina P, Moyano N, Sierra J . Sexual Double Standard: A Psychometric Study From a Macropsychological Perspective Among the Spanish Heterosexual Population. Front Psychol. 2019; 10:1869. PMC: 6702518. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01869. View

2.
Stewart-Williams S, Butler C, Thomas A . Sexual History and Present Attractiveness: People Want a Mate With a Bit of a Past, But Not Too Much. J Sex Res. 2016; 54(9):1097-1105. DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2016.1232690. View

3.
Tybur J, Lieberman D, Griskevicius V . Microbes, mating, and morality: individual differences in three functional domains of disgust. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009; 97(1):103-22. DOI: 10.1037/a0015474. View

4.
Thomas A, Jonason P, Blackburn J, Kennair L, Lowe R, Malouff J . Mate preference priorities in the East and West: A cross-cultural test of the mate preference priority model. J Pers. 2019; 88(3):606-620. DOI: 10.1111/jopy.12514. View

5.
Crawford M, Popp D . Sexual double standards: a review and methodological critique of two decades of research. J Sex Res. 2003; 40(1):13-26. DOI: 10.1080/00224490309552163. View