18

Hypergamy is the act or practice of seeking a spouse of higher socioeconomic status.

According to Wikipedia:

Some evolutionary psychologists believe that women exhibit mate-selective preferences for spouses who are greater than them in terms of attained physical attractiveness, educational level, job status, social standing, and capital accumulation.

Is there any research to support the belief that women are more disposed to hypergamous behavior than men?

For purposes of narrowing the scope of the claim, let's focus on women living in any first-world nation, although any of the categories of preferences listed above (physical attractiveness, educational level, job status, social standing, and/or capital accumulation) would be acceptable.

Beofett
  • 9,363
  • 4
  • 57
  • 84
  • 1
    The claim made here is backed by references to [a peer-reviewed study](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12293453) and [a Times article](http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1870066,00.html). Moreover, [another peer-reviewed study](http://www.springerlink.com/content/72x3m181544j672u/) is shared, which shows there is no statistical indication that any gender tends to marry up. I'm not sure what you're skeptical of. Read the peer-reviewed studies and draw the right conclusion. – Borror0 Mar 01 '12 at 19:27
  • @Borror0 I missed the first study, but discounted the Times article as it was merely an anthology of stories shared by prominent female authors. However, that study I missed seems to indicate there are statistical indication that females tend to marry up, which is in direct contraction to the claim in the other study (the full text of which is behind a paywall). Giving the contradicting messages, and the small sample size of the one positive study, I'd like to see if there are more thorough and modern studies that indicate a positive gender correlation. – Beofett Mar 01 '12 at 19:57
  • I am skeptical that you are really skeptical of this. The funny thing is the claim could be reduced to women like to feel like they got a good deal. – Chad Mar 01 '12 at 21:24
  • How do you intend to measure *pre*disposition rather than simply disposition? I'm certainly not skeptical that culture can force hypergamy in only one gender, but the claim made is one of evolutionary psychology and not simply cultural bias. As far as I can tell neither the positive nor negative study provides evidence either way for that claim. –  Mar 01 '12 at 23:00
  • I also think you've mischaracterized the 2008 study - I think it says "no gender tends to marry up more than any other", not "there is no statistical indication that any gender tends to marry up". –  Mar 01 '12 at 23:05
  • @Chad I'm skeptical that you're really skeptical that I'm really skeptical. My, isn't this fun and productive? On a serious note, I assure you that yes, I am skeptical that women *actually* choose to marry more often for status than men. – Beofett Mar 01 '12 at 23:26
  • @JoeWreschnig Good point on pre-disposed versus disposed. I've edited accordingly, as I don't know that I believe the claim is based on scientific fact (at least in current society). Regarding the mischaracterizing of the 2008 study, that was Borror0's summary, not mine. – Beofett Mar 01 '12 at 23:28
  • 12
    Not an answer, more a caveat: If you accept that women tend to be poorer than men, then a random (heterosexual) pairing is more likely to have the woman being poorer one in the couple - without any need for societal or genetic pressure. I'm not dismissing the claim, just explaining it must be examined carefully due to confounding issues. – Oddthinking Mar 02 '12 at 03:05
  • @Oddthinking - (1) the claim is that a woman on **any** level will **prefer** - given a choice - a male on higher level. It's not about whether those preferences are realistic to fulfill. Also, the claim doesn't say anything about male preferences. (2) Given the scope of the question (modern first world), women "being poorer" is not a factor. They have higher aggregate education levels than men, for one. – user5341 Mar 05 '12 at 10:30
  • 1
    @DVK: (1) That makes the question worse! If we define "levels" to be based on attractiveness as a partner, then by definition, people want partners at a higher level. (2) Women are as rich as men, in any country? I'll take that bet. – Oddthinking Mar 05 '12 at 11:49
  • 3
    Here is the problem. I would say that I married up with my wife. My wife also says that she married up. And the thing is we are both right because the criteria is subjective. Together we have been far more successful than either one of us expected to be alone. We have helped each other cross over into social groups we did not feel comfortable in alone before. And the thing is we met each other and both thought that the other was far more attractive (at least that is what she tells me). – Chad Mar 05 '12 at 14:08
  • @Oddthinking - Hypergamy doesn't talk about general attractiveness but measurable specific scales - e.g. education level, income, etc... E.g. controlling for all other variables, would a woman with a graduate degree prefer men with graduate degree-or-higher more or less when compared with preferences of women with only high school education? (again, controlling for other variables). – user5341 Mar 05 '12 at 16:42
  • Defined like this, is this question not just asking if Women have stricter standards? Also monogamy will cause problems with statistical analysis, as it sort of forces a uniform distribution of men and women, meaning everything averages out taken all at once. Also, the original claim is "evolutionary" based, which means ancient history, not "modern". If we really want to tackle the original statement: Do Women, simply because they are women, prefer hypergamy, that is where you would start. What were they doing 100,000 years ago, sort of thing. – Jonathon Aug 10 '14 at 03:04
  • @JonathonWisnoski "Defined like this, is this question not just asking if Women have stricter standards?" No, hypergamy is a specific subset of standards based on a clearly defined goal. – Beofett Aug 10 '14 at 12:17
  • @Beofett, Yes, but the question provides its own definition, which is not strictly at all the same to textbook Hypergamy. my point is that the definition provided here is so broad and nonspecific that is mostly just comes down to general mating standards. Not that Hypergamy is not a thing. – Jonathon Aug 10 '14 at 17:49
  • @JonathonWisnoski If you've got a better definition of hypergamy, please feel free to link it. However, your assessment of the definition above as "general mating standards" is one I cannot understand. Seeking a mate who is superior to yourself in one or more of several specific categories is not what I consider "general mating standards", but perhaps I just view it differently. Personally, I look for compatibility, rather than superiority, but maybe that's just me? – Beofett Aug 10 '14 at 19:37
  • @Beofett So you mean "personality". You would not care if she/he was a deadbeat drug addicted bum, as long as his/her personality "complimented" yours. I am not talking superiority, I am simply talking standards. – Jonathon Aug 10 '14 at 23:19
  • @Beofett We could talk all day on exactly what this means, but I like the definition: "... higher caste or status than oneself" - Wikipedia. Not, he is slightly more attractive then I am, but we have decided on some objective criteria that he is in a completely different strata when it comes to status/caste. Which more than anything will mean family, and secondly finances. Attractiveness, for example, will not play any role, at least for men, in most cultures. But all of this is highly culturally dependant. – Jonathon Aug 10 '14 at 23:20
  • @JonathonWisnoski if you're going to rely on semantic quibbling over straw man arguments, then I think we're done here. Feel free to vote to close if you feel the question is fundamentally unanswerable. – Beofett Aug 11 '14 at 00:22
  • @Beofett Quibbling over strawmen? How is pointing out that you are fundamentally misrepresenting hypergamy (by every definition I have ever seen) a strawman? – Jonathon Aug 11 '14 at 03:38
  • @JonathonWisnoski a straw man is where you deliberately misrepresent someone's position in order to make your weak argument look stronger. Feel free to look it up on Wikipedia. As I said before, though: we're done here. – Beofett Aug 11 '14 at 10:40
  • Mildly politically incorrect topic made me think of [this doubly politically incorrect song](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e8X4L8IUKU) from another era. – Benjol Aug 12 '14 at 07:53

1 Answers1

6

Actually it might be the opposite for USA in contrast to Australia.

Immigration and Status Exchange in Australia and the United States

Kate H. Choi,* Marta Tienda, Deborah Cobb-Clark, and Mathias Sinning

Princeton University

enter image description here

Shows, in USA: Homogamy > Hypogamy > Hypergamy in Australia: Homogamy > Hypergamy > Hypogamy

Community
  • 1
Devashish Das
  • 830
  • 10
  • 18
  • not very clear. What is being compared between husband and wife here? Wealth? What does it mean by hypergamy? –  Sep 13 '18 at 07:10