Search This Blog

Greeting Research Recommendation is That The Secret to a Happy Romantic Relationship is Kissing for Six Seconds Each Day

Greeting Research Recommendation is that the
Secret to a Happy Romantic Relationship is
Kissing for Six Seconds Each Day

I have been teaching the benefits of significant hello and goodbye rituals for couples. Here is one researcher’s recommendation.

Greeting Research Recommendation:
A few minutes a day doing certain things differently — like saying “hello,” “goodbye” and sharing a sweet little kiss — can change the course of your relationship for the better. By Theo Pauline Nestor scenarios that come along with a busy lifestyle are familiar to most of us: When your date arrives at your place while you’re in the middle of an important phone call, you gesture for this person to come in and finally get around to greeting each other 10 minutes later, still feeling a bit frazzled from your conversation. Or maybe you just spent a The parting and reunion [moments] turn out to be really important great weekend together, but when it’s time to say goodbye, you realize that you’re running late for an appointment — so you rush out the door in a hurry, barely kissing your date goodbye. These rushed instances are as understandable as they are commonplace, but they inevitably take a toll on relationships, because these transitional moments often set the tone for both a couple’s time together and their time spent apart. Dr. John Gottman, a leading relationship researcher and the author of What Makes Love Last? How to Build Trust and Avoid Betrayal, asserts that our “rituals of connections are crucial,” because they serve not only to re-establish the connection with our partners, but also to protect our relationships from betrayal. “The parting and reunion [moments] turn out to be really important,” asserts Dr. Gottman. Attention spent on each other in transitional junctures communicates that “you’re important to me, and when you come back at the end of the day, it’s an event. You matter to me.” How momentary transitions can safeguard your romance from betrayal Being present for each other and asserting the importance of the relationship during these transitional moments is part of how couples establish what Dr. Gottman refers to as “attunement” — i.e., a deep level of understanding that couples both possess and lovingly express to each other. In his book, What Makes Love Last, Dr. Gottman asserts that this level of attunement with each other is a way for couples to inoculate themselves against falling down the slippery slope of negative thinking about their relationship that can ultimately lead to betrayal. “One of the other important things we discovered about betrayal was not only about turning away from one another, but it’s also about this negative comparison where one partner is saying in [his/her] mind, ‘Who needs this crap? I can do better,’” Dr. Gottman explains. “And that negative comparison gets people to start detaching from the relationship.” Six seconds to a better relationship The “six-second kiss” is one simple and fun activity that Dr. Gottman advocates couples incorporate into their everyday moments of transition. Described by him as “long enough to feel romantic,” the six-second kiss serves as a temporary oasis within a busy day and creates a deliberate break between the on-the-job mentality (i.e., going to or from work) and a couple’s one-on-one time together. In fact, the six-second kiss makes up just a fraction of what Dr. Gottman has dubbed the “magic five hours,” which is the amount of extra time he’s found that the most successful, happiest couples began devoting to their relationships each week after completing his workshops together. Time spent intentionally focusing on their partners during “reunions” and “partings” also comprise an important component of the “magic five hours” that these couples invest into their relationships on a weekly basis. Reunited, and it feels so good... We’ve all heard the saying, “You never get a second chance to make a first impression.” The same could be said for the moment when you’re reunited with your date. Those first few moments set the tone for your time spent together — either positively or negatively. Greeting your sweetheart with affection Those first few moments set the tone for your time spent together.communicates this person’s importance to you while reminding your partner of the good feelings you share when you’re in each other’s company, and trigger reciprocal feelings of his or her own. A number of small gestures can be combined in order to ensure that your reunion goes well: Make sure to set aside your phone and any other distractions first, and then give your partner your full attention as you exchange greetings. Share a six-second kiss. Say that you’re happy to see your partner again. If you’re used to a more casual way of saying “hello” and “goodbye,” these seemingly simple gestures of affection might feel awkward at first, but letting your partner know that you’re happy to see him or her creates an important, positive transition between your time apart and the time you spend together. In a long-term relationship, Dr. Gottman says that having a “stress-reducing conversation” is a great way to kick off a couple’s reunion time together. “The one thing research has discovered,” says Dr. Gottman, “is that if they take 15 minutes apiece to talk about what’s stressful about the day, and their partner is an ally in listening — without giving advice or problem-solving — that can be very important. You have to have a time when you really have your partner’s ears; it’s a time when you really can connect.” How to make saying “goodbye” even sweeter Setting a few minutes aside to properly say “goodbye” to each other can make a dramatic difference in a couple’s thoughts about the relationship during the time they spend apart. So before you zoom off into the world going different directions, take a minute to communicate how much you enjoyed your time together — and maybe touch base about when you’ll be getting together again in the near future. If you don’t have a plan for your next date, just establishing when you’ll be talking to each other next (“I’ll call you tomorrow”) can help a couple maintain their feelings of connection with each other. You should also make a point of asking what’s ahead for your sweetie so you can provide the right kind of support later on. “One of the most important things to do in parting is to find out what your partner’s day is going to be like,” Dr. Gottman says. “Find out about anything that is important that’s going to happen to your partner that day. If she’s going to have lunch with a friend or he has a critical phone call or important meeting scheduled, know about that and what it means to her or him.” And yes, before saying goodbye to your partner (for now, anyway), don’t forget to savor that six-second kiss! Theo Pauline Nestor is the author of How to Sleep Alone in King-Size Bed: A Memoir of Starting Over and a regular contri - See more at: http://www.match.com/magazine/article/13162/6-Seconds-To-Happy-Couplehood/#sthash.1aM9IW17.dpuf


Patti Wood, MA, Certified Speaking Professional - The Body Language Expert. For more body language insights go to her website at www.PattiWood.net. Check out Patti's website for her new book "SNAP, Making the Most of First Impressions, Body Language and Charisma" at www.snapfirstimpressions.com. Also check out Patti's YouTube channel at http://youtube.com/user/bodylanguageexpert.
Posted by Patti Wood at

Gender Differences in Response to Stress. A New Stress Paradigm for Women

Gender Differences in Response to Stress
A New Stress Paradigm for Women


I have been teaching the gender differences in how we respond to stress in my programs for many years. Here is the research on how women respond to stress by tending and befriending, while men do the typical freeze, fight, flight, fall or faint response.  Check on my other blog posts on gender differences in stress at the links below.


http://www.bodylanguagelady.blogspot.com/search/label/gender%20differences%20in%20smiling

 http://www.bodylanguagelady.blogspot.com/search/label/Gender%20Differannces


Rather than fighting or fleeing, women may respond to stress by tending to themselves and their young and befriending others.
By BETH AZAR
Monitor Staff
July/August 2000, Vol 31, No. 7
Print version: page 42














Move over "fight-or-flight"--there's a new paradigm in town, the first new model to describe people's stress response patterns in more than 60 years.
The model, called "tend-and-befriend" by its developers, won't replace fight-or-flight. Rather, it adds another dimension to the stress-response arsenal, says University of California, Los Angeles, psychologist Shelley Taylor, PhD, who, along with five colleagues, developed the model.
In particular, they propose that females respond to stressful situations by protecting themselves and their young through nurturing behaviors--the "tend" part of the model--and forming alliances with a larger social group, particularly among women--the "befriend" part of the model. Males, in contrast, show less of a tendency toward tending and befriending, sticking more to the fight-or-flight response, they suggest.
The researchers describe this new model in an upcoming issue of Psychological Review, supporting their premise by pulling together existing evidence from research with nonhuman animals, neuroendocrine studies and human-based social psychology.
The tend-and-befriend model fills what Taylor sees as a huge gap in the stress response literature: namely, that almost all the studies have been conducted in males and so, therefore, upheld fight-or-flight as the main response to stress.
The tend-and-befriend response, in contrast, fits better the way females respond to stress. It builds on the brain's attachment/caregiving system, which counteracts the metabolic activity associated with the traditional fight-or-flight stress response--increased heart rate, blood pressure and cortisol levels--and leads to nurturing and affiliative behavior.
The research findings used to support the model are not new, says University of Chicago psychologist John Cacioppo, PhD, but the way they've been integrated is.
"The data supporting the model look very compelling," says Cacioppo, who has studied the biology of stress in animals and humans. "Even if it's wrong, which I don't think it will be, it's a very powerful model."
What's more, the model is sure to inspire thousands of new studies designed to test its claims, from whether women truly do respond to stress by tending and befriending, to questions about the specific hormonal and neuroendocrine systems responsible for the response to the specific contexts in which such a system may be triggered, adds psychologist Nancy Collins, PhD, who studies human reactions to stressful situations. The model can serve as a foundation on which to build an entirely new body of research, she says.
Culling the evidence
Taylor and her colleagues developed their model after listening to a lecture on stress responses in rats. The description of fight-or-flight in response to stress didn't fit any of the findings Taylor had seen in almost 30 years as a health psychologist studying people's reactions to stressful life events.
When she began discussing the issue with her laboratory staff, postdoc Laura Klein, PhD, pointed out that the findings heard about at the lecture had been heavily based on studies of male animals.
"It was like a big light went on," says Taylor, who developed the new model with Klein, now at Pennsylvania State University, Brian Lewis, PhD, now at Syracuse University, Regan Gurung, PhD, now at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, and graduate students Tara Gruenewald and John Updegraff.
Women, they speculated, may have developed a completely different system for coping with stress in large part because their responses evolved in the context of being the primary caregiver of their children. To find support for their theory, they pulled together data from previously unconnected sources.
From research into the neuroendocrine responses responsible for fight-or-flight, for example, they document that, although women do show the same immediate hormonal and sympathetic nervous system response to acute stress, other factors intervene to make fight-or-flight less likely in females.
In terms of the fight response, while male aggression appears to be regulated by androgen hormones, such as testosterone, and linked to sympathetic reactivity and hostility, female aggression isn't. Instead, female aggression appears to be more cerebral in nature--moderated by social circumstances, learning, culture and the situation--and in animals "confined to situations requiring defense," write the researchers.
In terms of flight, fleeing too readily at any sign of danger would put a female's offspring at risk, a response that might reduce her reproductive success in evolutionary terms. Consistent with this idea, studies in rats suggest there may be a physiological response to stress that inhibits flight. This response is the release of the hormone oxytocin, which enhances relaxation, reduces fearfulness and decreases the stress responses typical to the fight-or-flight response.
So rather than fight or flee, Taylor and her colleagues posit, women often tend and befriend, an idea supported by several lines of research in humans and other animals. Some of the more intriguing work, says Taylor, comes out of Michael Meaney's laboratory at McGill University. He and his colleagues remove rat pups from their nest for brief periods--a stressful situation for pups and mothers--and then return them to the nest and watch what happens. The mothers immediately move to nurture and soothe their pups by licking, grooming and nursing them. This kind of tending response stimulates the growth of the pups' stress-regulatory system.
What stimulates this behavior in the mother? Taylor and her colleagues suggest that it's governed in part by oxytocin. Studies in many different animals, including non-human primates and humans, show that oxytocin promotes caregiving behavior and underlies attachment between mothers and their infants. In addition, some studies have found that mothers tend to be more nurturing and caring toward their children when they are most stressed.
As for the idea of "befriending" when stressed, Taylor and her colleagues detail evidence from rodent studies and studies in humans that when they are stressed, females prefer being with others, especially other females, while males don't. Indeed, in humans, women are much more likely than men to seek out and use social support in all types of stressful situations, including over health-related concerns, relationship problems and work-related conflicts.
"It is one of the most robust gender differences in adult human behavior," write Taylor and her colleagues.
Again, oxytocin may be at play, they suggest. In female prairie voles, for example, injections of oxytocin enhance social contact and inhibit aggression. The same may occur in males, but males are less likely than females to have naturally high levels of oxytocin.
One of a repertoire of responses
Although the tend-and-befriend model emphasizes gender differences, the researchers reject the idea that gender stereotypes are written in our genes. Indeed, Taylor doesn't see biological models of behavior as inherently constraining--rather, they help tie human behavior to other species and provide a framework for general behavioral tendencies. The fun, she says, will be teasing apart how our biological predispositions unfold in the context of real-life experience.
Both Collins and Cacioppo hope that means researchers will examine social context to figure out which situations may promote tend-and-befriend and which might, instead, promote fight-or-flight or even as yet undiscovered stress responses.
In fact, tend-and-befriend may be just as adaptive for men as for women in certain contexts, says Collins, whose research finds no gender differences when examining how often husbands and wives seek support from their most intimate companions--for example, each other.
"Perhaps these gender differences are adaptive with acute stressors," says Collins. "But when you think of longer term stressors, such as hunger, it doesn't make sense to have these gender differences. Men and women need social networks to work it out."
The most adaptive system would be one in which men and women select from a repertoire of responses depending on the specific stressor, she says.

Adds Taylor: Mainstream stress researchers "have been very quick to study behaviors like aggression and withdrawal and have failed to notice very important behaviors like affiliation. We think it's cute when women call up their sisters when they're under stress. But no one has realized that that is a contemporaneous manifestation of one of the oldest biological systems. Our focus on fight-or-flight has kept us from recognizing that there are systems that are as old as fight-or-flight that are tremendously important."

Patti Wood, MA, Certified Speaking Professional - The Body Language Expert. For more body language insights go to her website at www.PattiWood.net. Check out Patti's website for her new book "SNAP, Making the Most of First Impressions, Body Language and Charisma" at www.snapfirstimpressions.com. Also check out Patti's YouTube channel at http://youtube.com/user/bodylanguageexpert.
Posted by Patti Wood at

Seeing the Body Language of Happy Couples Can Make Single People Feel Undeserving

Seeing the Body Language of Happy Couples 
Can Make Single People Feel Undeserving
Promoting love, relationships in marketing can punish sales. Showing videos and photos of happy couples can make single people buy less. Single people judge themselves “unworthy’ of purchases when they see photos of happy couples. 

Date: March 12, 2014
Source: USC Marshall School of Business 
Summary:
The prevalent marketing practice of highlighting relationships in advertising and promotions can have substantial negative consequences for sales and consumers' willingness to indulge themselves, new research indicates. The results of the study surprisingly revealed that reminders of romantic relationships caused single consumers to choose fewer high-end personal care products than their coupled counterparts. But the implications reach beyond the romantic relationship. When single consumers were reminded of close platonic relationships, they indulged as much as coupled individuals because singles have that type of valued relationship.

Valentine's Day has come and gone. But those images of romance are still everywhere: a happy couple holding hands in an eharmony ad, two lovebirds sharing a tender kiss in a Nikon camera commercial.
Related Articles
Advertising filled with romantic images, featuring "happy togetherness" in magazines and stores as well as on television and websites might resonate with you if you have a special someone. But if you're single, a new study shows you're not buying.
New research from consumer psychologist Lisa Cavanaugh, assistant professor at the USC Marshall School of Business, reveals how the prevalent marketing practice of highlighting relationships in advertising and promotions can have substantial negative consequences for sales and consumers' willingness to indulge themselves. Cavanaugh's research is presented in "Because I (Don't) Deserve It: How Relationship Reminders and Deservingness Influence Consumer Indulgence," forthcoming in the Journal of Marketing Research.

Marketers regularly remind consumers of valued social relationships -- romantic couples, close friends and family -- in order to influence choice and consumption. Cavanaugh's research explores an understudied influence -- relationship reminders -- and identifies a novel factor -- perceived deservingness -- that predicts consumers' propensity to indulge.
She found that reminding consumers of relationships they don't have reduces their perceptions of deservingness and triggers them to restrict their own indulgent consumption. That means they spend less money, choose lower-end brands of products and opt for lower-calorie foods. Those effects may be particularly profound during certain times of year, such as holidays and wedding season, when the portrayal of relationships is especially prominent in advertisements.
"Marketers may need to rethink the prevalent practice of using images of idealized relationships to sell everything from cookies to cameras," Cavanaugh said, "because many consumers don't have those relationships. By reminding people of relationships they don't have, marketers inadvertently make consumers feel undeserving -- less worthy of treating and rewarding themselves."
This lack of perceived deservingness causes consumers to restrict their own indulgence across a wide range of products. Cavanaugh's studies show that reminding consumers of relationships they don't have, whether through a promotional email, an advertisement or a conversation in a retail store, changes which brands they buy. The effect on indulgence is not simply restricted to the brand or product advertised.
"Perceived deservingness carries over to affect subsequent choices across multiple product categories, everything from the foods you choose to the amount of money you're willing to spend on clothing, accessories and even personal care products across retailers," Cavanaugh said.
With the number of marriages at a historical low (6.8 marriages per thousand between 2009 and 2011) and less than half of all adults consumers nationwide being single, do marketers need to be checking the relationship status of their customers on Facebook? Should companies like J.Crew think twice before sending January email blasts to women titled "Just got engaged?" and "Said yes?"
"By reminding consumers of relationships they do not have, marketers may not be simply mis-targeting but also self-handicapping," Cavanaugh said. "Marketers may think of these relationship reminders as aspirational, that is, suggesting that their brand or product will be able to help you achieve the type of life you've always wanted. But in fact, the reactions of consumers I've observed in my research tell a very different story -- relationship reminders often cause consumers to feel undeserving and restrict indulgence. Singles need to get some love from marketers, too."
In seven experiments, Cavanaugh used different study designs and types of relationship reminders (advertisements, greeting cards, magazine articles and scenarios), measured multiple indulgent choices (personal care products, clothing and accessories) and tested the hypotheses with student and adult populations. Her findings demonstrate the robustness of the effect of deservingness on indulgence.
In one study conducted during the week before Valentine's Day, each consumer viewed electronic greeting cards that emphasized one of two close relationship types, either romantic or platonic. Next, the participants were presented with a shopping task, choosing from economy, mid-range or higher-end brands of lip balm, shampoo, hand cream and fragrance. Finally, they indicated their current relationship status.
The results surprisingly revealed that reminders of romantic relationships caused single consumers to choose fewer high-end personal care products than their coupled counterparts. But the implications reach beyond the romantic relationship. When single consumers were reminded of close platonic relationships, they indulged as much as coupled individuals because singles have that type of valued relationship.
Widespread images in popular culture indicate singles are supposed to console themselves with consumption. Who can forget the scenes from movies like "Bridget Jones' Diary" and "Sex and the City," that show sad singles like Bridget Jones polishing off an entire quart of ice cream or Carrie Bradshaw drowning her single gal sorrows with some NYC retail therapy? It seems like singles should indulge more, right? Cavanaugh says not necessarily.
"That misconception is what makes these findings so fascinating," Cavanaugh said. "This evidence regarding perceived deservingness as a driver of indulgence runs counter to what existing theories and pop culture might predict about the salience of social relationships and indulgence. It is commonly assumed that when people lack valued relationships, they will feel lonely or sad and indulge more, through shopping or eating. My theory and findings based on deservingness suggest a very different pattern of behavior: Individuals choose in ways consistent with their perceptions of deservingness."
Cavanaugh noted the importance of distinguishing between how people feel (affective reactions) and how they feel about themselves (deservingness). Previous studies have focused on the former. "While perceiving oneself as less deserving may sometimes be accompanied by negative feelings, it is the perceptions of deservingness but not feelings or mood that most accurately predict whether indulgence occurs," she explained.
In her report, Cavanaugh made some specific recommendations for how marketers could improve their impact with advertising and product placement as well as direct marketing. When promoting indulgent products, marketers need to pay attention to the context of their advertising and product placement in television shows and movies. Specifically, Cavanaugh said, marketers of indulgent products may try to skew their marketing and may fare better by placing ads or products in shows or episodes focused on more general platonic relationships (friendships, neighbors or co-workers) that consumers are likely to have rather than exclusive pair relationships (romantic couples or best friends) that they may not have.
However if marketers know a consumer's relationship status, direct marketers could consider systematically varying the image (romantic couple vs. platonic others) used on a catalog cover or in a promotional email that encourages them to click through to shop and treat themselves, Cavanaugh suggested. The study should also provide a cautionary lesson to sales representatives who call consumers about promotional upgrades. Telemarketers should be careful about making assumptions or using relationship-related language or references to a spouse or kids that may remind consumers of relationships they lack.
"Given the prominent role that deservingness and relationships play in consumer choice," Cavanaugh concluded, "continued research on relationships and perceived deservingness would benefit both consumers and marketers alike."

Story Source:
The above story is based on materials provided by USC Marshall School of Business. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference:
1.     Lisa A. Cavanaugh. Because I (Don't) Deserve It: How Relationship Reminders and Deservingness Influence Consumer Indulgence. Journal of Marketing Research, 2014; 140111093227008 DOI: 10.1509/jmr.12.0133

Cite This Page:
·         MLA
·         APA
·         Chicago
USC Marshall School of Business. "Promoting love, relationships in marketing can punish sales." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 12 March 2014. .
    
·         
Patti Wood, MA, Certified Speaking Professional - The Body Language Expert. For more body language insights go to her website at www.PattiWood.net. Check out Patti's website for her new book "SNAP, Making the Most of First Impressions, Body Language and Charisma" at www.snapfirstimpressions.com. Also check out Patti's YouTube channel at http://youtube.com/user/bodylanguageexpert.
Posted by Patti Wood at

Is Twitter Use Linked to Infidelity and Divorce?

Is Twitter Use Linked to Infidelity and Divorce? 
Yes! Read the research below that shows that active Twitter users are more likely to have conflict with their partners no matter how new or old their relationship is. I am not sure if it shows that using Twitter CAUSES the conflict. A causal relationship is harder to determine. It may be a symptom. This relates to my belief that too much use of technology effects our ability to have healthy, happy relationships. (Check out other posts on technology and the brain)


http://www.bodylanguagelady.blogspot.com/search/label/brain 

 http://www.bodylanguagelady.blogspot.com/search/label/techno%20devices


April 7, 2014 Source University of Missouri-Columbia
Summary:
Scientists found that active Twitter users are far more likely to experience Twitter–related conflict with their romantic partners. However, new research shows that Twitter use could actually be damaging to users' romantic relationships. Scientists found that active Twitter users are far more likely to experience Twitter-related conflict with their romantic partners.
Twitter and other social networking services have revolutionized the way people create and maintain relationships. However, new research shows that Twitter use could actually be damaging to users' romantic relationships. Russell Clayton, a doctoral student in the University of Missouri School of Journalism, found that active Twitter users are far more likely to experience Twitter-related conflict with their romantic partners. Clayton's results showed that Twitter-related conflict then leads to negative relationship outcomes, including emotional and physical cheating, breakup and divorce.

In his study, Clayton surveyed 581 Twitter users of all ages. Clayton asked participants questions about their Twitter use such as how often they login in to Twitter, tweet, scroll the Twitter newsfeed, send direct messages to others, and reply to followers. Clayton also asked how much, if any, conflict arose between participants' current or former partners as a result of Twitter use. For example, Clayton asked: "How often do you have an argument with your current or former partner because of too much Twitter use?" Clayton found that the more often a respondent reported being active on Twitter, the more likely they were to experience Twitter-related conflict with their partner, which then significantly predicted negative relationship outcomes such as cheating, breakup and divorce.
"The aim of this study was to examine whether the findings of Claytons' recent study, which concluded that Facebook use predicted Facebook-related conflict, which then led to breakup and divorce were consistent with another social networking site platform: Twitter."
In his previous research on Facebook, Clayton found that Facebook-related conflict and negative relationship outcomes were greater among couples in newer relationships of 36 months or less. In his new research regarding Twitter, Clayton found these outcomes occurred regardless of duration of relationship.
"I found it interesting that active Twitter users experienced Twitter-related conflict and negative relationship outcomes regardless of length of romantic relationship," Clayton said. "Couples who reported being in relatively new relationships experienced the same amount of conflict as those in longer relationships."
If Twitter users are experiencing Twitter-related conflict with their partner, Clayton recommends couples of all ages limit their daily and weekly use of social networking sites to more healthy, reasonable levels.
"Although a number of variables can contribute to relationship infidelity and separation, social networking site usage, such as Twitter and Facebook use, can be damaging to relationships," Clayton said. "Therefore, users should cut back to moderate, healthy levels of Twitter use if they are experiencing Twitter or Facebook -- related conflict. Some couples share joint social networking site accounts to reduce relationship conflict, and there are some social networking site apps, such as the 2Life app, that facilitates interpersonal communication between partners."

Story Source:
The above story is based on materials provided by University of Missouri-Columbia. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference:
1.     Clayton et al. “The Third Wheel: The Impact of Twitter Use on Relationship Infidelity and Divorce. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 2014 DOI: 10.1089/yber.2013.0570

University of Missouri-Columbia. "Twitter use linked to infidelity and divorce." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 7 April 2014. 6.htm>.


Patti Wood, MA, Certified Speaking Professional - The Body Language Expert. For more body language insights go to her website at www.PattiWood.net. Check out Patti's website for her new book "SNAP, Making the Most of First Impressions, Body Language and Charisma" at www.snapfirstimpressions.com. Also check out Patti's YouTube channel at http://youtube.com/user/bodylanguageexpert.
Posted by Patti Wood at

Do Men Trade Their Status and Income for an Attractive Wife? Research says that 'Trophy Wife' Stereotype is Largely a Myth.

Do Men Trade Their Status and Income for an Attractive Wife?
Research says that 'Trophy wife' Stereotype is Largely a Myth.


Although this study was only done on young couples I wonder what the research would show about older rich men mate selection. Here is the research. I have highlighted the interesting sections.



Date:  June 17, 2014  
Source: University of Notre Dame
The trophy wife stereotype is largely a myth fueled by selective observation that reinforces sexist stereotypes and trivializes women's careers, researchers conclude. Research also indicates that, contrary to the trophy wife stereotype, social class barriers in the marriage market are relatively impermeable. Beautiful women are unlikely to leverage their looks to secure upward mobility by marriage.
Most people are familiar with the "trophy wife" stereotype that attractive women marry rich men, placing little importance on their other traits, including physical appearance, and that men look for pretty wives but don't care about their education or earnings.
New research, however, by University of Notre Dame Sociologist Elizabeth McClintock, shows the trophy wife stereotype is largely a myth fueled by selective observation that reinforces sexist stereotypes and trivializes women's careers.
In "Beauty and Status: The Illusion of Exchange in Partner Selection?" forthcoming in American Sociological Review, McClintock resolves the paradox between the trophy wife stereotype and the evidence that couples match on both physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status.
Using, for the first time, a nationally representative sample of young couples in which both partners were interviewed and rated for physical attractiveness, McClintock was able to control for matching on attractiveness. She says prior research in this area has ignored two important factors.
"I find that handsome men partner with pretty women and successful men partner with successful women," says McClintock, who specializes in inequality within romantic partnerships. "So, on average, high-status men do have better-looking wives, but this is because they themselves are considered better looking--perhaps because they are less likely to be overweight and more likely to afford braces, nice clothes and trips to the dermatologist, etc. Secondly, the strongest force by far in partner selection is similarity -- in education, race, religion and physical attractiveness."
McClintock's research shows that there is not, in fact, a general tendency for women to trade beauty for money. That is not to say trophy wife marriages never happen, just that they are very rare.
"Donald Trump and his third wife Melania Knauss-Trump may very well exemplify the trophy wife stereotype," McClintock says. "But, there are many examples of rich men who partner with successful women rather than 'buying' a supermodel wife.
The two men who founded Google (Larry Page and Sergey Brin) both married highly accomplished women -- one has a PhD and the other is a wealthy entrepreneur."
McClintock says the trophy wife stereotype is most often wrongly-applied among non- celebrities.
"I've heard doctors' wives referred to as trophy wives by observers who only notice her looks and his status and fail to realize that he is good-looking too and that she is also a successful professional--or was before she had kids and left her job," McClintock says.
McClintock's research also indicates that, contrary to the trophy wife stereotype, social class barriers in the marriage market are relatively impermeable. Beautiful women are unlikely to leverage their looks to secure upward mobility by marriage.

Story Source:
The above story is based on materials provided by University of Notre Dame. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference:
1.     E. A. McClintock. Beauty and Status: The Illusion of Exchange in Partner Selection? American Sociological Review, 2014; DOI: 10.1177/0003122414536391
University of Notre Dame. "'Trophy wife' stereotype is largely a myth, new study shows." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 17 June 2014. .



Patti Wood, MA, Certified Speaking Professional - The Body Language Expert. For more body language insights go to her website at www.PattiWood.net. Check out Patti's website for her new book "SNAP, Making the Most of First Impressions, Body Language and Charisma" at www.snapfirstimpressions.com. Also check out Patti's YouTube channel at http://youtube.com/user/bodylanguageexpert.
Posted by Patti Wood at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)