Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Evolutionary Psychology logoLink to Evolutionary Psychology
. 2019 Mar 19;17(1):1474704919834502. doi: 10.1177/1474704919834502

(Pretty) Lady First: Effects of Mate-Related Motives on the Item-Selection Orders of Faces With Varying Attractiveness

Yuchi Zhang 1,2, Xinyu Li 1,✉, Ping Li 2, Xiaoyu Jia 3, Weijian Li 1,✉
PMCID: PMC10480801  PMID: 30889967

Abstract

Evolutionary theories suggest that fundamental mating-related motives might exert specific effects on human cognition and behaviors. Based on the evolutionary perspective, our prior research illustrated that the activation of mating-related motives leads to a study-time allocation bias toward highly attractive female faces. While study-time allocation is one of the aspects of the self-regulated learning process, it is unclear whether mating motives affect study decision behaviors (as measured by item-selection orders) during the learning process. Therefore, the present study followed the logic of previous research and aimed to examine the effects of mating-related motives on item-selection orders for face–name associations among faces with varying attractiveness. In two experiments, after an imagery procedure, participants in mating-related priming conditions (Experiment 1: mate search, Experiment 2: mate guarding) or control conditions performed an item-selection task. Participants were shown 16 female faces with varying attractiveness on a computer screen and were instructed to decide the order for studying the faces and corresponding names. Experiment 1 showed that activating mate-search motives led male participants to prioritize the choice of highly attractive rather than less attractive faces for studying. In Experiment 2, compared to the participants in the control condition, female participants in the mate-guarding priming condition were more likely to prioritize the choice of highly attractive rather than less attractive faces for studying. The present findings clarify that mating-related motives affect the item-selection prioritization of faces with varying attractiveness.

Keywords: mating motives, evolutionary psychology, face attractiveness, self-regulated learning, item selection

Evolutionary theories suggest that mating is an important issue that every generation of human beings has to deal with (Buss, 1991; Dunbar, Dunbar, & Barrett, 2007; Kenrick, Neuberg, Griskevicius, Becker, & Schaller, 2010). An emerging body of theory and research suggests that natural selection has shaped our fundamental mating-related motives, with the latter inducing adaptive cognitive or behavioral processes (e.g., attention, memory, and decision-making) that could enhance reproductive fitness (Baker & Maner, 2009; Kenrick et al., 2010; Maner, Gailliot, Rouby, & Miller, 2007).

Most of the research on adaptive mating behaviors has focused on the effects of mating motives on basic processes such as attention (Baker, Nicole Sloan, Hall, Leo, & Maner, 2015; Maner et al., 2007; Zhang, Maner, Xu, & Zheng, 2017). However, limited research has explored the effects of mating motives on higher cognitive process (Sundie et al., 2011). In our prior research, we found that mating motives could also affect higher cognitive processes (i.e., self-regulated learning; W. Li et al., 2015). In that study, in Experiment 1, compared to the control group, the priming of mating-search motives resulted in male participants allocating more time to remembering highly attractive rather than less attractive female faces. According to the metacognition and evolutionary views, because a highly attractive face represents high genetic fitness for males (Aharon et al., 2001; Rhodes, 2006), allocating more time to remembering attractive potential mates may help males to improve their chances of remembering such faces successfully and accordingly develop precise mating strategies later (Dunlosky & Ariel, 2011). In Experiment 2 (W. Li et al., 2015), compared to the control group, the priming of mate-guarding motives resulted in female participants allocating more time to remembering highly attractive rather than less attractive female faces (W. Li et al., 2015). This may be because highly attractive same-sex individuals are more likely to threaten intrasexual rivals than rivals with less attractive faces are (Koranyi & Rothermund, 2012; Maner, Miller, Moss, Leo, & Ashby Plant, 2012). Thus, our prior research revealed that mating affects the self-regulated learning of faces. However, considering that self-regulated learning is a complex process containing different aspects like study decision and self-paced study-time allocation (Dunlosky & Ariel, 2011), it is essential to examine our prior research findings and expand the knowledge on the effect of mating on self-regulated learning using the same research logic.

Being a goal-oriented process (Efklides, 2011), successful self-regulated learning demands effective learning decision-making process. Individuals encounter numerous pieces of information every day, from the location of food, potential opposite-sex mates, to news about the stock market. According to the agenda-based regulation (ABR) model, an individual will develop an agenda (i.e., a simple plan) to regulate his or her self-regulated learning behaviors (Ariel, Dunlosky, & Bailey, 2009). As cognitive resources are limited, human beings prioritize, select, and process higher value information first. These study decision strategies could help individuals maximize the chance of accomplishing their learning goals and obtain the highest reward (Carney & Banaji, 2012; Dunlosky & Ariel, 2011; Leotti, Iyengar, & Ochsner, 2010; P. Li, Jia, Li, & Li, 2016).

The order of item selection and self-paced study time are indices to explore self-regulated learning (Ariel & Dunlosky, 2013; Dunlosky & Ariel, 2011). However, contrary to our prior research, which utilized self-paced study time as an index (W. Li et al., 2015), the present study adopted the order of item selection as an index for the following reasons. First, the order of item selection and self-paced study time may reflect different aspects of the cognitive processes in self-regulated learning (Dunlosky & Ariel, 2011). Generally, individuals first choose specific items and then make the decisions regarding study-time allocation for those items. Accordingly, the order of item selection could probe decision-making behavior more directly and reflect the metacognitive control behaviors involved (i.e., it would answer the question, “Which item should be prioritized for studying?”), whereas self-paced study time would detect the learning process after the study decision has been made (i.e., it would answer the question, “How should I study the items I chose before?”). It is unclear whether mating motives would induce the same effects on the order of item selection and self-paced study time. Second, previous research has failed to report consistent conclusions about the relationship between the order of item selection and self-paced study time. For example, in one study, participants selected more high-reward items for study as well as allocated longer time for studying high-reward items (Ariel et al., 2009). However, in Ariel and Dunlosky’s (2013) study, regardless of the participants’ order of item selection for different reward items, they allocated approximately equal amounts of time for studying different items. Thus, it would be valuable to further explore the scope of the effects of mating motives that were identified in our earlier study on the different aspects of the self-regulated learning process (W. Li et al., 2015). In line with convention in self-regulated learning research (Ariel et al., 2009; Jia et al., 2018; P. Li, Zhang, Li, & Li, 2018), the present study uses the term “item” to refer to the learning materials (i.e., the face–name associations), and “item selection” refers to the participants’ behaviors of selecting certain faces and their corresponding names.

ABR model and previous research have demonstrated that individuals will first choose those items for study that are likely to return the highest reward and maximize the chances of accomplishing their goals (Ariel et al., 2009). In Ariel and Dunlosky’s (2013) study, participants were presented three cues on the screen (each with a value of 1, 3, or 5) and subsequently had to choose the cues (e.g., 5-point cue = “black-?”) and learn the corresponding cue–target associations (e.g., black–white); their findings revealed that participants always prioritized the choice of items with higher point values for studying. According to evolutionary psychology theories and empirical evidence, when mating-search motives are aroused, highly attractive female faces hold high value for males (Dunbar et al., 2007; Kenrick et al., 2010; Rhodes, 2006; Schaller, Kenrick, Neel, & Neuberg, 2017). Because obtaining information about highly attractive female faces (e.g., recognizing her face and name) may enhance the chances of accomplishing the male’s mate-search goals, it is natural to predict that mate-search motives may affect males’ item selection for female faces based on attractiveness. On the other hand, highly attractive female faces represent highly threatening rivals for females (Maner et al., 2007; Maner et al., 2012; Massar & Buunk, 2010). Accordingly, in the present study, the mate-guarding motive may lead female participants to prioritize the choice of highly attractive female faces and names for studying because remembering highly attractive female faces may lead to a potentially high reward in the mate-guarding task.

In the present study, we followed the logic used in our prior study and adopted well-validated priming procedures with imaginary scenarios (W. Li et al., 2015) to activate mate-search (Experiment 1) and mate-guarding motives (Experiment 2). This was done to explore whether the priming of mating-related motives could affect the order of item-selection behaviors for female face–name associations. We used a self-regulated learning paradigm to present highly attractive and less attractive face–name associations (Ariel & Dunlosky, 2013; Watier & Collin, 2011). In each trial, the highly attractive and less attractive female faces were presented on the screen simultaneously, and participants were required to decide which faces they should select. Subsequently, they were required to study the names associated with the selected face. Based on the existing research discussed earlier, we hypothesized the following:

  • Hypothesis 1: Compared to participants in the happiness-control condition, those in the mate-search condition will prioritize the choice of highly attractive female faces for studying.

  • Hypothesis 2: Compared to participants in the anxiety-control condition, those in the mate-guarding condition will prioritize the choice of highly attractive female faces for studying.

  • Hypothesis 3: Participants in the two control conditions (in Experiment 1 and Experiment 2) will not exhibit significant preferences for the order of item selection for faces with varying attractiveness.

Experiment 1

In this experiment, we adopted the guided imagery procedure used in our previous study to manipulate the priming condition (mate search vs. happiness control; W. Li et al., 2015). After the priming procedure, male participants were instructed to study 16 face–name associations in a modified item-selection study task (Ariel & Dunlosky, 2013). In each trial, two female faces were presented on the screen simultaneously, positioned from left to right (they were photographs of a highly attractive and less attractive face, respectively). Participants were required to select the faces and study the corresponding face–name associations in any order (Figure 1) and later recall the corresponding names of each face. We hypothesized that participants in the mate-search condition would prioritize the choice of highly attractive female face–name associations.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Flow diagram of the self-paced face–name association study task (because of the copyright on the face database, the face image presented in this figure is a sketch map and not the actual experimental material).

Method

Participants

The participants were 56 male undergraduate students from Zhejiang Normal University (mean age = 21.32 years, SD = 2.13). All the participants were right-handed single males with normal vision. They were randomly assigned to either the mate-search (n = 28) or happiness-control condition (n = 28). Upon completion of the experiment, they received financial compensation (US$1). This study was approved by the Zhejiang Normal University Research Ethics Review Committee, and an informed consent form was signed by each participant prior to the experiments.

Materials

We used 16 color photographs of Chinese female faces with neutral expressions (8 highly attractive face and 8 less attractive face photographs). All face photographs were extracted from the Oriental Face Database (OFD; Gao & Tian, 2009). The OFD is a large Chinese face database that contains face photographs of 1,247 models. The face photographs in the present study were also used in our prior study (W. Li et al., 2015). All face photographs were frontal views and depicted a neutral expression. None of the faces contained distinctive features (e.g., glasses, scars). All of the faces appeared to be from the same age range (20–30 years). We standardized the size of each image (320 × 307 pixels) and removed the background of the photograph using Adobe Photoshop CS5 (Adobe Systems, 2010). These photographs were selected based on the results of a pilot study: 31 independent participants (16 males, 15 females, mean age = 20.2 years) were asked to rate the distinctiveness (1 = not distinctive, 7 = highly distinctive) and attractiveness (1 = unattractive, 7 = highly attractive) of each female face on a 7-point Likert-type scale. According to the photographs’ attractiveness, we divided them all into two sets (i.e., highly attractive and less attractive faces). The attractiveness level of highly attractive faces (M = 4.81, SD = 0.22) was significantly higher than that of less attractive faces (M = 1.96, SD = 0.09), t(14) = 47.80, p < .001. An independent-samples t test confirmed a nonsignificant difference in distinctiveness, t(14) = −0.45, p < .66.

Additionally, 16 female Chinese full names were used in Experiment 1. In a pilot study, 30 independent participants (26 females) were asked to rate the distinctiveness of each of 42 female names on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = unattractive, 7 = highly attractive). The 42 names were selected from the Internet. We selected the 16 names with lower distinctiveness from among the 42 names (M = 2.27, SD = 0.29) and randomly associated them with the 16 faces used in Experiment 1. All names contained two characters (e.g., “张慧,” Zhang Hui). An independent-samples t test confirmed that the difference in the distinctiveness of the names associated with the highly attractive and less attractive faces was not significant, t(14) = −0.51, p = .62. None of the selected names belonged to any celebrity.

The present study pseudorandomly assigned the 16 face–name associations across eight trials. We also randomly selected two medium attractive faces and two names to create materials for a practice trial. The material used in the practice trial was excluded from the actual experiment.

Design and Procedure

A single-factor between-subject (condition: mate search vs. happiness control) design was adopted.

The experiment comprised three stages that were adapted from previous frameworks (Ariel & Dunlosky, 2013; W. Li et al., 2015; Sundie et al., 2011). All participants were tested individually in a quiet experiment room. Participants were randomly assigned to either the mate-search or happiness-control condition. Prior to beginning the experiment, participants were seated at a computer and asked to sign a consent form. The same male experimenter informed all participants that the study has two distinct contents, in that it investigates imagination and memory. Following our prior study’s procedure (W. Li et al., 2015), for the mate-search condition, the experimenter followed a standard guided imagery procedure, which requested participants to imagine that their university’s student society would host a dating party in a few days, and participants were invited to this party with some single female students. To enhance the vividness of the imagined scenario, participants were encouraged to imagine the details of the dating party (e.g., people’s dresses, the weather on that day). Participants in the mate-search condition were told that they would see face photographs of all the single female students and their names later. Participants in the happiness-control condition were instructed to imagine that they were planning a family trip for their next vacation. They were told that they would see the face photographs and names of female strangers later and were encouraged to imagine the details of the vacation (e.g., people’s dresses, the weather during their vacation). All participants were asked to visualize each event based on a script. After completing the guided imagery procedure, participants were asked to report the valence and arousal level of their emotions, romantic feelings, mating motivation, and sexual arousal on a 7-point Likert-type manipulation check scale (1 = not at all, 7 = very much; Griskevicius, Goldstein, Mortensen, Cialdini, & Kenrick, 2006; W. Li et al., 2015).

In the second phase of the experiment, all participants performed the self-paced face–name association study task. This task comprised eight trials. In each trial, two female face photographs (cue) were presented horizontally on the screen (highly attractive and less attractive face). The order of the presentation of each face was randomized using a computer. Participants were required to study the face–name association by clicking the “F” or “J” button below the specific face. When participants selected a particular female face photograph, the corresponding name (target) of the person would appear on the screen. After the first-choice face–name association was studied, the other face associations were presented automatically. Participants were required to decide which items (face photographs) to select for studying first. Participants in both conditions were informed that the two face–name associations included in each trial were of equal difficulty, and their task was to try and remember all the face–name associations without any time constraint. Before the formal experiment, participants performed a trial task to familiarize them with the procedure. When participants completed the self-paced face–name association study task, they were required to solve simple arithmetic problems for 1 min (distraction task).

In the third phase of the experiment, a name recall test was administered. The eight female face photographs that the participants had studied before were presented on the screen, one at a time, in a randomized order. For each face, the participants were required to recall and enter the associated name on the computer within 1 min. Misspellings were coded as errors by the computer program. We asked every participant two questions about the experiment after completing it (i.e., “Could you really imagine the scenario we provided? Could you guess the possible purpose of this study?”). All participants reported that they were able to imagine the scenario we provided (W. Li et al., 2015). None of them guessed the real purpose of the study or the connection between the visualized imagination task and the self-paced face–name association study task. Finally, the participants were debriefed and dismissed. The Delphi 7 software (Borland, 2002) was used to present materials and collect data.

Results

Manipulation Check

To evaluate the effectiveness of the manipulation, we compared the arousal and valence of emotion, romantic feelings, mating motivation, and sexual arousal between the two groups using independent-samples t tests (Griskevicius et al., 2006). As expected, the participants in the mate-search condition reported greater sexual arousal (M = 3.93, SD = 1.15) than those in the happiness-control condition did (M = 1.21, SD = 0.50), t(27) = 4.39, p < .001, more romantic feelings (M = 3.21, SD = 1.17) than those in the happiness-control condition did (M = 1.93, SD = 0.90), t(27) = 2.36, p < .05, and greater motivation to seek a mate (M = 4.79, SD = 0.96) than those in the happiness-control condition did (M = 2.36, SD = 0.99), t(27) = 4.17, p < .005. No significant differences were found between the two conditions in terms of valence and arousal of emotion (ps > .05). These results indicate that the experimental manipulation was effective.

Item Selection for First Study

The mean proportions of the items chosen first for studying were computed for highly attractive faces to examine whether the activation of the mate-search motive affected item selection for highly attractive faces. An independent-samples t test indicated that (Figure 2) the participants in mate-search condition (M = 0.69, SD = 0.25) significantly prioritized the choice of highly attractive face–name associations than among happiness-control condition (M = 0.56, SD = 0.21), t(54) = 2.09, p < .05, d = 0.56. To clarify whether the activation of the mate-search motive only affects the prioritizing for highly attractive faces for mate-search condition, a paired-samples t test showed that for mate-search condition, the participants significantly prioritized the choice of highly attractive face–name associations (M = 0.69, SD = 0.25) than less attractive face–name associations (M = 0.31, SD = 0.25), t(27) = 3.95, p < .05, d = 1.25. In contrast, the happiness-control condition yielded no significant differences in the item-selection order between highly attractive (M = 0.56, SE = 0.21) and less attractive faces (M = 0.44, SE = 0.21), t(27) = 1.46, p = .16.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Proportions of the items chosen first for studying among highly attractive and less attractive faces for the mate-search and happiness-control conditions in Experiment 1.

Memory Performance

Although it was not relevant to our primary aim, we also examined the participants’ memory performance on the face–name association task, which is the ratio between the number of correct recalls for highly attractive or less attractive face–name associations and the sum of all face–name associations (i.e., the eight trials). A 2 (attractiveness: highly attractive vs. less attractive) × 2 (condition: mate search vs. happiness control) repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a marginal significant effect of attractiveness, F(1, 54) = 3.41, p = .07, η2 = 0.06. In particular, the mean correct-response percentage for highly attractive faces (M = 0.13, SD = 0.19) exceeded that for less attractive faces (M = 0.09, SD = 0.12). There was neither a significant main effect of condition (p = .15) nor a significant interaction effect between attractiveness and condition (p = .63).

Discussion

In accordance with our hypothesis, the participants whose mate-search motives were activated prioritized highly attractive faces for studying as compared to less attractive faces, while the participants in the control condition did not exhibit any such preference. Moreover, only the participants in the mate-search condition exhibited significantly higher proportions of prioritization of the choice of highly attractive faces compared to the chance level. These findings rule out the possibility that positive emotion or reading habits were responsible for the choice bias and suggest that mate-search motives might affect individuals’ self-regulated learning processes.

The finding about the effect of mating motives on adaptive behaviors is in line with the evolutionary perspective and previous research (W. Li et al., 2015; Maner et al., 2007; Schaller et al., 2017). Male participants in an imaginary singles party will have a greater chance of completing their mate search when they prioritize remembering the faces and names of highly attractive females rather than those of less attractive females. These results were consistent with the findings of our previous study (W. Li et al., 2015), which found that participants whose mate-search motives were activated tended to allocate more time (another index to measure the self-regulated learning process) for studying highly attractive rather than less attractive faces.

Experiment 2

Experiment 2 also investigated the order of item selection; however, in this experiment, we sought to replicate the findings of Experiment 1 by activating female participants’ mate-guarding motives. Previous research shows that females tend to view same-sex individuals with a highly attractive face as intrasexual rivals compared to those with a less attractive face (Maner et al., 2012; Massar & Buunk, 2010). Previous studies reported that, when mate-guarding motives were activated, females tended to exhibit adaptive behaviors toward highly attractive same-sex rivals, as evidenced by their higher attention bias (Maner et al., 2007) and longer study-time allocation (W. Li et al., 2015) to highly attractive faces. Experiment 2 adopted the same imagined procedure as that used in our prior study to activate mate-guarding motives (W. Li et al., 2015), and the same paradigm that was employed in Experiment 1 to measure the order of face–name association selection.

Method

Participants

The participants were 33 female undergraduate students from Zhejiang Normal University (mean age = 20.81 years, SD = 0.83). All participants were right-handed single females with normal vision. They were randomly assigned to either the mate-guarding (n = 17) or anxiety-control condition (n = 16). Upon completion of the experiment, they received financial compensation (US$1). All participants claimed that they were in a romantic relationship or had dated someone in the past (Maner et al., 2012).

Materials

The female face–name associations used in this experiment were the same as those used in Experiment 1.

Design and Procedure

A single-factor between-subject (condition: mate guarding vs. anxiety control) was adopted.

Experiment 2 comprised three stages, which were the same as those used in Experiment 1, except for the guided imagery procedure. Participants were randomly assigned to either the mate-guarding or anxiety-control condition. Participants in the mate-guarding condition were required to visualize a friend telling them that her boyfriend was flirting with other females in a bar; if they were single, they were asked to imagine the same scenario with someone they had been dating in the past or currently had romantic feelings for. Participants were told that, in the next phase, they would see 16 face images and names that belonged to those 16 females, who were in the same bar with the participants’ or their friend’s boyfriend, and one of them was flirting with him. Participants in the anxiety-control condition performed a similar task, but the imagined boyfriend situation was replaced by an anxiety-provoking condition, in which they failed on an important examination, and they would pass in some of the stranger passerby when they cross the campus (W. Li et al., 2015). Similar to Experiment 1, to enhance the vividness of the imagined scenario, the experimenter encouraged every participant to visualize the details of the corresponding scenario (e.g., people’s dresses, the weather in the imagined scenario). The participants in the control condition were told that, in the next phase, they would see 16 face images and names that belonged to these 16 female strangers (W. Li et al., 2015).

After the guided imagery procedure, all participants were asked to report the level of their jealousy, valence, and arousal of emotion on a 7-point Likert-type manipulation check scale (1 = not at all, 7 = very much; W. Li et al., 2015). The remaining procedures (self-paced face–name association study task and name recall test) were the same as those used in Experiment 1.

Results

Manipulation Check

To evaluate the effectiveness of the manipulation, we compared the jealousy, valence, and arousal of emotion between the two groups using an independent-samples t test (Griskevicius et al., 2006; W. Li et al., 2015). As expected, participants in the mate-guarding condition reported a greater jealousy level (M = 4.53, SD = 1.66) than those in the anxiety-control condition did (M = 1.63, SD = 1.02), t(31) = 5.99, p < .001. No significant differences were found for valence and arousal of emotion between the conditions (ps > .05). None of the participants guessed the real purpose of the study or the connection between the visualized imagination task and self-paced face–name association study task. These results indicate that the experimental manipulation was effective (Maner et al., 2012).

Item Selection for First Study

Consistent with the analysis method employed in Experiment 1, the mean proportions of the items chosen first for studying were computed for highly attractive to examine whether the activation of the mate-guarding motive affected item selection for first study for highly attractive faces. An independent-samples t test indicated that (Figure 3) the participants in mate-guarding condition (M = 0.72, SD = 0.21) significantly prioritized the choice of highly attractive face–name associations than among anxiety-control condition (M = 0.53, SD = 0.16), t(31) = 2.88, p < .01, d = 1.00. To clarify whether the activation of the mate-guarding motive only affects the prioritizing for highly attractive faces for mate-guarding condition, a paired-samples t test showed that for mate-guarding condition, the participants significantly prioritized the choice of highly attractive face–name associations (M = 0.72, SD = 0.21) than less attractive face–name associations (M = 0.28, SD = 0.21), t(16) = 4.24, p < .01, d = 0.10. In contrast, the anxiety-control condition yielded no significant differences in the item-selection order between highly attractive (M = 0.53, SE = 0.16) and less attractive faces (M = 0.47, SE = 0.16), t(15) = 0.78, p = .45.

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Proportions of items chosen first for studying among highly attractive and less attractive faces for the mate-guarding and anxiety-control conditions in Experiment 2.

Memory Performance

Participants’ memory performance on the face–name association task was computed as the ratio between the number of correct recalls of highly or less attractive face–name associations with the sum of all face–name associations (i.e., the eight trials). A 2 (attractiveness: highly attractive vs. less attractive) × 2 (condition: mate guarding vs. anxiety control) repeated-measures ANOVA revealed a marginal significant effect of attractiveness, F(1, 31) = 3.87, p = .06. In particular, the mean correct-response percentage for highly attractive faces (M = 0.23, SD = 0.17) exceeded that for less attractive faces (M = 0.17, SD = 0.15). There was neither a significant main effect of condition nor a significant interaction effect between attractiveness and condition (ps < .05).

Discussion

In accordance with our hypothesis, the participants whose mate-guarding motives were activated were found to prioritize highly attractive faces for studying rather than less attractive faces, while the participants in the anxiety-control condition did not exhibit any such preferences. Moreover, only the participants in the mate-guarding condition revealed significantly higher proportions of prioritizing the choice of highly attractive faces that were higher than the chance level. These findings rule out the possibility that positive emotion or reading habits were responsible for the choice bias and suggest that mate-guarding motives might affect individuals’ self-regulated learning processes. The finding about the effect of mate-guarding motives on females’ adaptive behaviors is in line with the evolutionary perspective and previous research, in that same-sex rivals with highly attractive faces are viewed as greater threats to females’ mate (Maner et al., 2007; Massar & Buunk, 2010). Thus, the prioritization of the choice of highly attractive face–name associations for studying would enhance the participants’ chances to obtain information about potential rivals. Our prior research found that mate-guarding motives lead females to spend longer time on studying highly attractive same-sex faces (W. Li et al., 2015).

General Discussion

The present study revealed that mating-related motives (Experiment 1: mate-search motives; Experiment 2: mate-guarding motives) lead participants to prioritize the choice of highly attractive female faces rather than less attractive ones for studying, which supported our hypotheses. To our knowledge, this is the first empirical study to explore the relationship between mating-related motives and the decision process in self-regulated learning by examining the order of item selection for studying.

Based on the evolutionary psychology perspective, mating-related situations tend to trigger an individual’s fundamental motives and content-specific adaptive behaviors, which could enhance the chance of accomplishing the individual’s mating-related goals successfully (Kenrick et al., 2010; Schaller et al., 2017). Because a highly attractive female face is an index of an ideal mate for males, when male participants’ mate-search motives were triggered, they tended to prioritize the choice of highly attractive female faces and names, which could enhance their chances of remembering potential mates’ names and would help them develop further mate-search strategies (Experiment 1). This result is consistent with the findings of our previous research, which revealed that, when males’ mate-research motives were aroused, they tended to allocate more time to studying highly attractive females’ faces (W. Li et al., 2015). Similarly, as females perceive other females with highly attractive faces as threats or mate rivals, Experiment 2 found that mate-guarding motives induced the prioritization of the choice of highly attractive female faces and names for studying among female participants, which could enhance their chances of remembering potential rivals’ names and would help them adopt mate-guarding behaviors directed toward most potential rivals (e.g., keeping their mates away from rivals or keeping an eye on their rivals’ Facebook updates). Compared to our previous study, the present study adopted a more direct self-regulated learning index and highlighted that mating motives affect the individual’s study decision behaviors during the self-regulated learning process. In summary, this finding not only supports our prior research (W. Li et al., 2015) and complements existing empirical studies showing the effects of mating motives on adaptive cognitive behaviors toward highly attractive faces (Maner et al., 2007; Zhang et al., 2017) but also affirms that fundamental mating motives induce adaptive self-regulated learning processes (Schaller et al., 2017).

The present study also contributes to the literature by supporting ABR model (Ariel et al., 2009). Owing to limited cognitive resources, the individual will subsequently compare potential study items (faces with varying attractiveness in the present study) based on the criteria set in this agenda and would accordingly prioritize the selection of those items for studying that meet these criteria and will lead to the highest reward (Ariel & Dunlosky, 2013; Ariel et al., 2009). In the present study, as learning the face–name associations of highly attractive females was of higher value for the participants in the mating-related situations as compared to those in the control conditions, the participants in the former condition may have developed an agenda to prioritize highly attractive female face–name associations for studying. These findings support the ABR model by indicating that the learning goals and agenda in mating conditions will affect the order of item selection more as compared to those in the control conditions. Moreover, as most of the research materials used in studies on self-regulated learning are noun–noun pairs, our findings expand the understanding of the self-regulated learning process by adopting social information (i.e., faces and names) to explore human study decision processes (Bjork, Dunlosky, & Kornell, 2013; Watier & Collin, 2011).

An alternative explanation of these effects could be attributed to the involvement of a bottom-up process (i.e., attention bias toward highly attractive face photographs). The ABR model posits that attention processes help individuals to maintain their agenda (learning plan) and spend limited resources for selecting the most relevant information (Ariel et al., 2009). Moreover, the metacognitive and affective model of self-regulated learning suggests that either top-down or bottom-up processes would affect the self-regulated learning process (Efklides, 2011). Priming an individual’s mating-related motives may increase attention toward adaptive relevant targets (Zhang et al., 2017), and these processes will affect control processes such as the first-choice order of face photographs. Future research should clarify the difference in effects between attention and the self-regulated learning process.

One of the interesting findings in the present study is that the prioritization of highly attractive face–name associations did not lead to better recall. There are three potential explanations for these results. First, names corresponding to faces are difficult to recall because face-associated names have limited semantic associations. Thus, memory performance for face–name associations in different conditions was low (Festini, Hartley, Tauber, & Rhodes, 2013; Tauber & Rhodes, 2010). Second, although individuals in the mate conditions prioritized the face–name associations of highly attractive females for studying, they probably did not allocate sufficient time to remember the face–name associations, which may have decreased their recall performance. A previous study supports this explanation based on the finding that, although participants prefer to choose higher reward items to study first, they later allocate approximately equal amounts of time for studying different items (Ariel & Dunlosky, 2013). Third, our finding could also be explained by the “labor-in-vain effect,” which implies that the prioritization of specific items or the allocation of longer time for studying has little or no significant improvement on memory performance (Nelson & Leonesio, 1988). One of the possible reasons for the labor-in-vain effect could be that the participants may not have been monitored appropriately while studying the face–name associations (Tullis & Benjamin, 2011). Considering that the sample size our study is small, and our results revealed marginal significant effect of face attractiveness (Experiment 1: p = .07; Experiment 2: p = .06), these marginal significant effects of face attractiveness may imply the trend that the face attractiveness may have better recall effects on performance. Future research might enlarge the sample sizes to further confirm the possibility of this effect. As the present study focused on learning strategies, memory performance was not relevant with reference to our central hypotheses (Ariel & Dunlosky, 2013). Future studies could reduce the difficulty level of the face–name associations and clarify the explanations mentioned above by exploring the associations between metacognitive monitoring accuracy, item selection, and recall performance.

Limitations and Future Directions

Despite the contributions of our study, some limitations must be mentioned. First, the present study adopted only female faces; thus, we could not compare gender differences across the different conditions. However, according to sexual selection theories, males (not females) tend to consider highly attractive opposite-sex faces as a value index of mating (Buss, 1991; Sprecher, Sullivan, & Hatfield, 1994). In the future, researchers could explore gender differences by using both male and female face–name associations as materials and both male and female participants in experiments. Compared to female participants, the future research may find that mate-guarding motives could not significantly trigger male participants prioritized to same-sex highly attractive faces, for that the face attractiveness is not the signal of threaten rival for males (Buss, 1989; Buunk, Solano, Zurriaga & González, 2011). Second, the metacognitive and affective model of self-regulated learning suggests that self-regulated learning could not only occur through top-down to bottom-up processes but also be affected by unconscious factors (Efklides, 2011). As the participants in our study did not realize the priming of mating motives, it seems that they were not completely conscious about the true reason for their learning strategies (Reder & Schunn, 1996). However, the paradigm we adopted in present study could not fully clarify the unconscious effects of mating motives on self-regulated learning process. Future studies could adopt the fully unconscious subliminal method to examine this speculation. For example, the future research could trigger the mating motives via the subliminal sexual cues paradigm (Gillath & Collins, 2016). According to the metacognitive and affective model of self-regulated learning, further full unconscious priming may replicate our mating effects (Efklides, 2011).

In conclusion, our study sheds light on the self-regulated learning process and mating motives by demonstrating that mating-related (mate search and mate guarding) motives affect participants’ order of selection of face–name associations of items with varying facial attractiveness for studying. These findings bridge the evolutionary and self-regulated learning frameworks by extending the findings of previous research and highlighting the value of exploring human beings’ domain-specific cognition.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note: Yuchi Zhang and Xinyu Li contributed equally to this work.

The author(s) declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 31170999). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  1. Adobe Systems, Inc. (2010). Adobe Photoshop CS5 Extended (Version 12.0.1) [Computer software]. San Jose: Adobe Systems, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  2. Aharon I., Etcoff N., Ariely D., Chabris C. F., O’Connor E., Breiter H. C. (2001). Beautiful faces have variable reward value: fMRI and behavioral evidence. Neuron, 32, 537–551. doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(01)00491-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Ariel R., Dunlosky J. (2013). When do learners shift from habitual to agenda-based processes when selecting items for study? Memory and Cognition, 41, 416–428. doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0267-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Ariel R., Dunlosky J., Bailey H. (2009). Agenda-based regulation of study-time allocation: When agendas override item-based monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 432–447. doi:10.1037/a0015928 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Baker M. D., Maner J. K. (2009). Male risk-taking as a context-sensitive signaling device. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1136–1139. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.06.006 [Google Scholar]
  6. Baker M. D., Jr, Nicole Sloan H., Hall A. D., Leo J., Maner J. K. (2015). Mating and memory: Can mating cues enhance cognitive performance? Evolutionary Psychology, 13. doi:10.1177/1474704915623280 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bjork R. A., Dunlosky J., Kornell N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444. doi:10.1037/e676252012-083 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Borland Inc. (2002). Delphi software (Version 7). https://delphi.fandom.com/wiki/Delphi_7. [Google Scholar]
  9. Buss D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_88-1 [Google Scholar]
  10. Buss D. M. (1991). Evolutionary personality psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 459–491. doi:10.1016/b978-012134645-4/50014-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Buunk A. P., Castro Solano A., Zurriaga R., González P. (2011). Gender differences in the jealousy-evoking effect of rival characteristics: A study in Spain and Argentina. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42, 323–339. doi:10.1177/0022022111403664 [Google Scholar]
  12. Carney D. R., Banaji M. R. (2012). First is best. PLoS One, 7, e35088. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035088 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Dunbar R. I. M., Dunbar R., Barrett L. (Eds.). (2007). Oxford handbook of evolutionary psychology. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198568308.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Dunlosky J., Ariel R. (2011). Self-regulated learning and the allocation of study time. In Ross B. (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 54, pp. 103–140). doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-385527-5.00004-8 [Google Scholar]
  15. Efklides A. (2011). Interactions of metacognition with motivation and affect in self-regulated learning: The MASRL model. Educational Psychologist, 46, 6–25. doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.538645 [Google Scholar]
  16. Festini S. B., Hartley A. A., Tauber S. K., Rhodes M. G. (2013). Assigned value improves memory of proper names. Memory, 21, 657–667. doi:10.1080/09658211.2012.747613 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Gao X., Tian C. (2009). Multi-view face recognition based on tensor subspace analysis and view manifold modeling. Neurocomputing, 72, 3742–3750. doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2009.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gillath O., Collins T. (2016). Unconscious desire: The affective and motivational aspects of subliminal sexual priming. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 5–20. doi:10.1007/s10508-015-0609-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Griskevicius V., Goldstein N. J., Mortensen C. R., Cialdini R. B., Kenrick D. T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 281–294. doi:10.1037/e633962013-016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Jia X., Li W., Cao L., Li P., Shi M., Wang J.…Li X. (2018). Effect of individual thinking styles on item selection during study time allocation. International Journal of Psychology, 53, 83–91. doi:10.1002/ijop.12267 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kenrick D. T., Neuberg S. L., Griskevicius V., Becker D., Schaller M. (2010). Goal-driven cognition and functional behavior: The fundamental-motives framework. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 63–67. doi:10.1177/0963721409359281 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Koranyi N., Rothermund K. (2012). When the grass on the other side of the fence doesn’t matter: Reciprocal romantic interest neutralizes attentional bias towards attractive alternatives. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 186–191. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.06.012 [Google Scholar]
  23. Leotti L. A., Iyengar S. S., Ochsner K. N. (2010). Born to choose: The origins and value of the need for control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 457–463. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.08.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Li P., Jia X., Li X., Li W. (2016). The effect of animacy on metamemory. Memory & Cognition, 44, 1–10. doi:10.3758/s13421-016-0598-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Li P., Zhang Y., Li W., Li X. (2018). Age-related differences in effectiveness of item restudy choices: The role of value. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 25, 122–131. doi:10.1080/13825585.2016.1267326 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Li W., Zhang Y., Li F., Li X., Li P., Jia X.…Ji H. (2015). Out of lust or jealousy: The effects of mating-related motives on study-time allocation to faces varying in attractiveness. PLoS One, 10, e0132207. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0132207 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Maner J. K., Gailliot M. T., Rouby D. A., Miller S. L. (2007). Can’t take my eyes off you: Attentional adhesion to mates and rivals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 389–401. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.3.389 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Maner J. K., Miller S. L., Moss J. H., Leo J. L., Ashby Plant E. (2012). Motivated social categorization: Fundamental motives enhance people’s sensitivity to basic social categories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 70–83. doi:10.1037/a0028172 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Massar K., Buunk A. P. (2010). Judging a book by its cover: Jealousy after subliminal priming with attractive and unattractive faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 634–638. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.037 [Google Scholar]
  30. Nelson T. O., Leonesio R. J. (1988). Allocation of self-paced study time and the “Labor-in-Vain Effect.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 676–686. doi:10.1037//0278-7393.14.4.676 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Reder L. M., Schunn C. D. (1996). Metacognition does not imply awareness: Strategy choice is governed by implicit learning and memory. In Reder L. M. (Ed.), Implicit memory and metacognition. Carnegie Mellon Symposia on Cognition Series (pp. 45–78). Hove, England: Psychology Press. doi:10.1037/a0034030 [Google Scholar]
  32. Rhodes G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 199–226. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Schaller M., Kenrick D. T., Neel R., Neuberg S. L. (2017). Evolution and human motivation: A fundamental motives framework. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11. doi:10.1111/spc3.12319 [Google Scholar]
  34. Sprecher S., Sullivan Q., Hatfield E. (1994). Mate selection preferences: Gender differences examined in a national sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1074–1080. doi:10.1037/e664442012-001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Sundie J. M., Kenrick D. T., Griskevicius V., Tybur J. M., Vohs K. D., Beal D. J. (2011). Peacocks, porsches, and thorstein veblen: Conspicuous consumption as a sexual signaling system. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 664–680. doi:10.1037/e621442012-131 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Tauber S. K., Rhodes M. G. (2010). Metacognitive errors contribute to the difficulty in remembering proper names. Memory, 18, 522–532. doi:10.1080/09658211.2010.481818 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Tullis J. G., Benjamin A. S. (2011). On the effectiveness of self-paced learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 109–118. doi:10.1037/e520562012-604 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Watier N. N., Collin C. A. (2011). Metamemory for faces, names, and common nouns. Acta Psychologica, 138, 143–154. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.05.017 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhang Q., Maner J. K., Xu Y., Zheng Y. (2017). Relational motives reduce attentional adhesion to attractive alternatives in heterosexual university students in China. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46, 1–9. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0759-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Evolutionary Psychology are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES