(gonna post this whole article here, in case it dissapears off the web in future. )
How To Choose A Romantic Partner
What psychology tells us about the pillars of a joyful life
Below is a piece on mating psychology I wrote for Onn Health. It is aimed primarily at (heterosexual) men, yet the insights offered here are broadly applicable to everyone.
The two most powerful predictors of happiness and life satisfaction are working in the right profession and finding the right spouse.
You can commit a lot of blunders in your life, but if you manage to get two things right, you will maximize your chance of long-term wellbeing.
Our choice of job and our choice of spouse are central to our happiness because they are where we spend most of our lives—at work and with our families. Therefore, we should devote a good deal of time concentrating on how to make the best possible decision for these two sources of potential happiness. Indeed, making the wrong choice can lead to potential misery.
Interestingly, much of modern advice prioritizes education and career, often relegating relationships to a secondary concern or valuing them primarily for their potential to enhance career ambitions.
Relationships, though, are critical for our health and wellbeing. Studies have found that the effect of poor relationship quality on mortality is as strong as the effects of better-known risk factors, such as smoking and alcohol use, and even stronger than other important factors, such as sedentariness and obesity.
For those who are focused on their careers, choosing the right partner can fuel occupational success. For instance, people with conscientious romantic partners tend to report higher job satisfaction and income, and are more likely to be promoted. This pattern held even after controlling for the study participants’ own conscientiousness. A disciplined and hard-working romantic partner can help us succeed in our own careers.
Indeed, there are examples of well-known men and the women who have helped them in their journeys:
Mr Beast:
“I have someone who I think is very beautiful, very intelligent, makes me better, is constantly pushing me, is okay with me working hard, makes me smarter. And just all these different things. For me, love just makes me a better person.”
Connor McGregor:
“My girlfriend worked very hard throughout the years and stuck by me when I had essentially absolutely nothing. I only had a dream that I was telling her.”
Chris Bumstead:
“She just built this confidence in me… It was a really important moment for my personal growth, champion growth, relationship growth.”
Warren Buffett:
“Susie really put me together. She believed in me. She got me to believe in myself, and that changed my life.”
“And I would not only have not turned out to be the person I turned out to be, but I actually wouldn’t have been as successful in business without that. She made me more of a whole person.”
These examples show only one side of the story. In healthy relationships, both partners are expected to receive net benefits and grow.
Research in evolutionary and social psychology has illuminated key findings that help us to understand how people choose mates, as well as the factors that predict relationship success.
George Vaillant, former director of the multigenerational Harvard Study of Adult Development, has noted that “warm, intimate relationships are the most important prologue to a good life.”
Warm relationships supply benefits to both happiness and health.
How do people go about choosing mates? In popular culture, we often hear two different adages when it comes to relationship formation: Opposites attract, and birds of a feather flock together.
The former might make for a good romantic comedy. But in the real world, people tend to mate assortatively. We generally favor romantic partners who are similar to ourselves.
This is especially true for education and intelligence. In the U.S., for example, if your highest level of education is a high school diploma, your probability of marrying a college graduate is only nine percent. In contrast, if you hold a college degree, your probability of marrying a fellow college graduate is sixty-five percent. Interestingly, though, couples’ similarity in intelligence does not seem to predict relationship satisfaction.
Beyond education, we also tend to choose romantic partners who are similar to ourselves in terms of age, political orientation, religious affiliation, and socioeconomic status.
Does similarity predict stronger relationship satisfaction? The answer seems to be no. A meta-analysis concluded that “similarity had very little effect on satisfaction.” This doesn’t mean, of course, that similarity is meaningless for romantic satisfaction. More likely, similarity is necessary but not sufficient for romantic satisfaction. That is, while similarity does not guarantee relationship satisfaction, strong dissimilarities might be “deal-breakers” that would contribute to discontent. Your romantic partner holding the same political beliefs as you doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll be 100% satisfied with each other; but if they take the opposite stance on every view you hold, there’s a strong chance that relationship wouldn’t last very long.
So what does predict relationship satisfaction?
One factor seems to be authenticity. A team of psychologists found that the link between authenticity in relationships and relationship satisfaction is very strong. For instance, people who strongly agreed with statements such as “I share my deepest thoughts with my partner even if there’s a chance he/she won’t understand them” reported being particularly happy in their relationships. Interestingly, the study found that authentic people tended to mate with other authentic people, whereas deceptive individuals tend to attract deceptive partners. This seems to be another example of assortative mating, whereby people find themselves in relationships with partners similar to themselves.
What else besides authenticity predicts relationship satisfaction? A 2016 paper in Evolution and Human Behavior, authored by Daniel Conroy-Beam, Cari D. Goetz, and David Buss explored what makes people happy in their relationships. They discovered that people were less satisfied in relationships when their partners were less desirable compared to other potential choices. However, this was specifically the case for individuals who were more attractive than their partners. That is, people were satisfied with mates who were either more attractive than themselves, or more attractive than alternative choices. In short, when people were with partners who were attractive and hard to replace, then they were more likely to be satisfied. It seems that people aren’t asking themselves, “Does my partner fulfill my relationship needs?” Rather, they ask “Is my partner better than the realistic alternatives?” We aren’t gauging on some objective rubric. Rather, we grade our partners on a curve, comparing them to others we could reasonably hope to pair with.
This gets to the question of how we should approach searching for a compatible mate. An important idea from decision theory that can assist with this is known as the 37% rule, or “the secretary problem.” Suppose you’re looking for the best candidate for a secretary position (or any other job). The rule says that you should estimate how many total applicants are likely to seek the position, interview the first 37 percent of them, and remember the best out of that initial sample. Then, continue interviewing until you find a candidate who is even better than that. Once you find that better candidate, hire him or her. That is how you select the optimal candidate.
The problem with this rule is that it takes a lot of time and energy, especially if you are faced with a large number of possible candidates. You can’t realistically date 37% of all women you might possibly be interested in, and then keep going until you find someone more compatible than the best in that batch. However, researchers have found that a similar rule called “Try a Dozen” can work just as well as the 37% rule. According to this simpler approach, you would date a dozen possible romantic partners, remember the best of them, and then pick the very next prospect who is even more appealing to you. Of course, this is just a theoretical model that sheds light on the challenges of trying to optimize a difficult decision. It has many shortcomings and is not necessarily applicable to all individuals in all circumstances.
Many men try to get the hottest possible partner they can find. But this can present its own problems. As David Buss has said, “Mates, once gained, must be retained.” An average guy might manage to get a few dates with a supermodel. But the supermodel’s array of potential alternative options can introduce potential instability into the relationship. This can lead to jealousy, increased mate guarding, warding off potential romantic rivals, increased stress, heated arguments, and so on.
Of course, the reverse is not ideal. Entering a relationship with someone who is noticeably less attractive than you can give rise to dissatisfaction, conflict, and a wandering eye as you consider possible alternatives. The ideal situation, as Buss says, is “when both people feel lucky to be with the other person.” Of course, if your current pool of mates you could reasonably hope to attain is less attractive than you’d like, there is a simple option: Become more attractive yourself. For appearance, keep up on personal grooming and hygiene; improve your health and fitness; buy clothes that are stylish and fit well; get a good haircut. As a man, you can also level up your attractiveness by earning a promotion at work, switching to a higher paying position, or seeking a cool side job (bartenders, musicians, and volunteer firefighters don’t get paid like surgeons but still appeal to many women).
Many people have noticed that young people are unrealistically expected to know what career they will pursue at the age of 18 or 22. Seldom does anyone point out that the same logic applies to long-term romantic commitment. Interestingly, while there is a lot of guidance for how to choose a good career, far less support is available for choosing the right spouse.
Choosing a mate is not just choosing a mate. It’s also casting a vote for who you will be and who your children will be. The psychologist and relationship researcher Eli Finkel has pioneered the concept of the Michelangelo phenomenon. “In Michelangelo’s mind,” Finkel writes, “the David existed within the rock before sculpting began.” The idea is that in healthy marriages, each partner helps foster the other’s best self.
Mate choice also profoundly influences children. If you have kids, your partner’s genetics will significantly influence their intelligence (at least 60% heritable), personality traits (more than 40% heritable), and mental health (more than 30% heritable). And as I cover extensively in my book, healthy, stable relationships benefit children. Having a partner who contributes to such a relationship will be instrumental in your child’s development and wellbeing.
Given the importance of marriage in a man’s life, it is crucial to choose a compatible spouse. Knowing which qualities to avoid and which to seek out can save you from future emotional and perhaps financial ruin.
People often focus on attributes they would like in a partner, but it is perhaps even more important to know which characteristics to avoid. “Red flags,” in common parlance.
In his book Gatekeeper: The Tactical Guide to Commitment, the psychologist Shawn T. Smith offers several characteristics to watch out for. Here are a few important ones:
· Shifting responsibility for managing emotions. Rather than speak directly about their own sadness or anger, someone might redirect the conversation onto their partners by saying things like “Why did you need to do that?” Or “Only someone with problems would say it that way.” These ad hominem attacks imply that they are not responsible for their own feelings, and that you are to blame for managing their emotions. Relatedly, David Buss has suggested that one desirable feature for any potential mate is how quickly they return to their emotional baseline. That is, if your partner is angry or upset with you, do they take a long time to settle down? Do their negative emotions take a long time to subside? This is a key marker of emotional stability (neuroticism). Low emotional stability (high neuroticism) is consistently associated with increased conflict, marital dissatisfaction, and risk of divorce.
· Forcing you to play the guessing game. Instead of stating their needs outright, someone might say, “If you cared about me, you would know what I need.” This puts you in a state of constant uncertainty, a recipe for an unhappy relationship. In fact, personally, I would recommend a policy of overcommunication. For uncertainties and ambiguities, try to cultivate a rule where both you and your partner err on the side of saying more than you think is necessary, to the point where you and your partner say things to each other that seem perfectly obvious. This can save a lot of heartache.
· Character assault. Statements like “You always do that” or “You never listen” indicate an undeveloped personality and suggest that the person is unwilling to bear any share of responsibility for conflicts that arise.
· The silent treatment. Evolutionary psychology research suggests that anger evolved in order to bargain for better treatment. It can be expressed in one of two ways. First, inflicting costs, which can entail verbal or physical abuse. Second, anger can be expressed by withholding benefits which can entail tactics like the silent treatment. Both are intended to manipulate the target’s behavior. However, we have rightly developed a norm against overt anger expressions (inflicting costs). Such a norm would also be helpful for covert anger expressions as well (withholding benefits). Healthy communication rather than yelling or snubbing is a better approach.
Smith offers a quote in another of his books, The Tactical Guide to Women, “Look for the red flags early in the relationship. If anything pops up early on, don’t let that slide. Most people are on their best behavior in the beginning. They hide it well until around the six-month mark. For example, if she gets drunk and is screaming at you for no reason within the first month, run as fast as you can. Don’t let something like that slide. There are underlying issues there.” This doesn’t mean that they are a bad person or unworthy of love or anything like that. But drinking and yelling is a sign that such a person might not be ideal for a long-term relationship commitment.
What about beneficial traits, or so-called “green flags?”
Smith suggests seeking clarity, maturity, and stability in a potential mate.
Anybody can communicate well when they and the relationship are at their best. Clarity, though, encompasses reliable communication and the ability to communicate during stormy periods. If a partner’s skills are unreliable, they may revert to more primitive means of self-expression, such as passive-aggressiveness and outbursts. Good relationships require that both partners express themselves constructively, especially during times of stress.
Relatedly, inquisitiveness is an important skill. It cuts through ambiguities and insecurities. Within a relationship, if one person behaves in an insensitive manner, a sign of inquisitiveness would be if his or her partner, rather than expressing anger, calmly asks why and listens. This can open the path to communication and understanding, rather than mutually escalating hostilities. As Smith puts it, “The inquisitive person places facts and reality above emotion. Emotions still exist, they’re just not in the driver’s seat.” Inquisitiveness works when both individuals try to understand the other person, rather than make assumptions based on limited information.
Emotional maturity is another green flag. Some signs of this skill: She can calm herself when she’s sad or angry, she accepts reality, she keeps commitments, she takes care of relationships and doesn’t burn bridges, she bases important decisions on values rather than impulse, and she possesses the emotional resources to function well among coworkers, family, and friends.
Stability, another positive quality, indicates that a woman handles her personal challenges and cares for herself so that her life (and yours) isn’t a series of crises. As Smith puts it, a woman “who is unwilling to strive for her best state of mental health is unlikely to succeed in relationships.”
Many men devote monumental effort to educational attainment, career striving, and occupational success. It would be wise to expend no less effort on identifying a compatible partner.
Instead of seeing a potential romantic partner as someone who can support your career ambitions, you could also view your career as something that can improve life for you, your future spouse, and your family.
In The Seasons of a Man’s Life, Daniel J. Levinson describes “a unique relationship that ordinarily includes loving, romantic, tender, and sexual feelings, but it goes beyond this.” He describes the “special woman,” who in turn experiences her partner as a “special man.” The special woman is someone who “generates and supports his heroic strivings” and “joins him on his journey” to shape and live out his ambitions, where “his aspirations can be imagined and his hopes nourished.”
In return, he supports the special woman’s hopes and dreams. “A couple can form a lasting relationship that furthers his development only if it also furthers hers…If in supporting his Dream she loses her own, then her development will suffer and both will later pay the price.”
And Levinson, too, notes that “occupation and marriage-family are usually the most central components” in a man’s life.
This perspective on relationships underscores the importance of mutual support and shared growth. The notion of the “special woman” and “special man” transcends the conventional understanding of romantic partnerships, emphasizing a deeper, more harmonious connection. This link is not solely about love or attraction or sex; it is about finding a partner who understands, encourages, and participates in your life journey. Such a relationship becomes a crucible for personal and professional development, where both individuals are not just companions but co-architects of a shared future.
https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/how-to-choose-a-romantic-partner
