Sexual partner preferences: evolutionary imperative, emotional attachment or hedonism?

Data are taken from a representative sample of the Australian population to determine the qualities that are desired in a sexual partner. These qualities are considered in three categories: those reflecting the perceived reproductive value of the partner (evolutionary imperative), the emotional attachment to a partner and the pure pleasure associated with having sex. Subjects completed a telephone-based survey 876 males; 908 females; aged 18-59). The qualities respondents report they most desire in a sexual partner are that the person is someone who cares about them, and whom they love. They also rank highly the criterion that their partner should enjoy sex, and much less highly that they themselves should enjoy the sex. Evolutionary imperatives are ranked fairly low as criteria sought in a sexual partner. Males and females generally expressed similar preferences in a sexual partner, as do persons in different age groups, and persons in different marital status categories. Heterosexual males appear to place a higher emphasis on the physical appearance of a partner when compared with non-heterosexuals. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Adoption, adult attachment security, and relationship outcomes

Despite reports that adopted persons are destined for poor psychological and relational adjustment, this conclusion remains controversial. Previous research on this topic has been inconclusive, and has failed to provide a complex assessment of the predictors of adjustment. For instance, whether attachment security plays a key role in later relationship outcomes remains unresolved. This paper presents the results of a longitudinal study of adults who were adopted as infants, and a comparison sample of adults who grew up with both biological parents. Two research questions were addressed: differences in attachment security between the two samples, and the predictive relations between initial attachment scales and relationship variables (e.g., risk in intimacy, loneliness) assessed at follow-up. Attachment profiles at Time 1 indicated less security in the adopted sample than the comparison sample, and these differences were maintained at follow-up. However, adoptees who had not searched for birth relatives did not differ from the comparison sample. Although sample (adopted / comparison) was an important predictor of some relationship variables, it became less influential when attachment measures were included. Discussion focused on the complex factors that influence attachment security, and the need for in-depth study of the relational experiences of adopted people.