These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

216 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31729413)

  • 1. Contrasting Computational Models of Mate Preference Integration Across 45 Countries.
    Conroy-Beam D; Buss DM; Asao K; Sorokowska A; Sorokowski P; Aavik T; Akello G; Alhabahba MM; Alm C; Amjad N; Anjum A; Atama CS; Duyar DA; Ayebare R; Batres C; Bendixen M; Bensafia A; Bizumic B; Boussena M; Butovskaya M; Can S; Cantarero K; Carrier A; Cetinkaya H; Croy I; Cueto RM; Czub M; Dronova D; Dural S; Duyar I; Ertugrul B; Espinosa A; Estevan I; Esteves CS; Fang L; Frackowiak T; Garduño JC; González KU; Guemaz F; Gyuris P; Halamová M; Herak I; Horvat M; Hromatko I; Hui CM; Jaafar JL; Jiang F; Kafetsios K; Kavčič T; Kennair LEO; Kervyn N; Thi Khanh Ha T; Khilji IA; Köbis NC; Lan HM; Láng A; Lennard GR; León E; Lindholm T; Thi Linh T; Lopez G; Van Luot N; Mailhos A; Manesi Z; Martinez R; McKerchar SL; Meskó N; Misra G; Monaghan C; Mora EC; Moya-Garófano A; Musil B; Natividade JC; Niemczyk A; Nizharadze G; Oberzaucher E; Oleszkiewicz A; Omar-Fauzee MS; Onyishi IE; Özener B; Pagani AF; Pakalniskiene V; Parise M; Pazhoohi F; Pisanski A; Pisanski K; Ponciano E; Popa C; Prokop P; Rizwan M; Sainz M; Salkičević S; Sargautyte R; Sarmány-Schuller I; Schmehl S; Sharad S; Siddiqui RS; Simonetti F; Stoyanova SY; Tadinac M; Varella MAC; Vauclair CM; Vega LD; Widarini DA; Yoo G; Zaťková M; Zupančič M
    Sci Rep; 2019 Nov; 9(1):16885. PubMed ID: 31729413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Euclidean Mate Value and Power of Choice on the Mating Market.
    Conroy-Beam D
    Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2018 Feb; 44(2):252-264. PubMed ID: 29082804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. How Are Mate Preferences Linked with Actual Mate Selection? Tests of Mate Preference Integration Algorithms Using Computer Simulations and Actual Mating Couples.
    Conroy-Beam D; Buss DM
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(6):e0156078. PubMed ID: 27276030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Do mate preferences influence actual mating decisions? Evidence from computer simulations and three studies of mated couples.
    Conroy-Beam D; Buss DM
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2016 Jul; 111(1):53-66. PubMed ID: 27337140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Self-Perceived Mate Value, Facial Attractiveness, and Mate Preferences: Do Desirable Men Want It All?
    Arnocky S
    Evol Psychol; 2018; 16(1):1474704918763271. PubMed ID: 29534596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Predictive validity and adjustment of ideal partner preferences across the transition into romantic relationships.
    Gerlach TM; Arslan RC; Schultze T; Reinhard SK; Penke L
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2019 Feb; 116(2):313-330. PubMed ID: 28921999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Mate preference priorities in the East and West: A cross-cultural test of the mate preference priority model.
    Thomas AG; Jonason PK; Blackburn JD; Kennair LEO; Lowe R; Malouff J; Stewart-Williams S; Sulikowski D; Li NP
    J Pers; 2020 Jun; 88(3):606-620. PubMed ID: 31494937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Relationship dealbreakers: traits people avoid in potential mates.
    Jonason PK; Garcia JR; Webster GD; Li NP; Fisher HE
    Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2015 Dec; 41(12):1697-711. PubMed ID: 26445853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Norwegian Men and Women Value Similar Mate Traits in Short-Term Relationships.
    Mehmetoglu M; Määttänen I
    Evol Psychol; 2020; 18(4):1474704920979623. PubMed ID: 33371743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sex differences in human mate preferences vary across sex ratios.
    Walter KV; Conroy-Beam D; Buss DM; Asao K; Sorokowska A; Sorokowski P; Aavik T; Akello G; Alhabahba MM; Alm C; Amjad N; Anjum A; Atama CS; Duyar DA; Ayebare R; Batres C; Bendixen M; Bensafia A; Bizumic B; Boussena M; Butovskaya M; Can S; Cantarero K; Carrier A; Cetinkaya H; Croy I; Cueto RM; Czub M; Dronova D; Dural S; Duyar I; Ertugrul B; Espinosa A; Estevan I; Esteves CS; Fang L; Frackowiak T; Garduño JC; González KU; Guemaz F; Gyuris P; Halamová M; Herak I; Horvat M; Hromatko I; Hui CM; Jaafar JL; Jiang F; Kafetsios K; Kavčič T; Ottesen Kennair LE; Kervyn N; Khanh Ha TT; Khilji IA; Köbis NC; Lan HM; Láng A; Lennard GR; León E; Lindholm T; Linh TT; Lopez G; Luot NV; Mailhos A; Manesi Z; Martinez R; McKerchar SL; Meskó N; Misra G; Monaghan C; Mora EC; Moya-Garófano A; Musil B; Natividade JC; Niemczyk A; Nizharadze G; Oberzaucher E; Oleszkiewicz A; Omar-Fauzee MS; Onyishi IE; Özener B; Pagani AF; Pakalniskiene V; Parise M; Pazhoohi F; Pisanski A; Pisanski K; Ponciano E; Popa C; Prokop P; Rizwan M; Sainz M; Salkičević S; Sargautyte R; Sarmány-Schuller I; Schmehl S; Sharad S; Siddiqui RS; Simonetti F; Stoyanova SY; Tadinac M; Correa Varella MA; Vauclair CM; Vega LD; Widarini DA; Yoo G; Zaťková MM; Zupančič M
    Proc Biol Sci; 2021 Jul; 288(1955):20211115. PubMed ID: 34284630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Genetic considerations in human sex-mate selection: partners share human leukocyte antigen but not short-tandem-repeat identity markers.
    Israeli M; Kristt D; Nardi Y; Klein T
    Am J Reprod Immunol; 2014 May; 71(5):467-71. PubMed ID: 24589062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Are human mating preferences with respect to height reflected in actual pairings?
    Stulp G; Buunk AP; Pollet TV; Nettle D; Verhulst S
    PLoS One; 2013; 8(1):e54186. PubMed ID: 23342102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mate-choice copying in single and coupled women: the influence of mate acceptance and mate rejection decisions of other women.
    Deng Y; Zheng Y
    Evol Psychol; 2015 Jan; 13(1):89-105. PubMed ID: 25622338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mate Preferences for Warmth-Trustworthiness Predict Romantic Attraction in the Early Stages of Mate Selection and Satisfaction in Ongoing Relationships.
    Valentine KA; Li NP; Meltzer AL; Tsai MH
    Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2020 Feb; 46(2):298-311. PubMed ID: 31184259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Individual differences in preference for risky behaviors during courtship.
    Prokop P; Pazda A
    Scand J Psychol; 2020 Aug; 61(4):560-564. PubMed ID: 32103513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessment of Long-Term Mate Preferences in Iran.
    Atari M
    Evol Psychol; 2017; 15(2):1474704917702459. PubMed ID: 28401792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Are Sex Differences in Preferences for Physical Attractiveness and Good Earning Capacity in Potential Mates Smaller in Countries With Greater Gender Equality?
    Zhang L; Lee AJ; DeBruine LM; Jones BC
    Evol Psychol; 2019; 17(2):1474704919852921. PubMed ID: 31146580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. MHC-correlated mate choice in humans: a review.
    Havlicek J; Roberts SC
    Psychoneuroendocrinology; 2009 May; 34(4):497-512. PubMed ID: 19054623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection.
    Li NP; Yong JC; Tov W; Sng O; Fletcher GJ; Valentine KA; Jiang YF; Balliet D
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2013 Nov; 105(5):757-76. PubMed ID: 23915041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Netflix and Chill? What Sex Differences Can Tell Us About Mate Preferences in (Hypothetical) Booty-Call Relationships.
    March E; Van Doorn G; Grieve R
    Evol Psychol; 2018; 16(4):1474704918812138. PubMed ID: 30428700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.