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 *

192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33851315)

  • 1. The Role of Vision in the Emergence of Mate Preferences.
    Scheller M; Matorres F; Little AC; Tompkins L; de Sousa AA
    Arch Sex Behav; 2021 Nov; 50(8):3785-3797. PubMed ID: 33851315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A Compensatory Effect on Mate Selection? Importance of Auditory, Olfactory, and Tactile Cues in Partner Choice among Blind and Sighted Individuals.
    Sorokowska A; Oleszkiewicz A; Sorokowski P
    Arch Sex Behav; 2018 Apr; 47(3):597-603. PubMed ID: 29396613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sex differences in sexual attraction for aesthetics, resources and personality across age.
    Whyte S; Brooks RC; Chan HF; Torgler B
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(5):e0250151. PubMed ID: 34010298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Exposure to visual cues of pathogen contagion changes preferences for masculinity and symmetry in opposite-sex faces.
    Little AC; DeBruine LM; Jones BC
    Proc Biol Sci; 2011 Jul; 278(1714):2032-9. PubMed ID: 21123269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The Role of Sexual and Romantic Attraction in Human Mate Preferences.
    Scheller M; de Sousa AA; Brotto LA; Little AC
    J Sex Res; 2024 Feb; 61(2):299-312. PubMed ID: 36795115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. The effects of control of resources on magnitudes of sex differences in human mate preferences.
    Moore F; Cassidy C; Perrett DI
    Evol Psychol; 2010 Dec; 8(4):720-35. PubMed ID: 22947829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mate choice trade-offs and women's preference for physically attractive men.
    Waynforth D
    Hum Nat; 2001 Sep; 12(3):207-19. PubMed ID: 26192277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sexual Conflict and Gender Gap Effects: Associations between Social Context and Sex on Rated Attractiveness and Economic Status.
    Gouda-Vossos A; Dixson BJ; Brooks RC
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(1):e0146269. PubMed ID: 26731414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. More than just a pretty face and a hot body: multiple cues in mate-choice.
    Jonason PK; Raulston T; Rotolo A
    J Soc Psychol; 2012; 152(2):174-84. PubMed ID: 22468419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sex Differences in Response to Deception Across Mate-Value Traits of Attractiveness, Job Status, and Altruism in Online Dating.
    Desrochers J; MacKinnon M; Kelly B; Masse B; Arnocky S
    Arch Sex Behav; 2021 Nov; 50(8):3675-3685. PubMed ID: 34664152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Impact of Health, Wealth, and Attractiveness on Romantic Evaluation from Photographs of Faces.
    Tskhay KO; Clout JM; Rule NO
    Arch Sex Behav; 2017 Nov; 46(8):2365-2376. PubMed ID: 28255792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Discriminating males and unpredictable females: males differentiate self-similar facial cues more than females in the judgment of opposite-sex attractiveness.
    Zhuang JY; Zhang S; Xu J; Hu D
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(3):e90493. PubMed ID: 24594644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Body-odor based assessments of sex and personality - Non-significant differences between blind and sighted odor raters.
    Sorokowska A; Oleszkiewicz A
    Physiol Behav; 2019 Oct; 210():112573. PubMed ID: 31248615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The use of multiple cues in mate choice.
    Candolin U
    Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc; 2003 Nov; 78(4):575-95. PubMed ID: 14700392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.