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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38920771)

  • 1. Testing Sexual Strategy Theory in Norway.
    Mehmetoglu M; Määttänen I; Mittner M
    Behav Sci (Basel); 2024 May; 14(6):. PubMed ID: 38920771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Self-Rated Attractiveness Moderates the Relationship Between Dark Personality Traits and Romantic Ideals in Women.
    Birkás B; Láng A; Meskó N
    Psychol Rep; 2018 Feb; 121(1):184-200. PubMed ID: 29298572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Environmental influences on mate preferences as assessed by a scenario manipulation experiment.
    Marzoli D; Moretto F; Monti A; Tocci O; Roberts SC; Tommasi L
    PLoS One; 2013; 8(9):e74282. PubMed ID: 24069291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Perceived Effectiveness of Flirtation Tactics: The Effects of sex, Mating Context and Individual Differences in US and Norwegian Samples.
    Kennair LEO; Wade TJ; Tallaksen MT; Grøntvedt TV; Kessler AM; Burch RL; Bendixen M
    Evol Psychol; 2022; 20(1):14747049221088011. PubMed ID: 35331044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Intersexual and Intrasexual Differences in Mate Selection Preferences Among Lesbian Women, Gay Men, and Bisexual Women and Men.
    Klümper L; Hassebrauck M; Schwarz S
    Arch Sex Behav; 2024 Jan; 53(1):177-203. PubMed ID: 37558933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Homosexual mating preferences from an evolutionary perspective: sexual selection theory revisited.
    Gobrogge KL; Perkins PS; Baker JH; Balcer KD; Breedlove SM; Klump KL
    Arch Sex Behav; 2007 Oct; 36(5):717-23. PubMed ID: 17674179
    [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 evolution of autistic-like and schizotypal traits: a sexual selection hypothesis.
    Del Giudice M; Angeleri R; Brizio A; Elena MR
    Front Psychol; 2010; 1():41. PubMed ID: 21833210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The synergistic effect of prosociality and physical attractiveness on mate desirability.
    Ehlebracht D; Stavrova O; Fetchenhauer D; Farrelly D
    Br J Psychol; 2018 Aug; 109(3):517-537. PubMed ID: 29250771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The long and short of mistress relationships: Sex-differentiated mate preferences reflect a compromise of mating ideals.
    Choy BKC; Li NP; Tan K
    J Pers; 2023 Apr; 91(2):383-399. PubMed ID: 35567542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The influence of resource-gaining capacity on mate preferences: an eye tracking study.
    Zhao Z; Su W; Hou J
    BMC Psychol; 2023 Dec; 11(1):444. PubMed ID: 38111064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A Comparison of Mate Preferences in Asexual and Allosexual Adults.
    Edge J; Vonk J
    Arch Sex Behav; 2024 Jan; 53(1):17-24. PubMed ID: 37891437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.