Ideal partner preferences (i.e., ratings of the desirability of attributes like attractiveness or intelligence) are the source of numerous foundational findings in the interdisciplinary literature on human mating. Recently, research on the predictive validity of ideal partner preference matching (i.e., Do people positively evaluate partners who match vs. mismatch their ideals?) has become mired in several problems. First, articles exhibit discrepant analytic and reporting practices. Second, different findings emerge across laboratories worldwide, perhaps because they sample different relationship contexts and/or populations. This registered report-partnered with the Psychological Science Accelerator-uses a highly powered design (N = 10,358) across 43 countries and 22 languages to estimate preference-matching effect sizes. The most rigorous tests revealed significant preference-matching effects in the whole sample and for partnered and single participants separately. The "corrected pattern metric" that collapses across 35 traits revealed a zero-order effect of β = .19 and an effect of β = .11 when included alongside a normative preference-matching metric. Specific traits in the "level metric" (interaction) tests revealed very small (average β = .04) effects. Effect sizes were similar for partnered participants who reported ideals before entering a relationship, and there was no consistent evidence that individual differences moderated any effects. Comparisons between stated and revealed preferences shed light on gender differences and similarities: For attractiveness, men's and (especially) women's stated preferences underestimated revealed preferences (i.e., they thought attractiveness was less important than it actually was). For earning potential, men's stated preferences underestimated-and women's stated preferences overestimated-revealed preferences. Implications for the literature on human mating are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

对理想伴侣偏好匹配的预测有效性的全球测试。


理想的伴侣偏好（即对吸引力或智力等属性的可取性的评级）是关于人类交配的跨学科文献中许多基础性发现的来源。最近，关于理想伴侣偏好匹配的预测有效性的研究（即，人们是否积极评价匹配与理想匹配的伴侣？）陷入了几个问题的泥潭。首先，文章表现出不同的分析和报告实践。其次，世界各地的实验室出现了不同的发现，这可能是因为它们对不同的关系背景和/或人群进行了采样。这份与心理科学加速器合作的注册报告在 43 个国家/地区和 22 种语言中使用了高功率设计 （N = 10,358） 来估计偏好匹配的效应大小。最严格的测试揭示了整个样本以及分别针对伴侣和单人参与者的显著偏好匹配效应。在 35 个特征中折叠的“校正模式指标”显示，当与规范偏好匹配指标一起包含时，零阶效应为 β = .19，β = .11 效应。“水平指标”（交互）测试中的特定特征揭示了非常小（平均 β = .04）的影响。在进入关系之前报告理想的伴侣参与者的效应大小相似，并且没有一致的证据表明个体差异会调节任何影响。陈述和揭示的偏好之间的比较揭示了性别差异和相似性：对于吸引力，男性和（尤其是）女性的陈述偏好低估了揭示的偏好（即，他们认为吸引力不如实际重要）。 就收入潜力而言，男性的陈述偏好被低估了，而女性的陈述偏好被高估了——揭示了偏好。讨论了对人类交配文献的影响。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 （c） 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。