Huge New Study Reveals What People Really Want In A Partner - Dr Paul Eastwick

Huge New Study Reveals What People Really Want In A Partner - Dr Paul Eastwick

Modern WisdomSep 14, 20241h 6m

Chris Williamson (host), Dr Paul Eastwick (guest)

Stated vs. revealed mate preferences and how they’re measuredAccuracy and limits of self-knowledge in romantic attractionGender differences in preferences for attractiveness and earning potentialKey trait discrepancies (e.g., good lover, smells good, sexy vs. considerate, patient)Compatibility, matching effects, and the challenge of algorithmic matchmakingCultural change, stereotypes, and economic shifts in shaping preferencesModern dating dynamics, red/black/blue-pill discourse, and the role of social networks

In this episode of Modern Wisdom, featuring Chris Williamson and Dr Paul Eastwick, Huge New Study Reveals What People Really Want In A Partner - Dr Paul Eastwick explores massive global study exposes surprising truths about real partner preferences Dr. Paul Eastwick discusses a 10,000-person, 43-country study comparing what people *say* they want in a romantic partner (stated preferences) versus what actually predicts their attraction and desire (revealed preferences).

Massive global study exposes surprising truths about real partner preferences

Dr. Paul Eastwick discusses a 10,000-person, 43-country study comparing what people *say* they want in a romantic partner (stated preferences) versus what actually predicts their attraction and desire (revealed preferences).

People are quite accurate about which traits are generally desirable versus undesirable, but much less accurate about what they uniquely value compared with others.

Traits like being a “good lover,” smelling good, and sexiness are heavily underestimated in surveys yet emerge as top predictors of real attraction, while some highly touted virtues (e.g., patience, emotional stability) matter less than people claim.

The study also shows that classic gender differences (men wanting looks, women wanting status) largely vanish at the revealed level, suggesting stereotypes and social narratives distort what men and women report wanting.

Key Takeaways

People systematically underestimate how much sexual and sensory traits drive attraction.

Traits like being a “good lover,” smelling good, being sexy, and having a good body rank modestly when people fill out ideal-partner surveys, yet “good lover” was the strongest revealed preference and smell/sexiness were near the top predictors of real desire.

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Warmth and loyalty still matter a lot—but not exactly how people predict.

Loyalty, honesty, understanding, supportiveness and warmth sit high in both stated and revealed rankings, confirming that “soft” relational traits are genuinely central to attraction and relationship quality, even alongside highly physical traits.

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Classic gender differences mostly disappear once you look at actual behavior.

Men and women’s revealed preferences for attractiveness and earning-related traits are essentially the same; the apparent gender gaps exist mainly in what they *say* they value, influenced by stereotypes, social roles, and self-presentation pressures.

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Self-insight is modest overall and very weak for single traits in isolation.

Across all 35 traits combined, people show a small but real tendency to like partners who match their stated ideals, but when you zoom in on any one trait (e. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

First-impression advantages matter, but repeated interaction can reshape who’s attractive.

Conventional attractiveness and sexiness strongly drive initial consensus in speed-dating or app swiping, yet as people interact over time, consensus on who is attractive declines, opening doors for non-stereotypically attractive people in real-life social networks.

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Matchmaking algorithms can predict popularity, not deep compatibility.

Using self-reports, it’s easy to forecast who will get lots of interest, but there’s still no robust way to predict which specific pairs will be genuinely compatible; the “holy grail” of algorithmic compatibility matching remains unsolved.

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Falling in love is chaotic, idiosyncratic, and resists full quantification.

Beyond traits and preferences, Eastwick notes that the phenomenological experience of falling in love often hinges on unique, unpredictable interactions and small turning points that no spreadsheet or survey could have forecasted in advance.

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Notable Quotes

Both men and women are underestimating how much they like attractiveness, but women are really underestimating.

Dr. Paul Eastwick

A good lover was the single strongest predictor of feeling positively about a romantic partner, even though people only ranked it about twelfth.

Dr. Paul Eastwick

Anybody who tells you that they have a matchmaking algorithm is probably just trying to sell you a secret sauce.

Dr. Paul Eastwick

Sometimes you just sort of fall in love with somebody and you have no idea why—and that really throws a wrench into our presumed godlike predictive powers.

Chris Williamson

Close relationships are, by their nature, dangerous, risky things—because you put yourself in a position to be taken advantage of.

Dr. Paul Eastwick

Questions Answered in This Episode

If people misjudge the importance of sex and physicality, how should they rethink their own dating checklists and deal-breakers?

Dr. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Given that revealed preferences show men and women want similar things, what does this imply for popular gender-war narratives and red/black-pill ideologies?

People are quite accurate about which traits are generally desirable versus undesirable, but much less accurate about what they uniquely value compared with others.

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

How could dating apps be redesigned to leverage repeated interaction and social networks instead of just optimizing for first-impression swipes?

Traits like being a “good lover,” smelling good, and sexiness are heavily underestimated in surveys yet emerge as top predictors of real attraction, while some highly touted virtues (e. ...

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

What practical steps could someone take to improve their self-insight so their stated preferences better match what actually makes them happy in relationships?

The study also shows that classic gender differences (men wanting looks, women wanting status) largely vanish at the revealed level, suggesting stereotypes and social narratives distort what men and women report wanting.

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

If compatibility is so hard to predict in advance, how should individuals balance being selective with remaining open to unexpected partners they might grow to love?

Get the full analysis with uListen AI

Transcript Preview

Chris Williamson

Your new study is one of the most interesting things that I think I've seen this year.

Dr Paul Eastwick

Oh, good. Oh, good.

Chris Williamson

It also has maybe the highest number of authors that I've ever seen on a single paper.

Dr Paul Eastwick

(laughs) It was a big, it was a big team.

Chris Williamson

Yes. So, how well would you say people actually know what they want in a romantic partner?

Dr Paul Eastwick

Um, it depends. So, what people are very good at recognizing is that some attributes are very, very desirable, right? So, there's good agreement that traits like attractiveness and intelligent and considerate and honest, that these are desirable things that we want romantic partners to have, and there's also a lot of agreement that, hmm, we don't really want somebody who's disorganized and careless, and we don't really want somebody who's anxious and easily upset. So, there's a lot of agreement and accurate self-knowledge that some attributes are more desirable than others, and you can ask lots of interesting questions about, why don't we wanna be with anxious partners (laughs) , right? Why don't we wanna be with, with partners who are kind of a mess, right? And why do we want to be with partners who are attractive and intelligent? The trick, though, is when we expect people to have insight about what it is that they uniquely like, what do they like that makes them different from other people, and that's the insight challenge where we find, eh, sometimes people do okay, and sometimes not so much.

Chris Williamson

Why is that an interesting insight? What is it that you like that other people don't like? Why is that an interesting question?

Dr Paul Eastwick

Well, I'll tell you, the reason I got interest, the, the, the way I came to that particular question was because of, uh, the work on gender differences, so what do men and women want in a partner, right? And so this is research going back, and it goes back, I mean, like, 80 years at this point, right? I mean, middle part of the 20th century, when we started asking people, this was actually the sociologists at first, were really interested in what attributes do, uh, men and women say they like, and do we find these, uh, gender differences, and you certainly do for attributes like attractiveness, for attributes like earning potential, right? Men will consistently say they like attractiveness more than women. Women will say they like earning potential more than men. Um, so we were originally interested in whether we saw that those gender differences also played out when we looked at how those attributes predicted all sorts of downstream consequences, because that is an individual difference of sorts, right?

Chris Williamson

How do you mean?

Dr Paul Eastwick

Gen- well, gender, right, is, uh, w- what we're doing is we're describing how some people are different from other people, right? In, in some ways it's like one of the easiest ones to latch onto in the mating domain, right? But it does function like other individual differences in that if men say something as a group that this appeals to them more than this other group, women, it requires some amount of individual predictive power, right, that the groups have to be telling us something different that's gonna then play out when we see what it is that they actually find appealing. So, it was really the gender differences that got me interested in this, uh, this, uh, accurate, uh, self-knowledge question in the first place.

Install uListen to search the full transcript and get AI-powered insights

Get Full Transcript

Get more from every podcast

AI summaries, searchable transcripts, and fact-checking. Free forever.

Add to Chrome