Homogamy and imprinting-like effect on mate choice preference for body height in the current Japanese population

References

• Arnqvist G, Rowe L, Krupa JJ, Sih A. 1996. Assortative mating by size: a meta-analysis of mating patterns in water striders. Evol Ecol. 10:265–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bereczkei T, Gyuris P, Koves P, Bernath L. 2002. Homogamy, genetic similarity, and imprinting; parental influence on mate choice preferences. Pers Ind Diff. 33:677–690.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bereczkei T, Gyuris P, Weisfeld GE. 2004. Sexual imprinting in human mate choice. Proc R Soc Lond B. 271:1129–1134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Box GEP. 1949. A general distribution theory for a class of likelihood criteria. Biometrika. 36:317–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brundtland GH, Liestøl K, Walløe L. 1980. Height, weight and menarcheal age of Oslo schoolchildren during the last 60 years. Ann Hum Biol. 7:307–322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coates TJ, Jeffery RW, Wing RR. 1978. The relationship between persons' relative body weight and the quality and quantity of food stored in their homes. Addict Behav. 3:179–184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Courtiol A, Raymond M, Godelle B, Ferdy JB. 2010. Mate choice and human stature: homogamy as a unified framework for understanding mating preferences. Evolution. 64:2189–2203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crespi BJ. 1989. Causes of assortative mating in arthropods. Anim Behav. 38:980–1000.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis BJ. 1992. The evolution of sexual attraction: evaluative mechanisms in women. In Barkow JH, Cosmides L, Tooby J (editor), The adaptive mind. New York: Oxford University Press267–288.
   Google Scholar
• Fink B, Neave N, Brewer G, Pawlowski B. 2007. Variable preferences for sexual dimorphism in stature (SDS): further evidence for an adjustment in relation to own height. Pers Ind Diff. 43:2249–2257.
   Google Scholar
• Foote CJ, Larkin PA. 1988. The role of male choice in the assortative mating of anadromous and non-anadromous sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka). Behaviour. 106:43–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furusho T. 1961. Genetic study on stature. Jap J Hum genet. 6:78–101.
   Google Scholar
• Gillis JS. 1982. Too tall, too small. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Gillis JS, Avis WE. 1980. The male-taller norm in mate selection. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 6:396–401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorber SC, Tremblay M, Moher D, Gorber B. 2007. A comparison of direct vs. self-report measures for assessing height, weight and body mass index: a systematic review. Obes Rev. 8:307–326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hauber ME, Sherman PW. 2001. Self-referent phenotype matching: theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. Trends Neurosci. 24:609–616.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herdman EJE, Kelly CD, Godin JGJ. 2004. Male mate choice in the guppy (Poecillia reticulata): do males prefer larger females as mates?. Ethology. 110:97–111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hur YM. 2003. Assortative mating for personality traits, educational level, religious affiliation, height, weight, and body mass index in parents of a Korean twin sample. Twin Res. 6:467–470.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hur YM, Kwon JS. 2005. Changes in twinning rates in South Korea: 1981–2002. Twin Res Hum Genet. 8:76–79.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jones KM, Monaghan P, Nager RG. 2001. Male mate choice and female fecundity in zebra finches. Anim Behav. 62:1021–1026.
   Google Scholar
• Kendrick KM, Haupt MA, Hinton MR, Broad KD, Skinner JD. 2001. Sex differences in the influence of mothers on the sociosexual preferences of their offspring. Horm Behav. 40:322–338.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kendrick KM, Hinton MR, Atkins K, Haupt MA, Skinner JD. 1998. Mothers determine sexual preferences. Nature. 395:229–230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kouchi M. 1996. Secular change and socioeconomic difference in height in Japan. Anthropol Sci. 104:325–340.
   Google Scholar
• Little AC, Penton-Voak IS, Burt DM, Perrett DI. 2003. Investigating an imprinting-like phenomenon in humans: partners and opposite-sex parents have similar hair and eye colour. Evol Hum Behav. 24:43–51.
   Google Scholar
• Mascie-Taylor CGN. 1987. Assortative mating in a contemporary British population. Ann Hum Biol. 14:59–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mascie-Taylor CGN, Boldsen JL. 1988. Assortative mating, differential fertility and abnormal pregnancy outcome. Ann Hum Biol. 15:223–228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan. 2001, 2006. Tairyoku, Undo Noryoku Chosa (in Japanese). Available online at: http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/NewList.do?tid = 000001016672, accessed 15 August 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Mita TH, Dermer M, Knight J. 1977. Reversed facial images and the mere-exposure hypothesis. J Pers Soc Psychol. 35:597–601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakamura K, Hoshino Y, Kodama K, Yamamoto M. 1999. Reliability of self-reported body height and weight of adult Japanese women. J Biosoc Sci. 31:555–558.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nettle D. 2002. Height and reproductive success in a cohort of British men. Hum Nat. 13:473–491.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nojo S, Tamura S, Ihara Y, Human homogamy in facial characteristics: does sexual imprinting-like mechanism play a role? Hum Nat, [In press]..
   Google Scholar
• Olsson M. 1993. Male preference for large females and assortative mating for body size in the sand lizard (Lacerta agilis). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 32:337–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawłowski B. 2003. Variable preferences for sexual dimorphism in height as a strategy for increasing the pool of potential partners in humans. Proc R Soc Lond B. 270:709–712.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roberts DF. 1977. Assortative mating in man: husband/wife correlations in physical characteristics. Suppl Bull Eugen Soc. 2:1–45.
   Google Scholar
• Salces I, Rebato E, Susanne C. 2004. Evidence of phenotypic and social assortative mating for anthropometric and physiological traits in couples from the Basque country (Spain). J Biosoc Sci. 36:235–250.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salska I, Frederick DA, Pawlowski B, Reilly AH, Laird KT, Rudd NA. 2008. Conditional mate preferences: factors influencing preferences for height. Pers Ind Diff. 44:203–215.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sear R, Marlowe FW. 2009. How universal are human mate choices? Size does not matter when Hadza foragers are choosing a mate. Biol Lett. 5:606–609.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Silventoinen K, Kaprio J, Lahelma E, Viken RJ, Rose RJ. 2003. Assortative mating by body height and BMI: Finnish twins and their spouses. Am J Hum Biol. 15:620–627.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. 1995. Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Spuhler JN. 1968. Assortative mating with respect to physical characteristics. Eugen Q. 15:128–140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wada K, Tamakoshi K, Tsunekawa T, Otsuka R, Zhang H, Murata C, Nagasawa N, Matsushita K, Sugiura K, Yatsuya H, Toyoshima H. 2005. Validity of self-reported height and weight in a Japanese workplace population. Int J Obes. 29:1093–1099.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watkins CD, DeBruine LM, Smith FG, Jones BC, Vukovic J, Fraccaro P. 2011. Like father, like self: emotional closeness to father predicts women's preferences for self-resemblance in opposite-sex faces. Evol Hum Behav. 32:70–75.
   Google Scholar
• Wiszewska A, Pawlowski B, Boothroyd LG. 2007. Father-daughter relationship as a moderator of sexual imprinting: a facialmetric study. Evol Hum Behav. 28:248–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolanski N, Siniarska A. 1984. Species module and assortative mating in man. J Hum Evol. 13:247–253.
   Google Scholar
• Yamada K. 2010. Family background and economic outcomes in Japan, Research Collection School of Economics, Paper 1246.
   Google Scholar