Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding The Role of Mate Selection Processes in Couples’ Pair-Bonding Behavior

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Behavior Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Couples are similar in their pair-bonding behavior, yet the reasons for this similarity are often unclear. A common explanation is phenotypic assortment, whereby individuals select partners with similar heritable characteristics. Alternatively, social homogamy, whereby individuals passively select partners with similar characteristic due to shared social backgrounds, is rarely considered. We examined whether phenotypic assortment and/or social homogamy can contribute to mate similarity using a twin–partner design. The sample came from the Twin and Offspring Study in Sweden, which included 876 male and female monozygotic and same-sex dizygotic twins plus their married or cohabitating partners. Results showed that variance in pair-bonding behavior was attributable to genetic and nonshared environmental factors. Furthermore, phenotypic assortment accounted for couple similarity in pair-bonding behavior. This suggests that individuals’ genetically based characteristics are involved in their selection of mates with similar pair-bonding behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bernhardt E (2004) Cohabitation or marriage? Australian Institute for Family Studies. Preferred living arrangements in Sweden, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth A, Johnson D, Edwards JN (1983) Measuring marital instability. J Marriage Fam 45:387–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caspi A, Herbener ES (1993) Marital assortment and phenotypic convergence: longitudinal evidence. Biodemogr Soc Biol 40:48–60

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chapais B (2008) Primeval kinship: how pair-bonding gave birth to human society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Eaves LJ (1979) The use of twins in the analysis of assortative mating. Heredity 43:399–409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher GJO, Simpson JA, Campbell L, Overall NC (2015) Pair-bonding, romantic love, and evolution: the curious case of Homo sapiens. Perspect Psychol Sci 10:20–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hill CA (1987) Affiliation motivation: people who need people… but in different ways. J Pers Soc Psychol 52:1008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horwitz BN, Ganiban JM, Spotts EL, Lichtenstein P, Reiss D, Neiderhiser JM (2011) The role of aggressive personality and family relationships in explaining family conflict. J Fam Psychol 25:174–183

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Horwitz BN, Reynolds CA, Neiderhiser JM, Charles ST (2014) Friend support and psychological distress in a US adult twin sample. Pers Relatsh 21:570–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleiman DG (1977) Monogamy in mammals. Q Rev Biol, 39–69

  • Lovejoy CO (1981) The origin of man. Science 211:341–350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luo S, Klohnen EC (2005) Assortative mating and marital quality in newlyweds: a couple-centered approach. J Pers Soc Psychol 88:304–326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marlowe FW (2003) A critical period for provisioning by Hadza men - Implications for pair bonding. Evol Hum Behav 24:217–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGue M, Bouchard TJ Jr (1984) Adjustment of twin data for the effects of age and sex. Behav Genet 14:325–343

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McGue M, Lykken DT (1992) Genetic influence on risk of divorce. Psychol Sci 3:368–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neale MC, Boker SM, Xie G, Maes HM (1999) Statistical modeling. Department of Psychiatry, Richmond

    Google Scholar 

  • Neiderhiser JM, Lichtenstein P (2008) The Twin and Offspring Study in Sweden: advancing our understanding of genotype-environment interplay by studying twins and their families. Acta Psychologica Sinica 40:1116–1123

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols RC, Bilbro WC (1966) The diagnosis of twin zygosity. Hum Hered 16:266–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plomin R, DeFries JC, Loehlin JC (1977) Genotype-environment interaction and correlation in the analysis of human behavior. Psychol Bull 84:309–322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Price RA, Vandenberg SG (1980) Spouse similarity in American and Swedish couples. Behav Genet 10:59–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds CA, Baker LA, Pedersen NL (1996) Models of spouse similarity: applications to fluid ability measured in twins and their spouses. Behav Genet 26:73–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds CA, Baker LA, Pedersen NL (2000) Multivariate models of mixed assortment: phenotypic assortment and social homogamy for education and fluid ability. Behav Genet 30:455–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds CA, Barlow T, Pedersen NL (2006) Alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine use: spouse similarity processes. Behav Genet 36:201–215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scarr S, McCartney K (1983) How people make their own environments: a theory of genotype greater than environment effects. Child Dev 54:424–435

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson JA (1990) Influence of attachment styles on romantic relationships. J Pers Soc Psychol 59:971–980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spanier GB (1976) Measuring dyadic adjustment: new scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. J Marriage Fam, 15–28

  • Spotts EL, Neiderhiser JM, Towers H, Hansson K, Lichtenstein P, Cederblad M, Pedersen NL, Reiss D (2004) Genetic and environmental influences on marital relationships. J Fam Psychol 18:107–119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walum H, Westberg L, Henningsson S, Neiderhiser JM, Reiss D, Igl W, Ganiban JM, Spotts EL, Pedersen NL, Eriksson E, Lichtenstein P (2008) Genetic variation in the vasopressin receptor 1a gene (AVPR1A) associates with pair-bonding behavior in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:14153–14156

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Walum H, Lichtenstein P, Neiderhiser JM, Reiss D, Ganiban JM, Spotts EL, Pedersen NL, Anckarsater H, Larsson H, Westberg L (2012) Variation in the oxytocin receptor gene in associated with pair-bonding and social behavior. Biol Psychiatry 71:419–426

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Watson D, Klohnen EC, Casillas A, Simms EN, Haig J, Berry DS (2004) Match makers and deal breakers: analyses of assortative mating in newlywed couples. J Pers 72:1029–1068

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zietsch BP, Verweij KJH, Heath AC, Martin NG (2011) Variation in human mate choice: simultaneously investigating heritability, parental influence, sexual imprinting, and assortative mating. Am Nat 177:605–616

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the principle investigators and families of the Twin and Offspring Study in Sweden (TOSS. Funding for TOSS was provided by the National Institute of Mental Health Grant R01MH54601. Additional funding was provided by the National Institute on Aging (F32 AG039165).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, California State University, Fullerton, H-710I Humanities Building, Fullerton, CA, 92831, USA

    Briana N. Horwitz

  2. Department of Psychology, University of California, Riverside, CA, USA

    Chandra A. Reynolds

  3. Center for Behavioral Neuroscience, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Hasse Walum

  4. Department of Psychology, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA

    Jody Ganiban

  5. Office of Behavioral Sciences and Social Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Erica L. Spotts

  6. Child Study Center, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

    David Reiss

  7. Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinksa Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

    Paul Lichtenstein

  8. Department of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

    Jenae M. Neiderhiser

Authors
  1. Briana N. Horwitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chandra A. Reynolds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hasse Walum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jody Ganiban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Erica L. Spotts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. David Reiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Paul Lichtenstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jenae M. Neiderhiser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Briana N. Horwitz.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Briana N. Horwitz, Chandra A. Reynolds, Hasse Walum, Jody Ganiban, Erica L. Spotts, David Reiss, Paul Lichtenstein, and Jenae M. Neiderhiser declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of Institutional Review Boards (IRB) in Sweden and the United States, and all participants provided written informed consent before participating in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Horwitz, B.N., Reynolds, C.A., Walum, H. et al. Understanding The Role of Mate Selection Processes in Couples’ Pair-Bonding Behavior. Behav Genet 46, 143–149 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-015-9766-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-015-9766-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation