Psychologist Paul Eastwick’s new book, Bonded by Evolution, dismantles a popular, yet flawed, theory about how relationships work. The idea – often circulated in dating advice and online forums – suggests that romantic success is dictated by a rigid “mate value” hierarchy based on attractiveness, status, and resources. According to this view, individuals compete in a marketplace, pairing off with the highest-value partner possible for optimal offspring. Eastwick persuasively argues that this “EvoScript” is largely bunkum.
The Problem with Snap Judgments
Much of the research supporting mate value relies on superficial assessments. Studies often ask participants to rate attractiveness from photos or videos of strangers. While people may agree on who appears more appealing, these initial judgments are notoriously unreliable. Eastwick and his colleagues have demonstrated that consensus on someone’s appeal quickly dissolves once real interaction begins.
“If I think you’re hot, someone else agrees with me a mere 53 percent of the time,” Eastwick notes. This instability suggests that our perceived “mate value” is far more fluid than previously assumed.
Compatibility Trumps Checklists
The real driver of connection isn’t ticking boxes on a preference list. People claim to seek specific traits – extroversion, adventure, success – but research shows these preferences matter surprisingly little. What truly matters are the feelings someone elicits in you, something that can only be discovered through meaningful conversation and shared experiences. Compatibility is messy, unpredictable, and doesn’t neatly align with surface-level impressions.
First Impressions Are Deceptive
Justin Garcia, director of the Kinsey Institute, agrees that initial assessments of “date-ability” are highly misleading. We quickly judge mismatched pairings, but mate value is far more complex than it appears. Both Eastwick and Garcia emphasize the importance of “self-expansion” – the mutual growth and new experiences that make relationships alluring.
Practical Implications for Dating
Given the unreliability of first impressions, Eastwick recommends giving potential partners at least three chances before writing them off. Your third impression is a far better predictor than any initial judgment. He also suggests engaging in diverse dates – roller-skating, karaoke, even chocolate tasting – to gauge how someone behaves in different contexts.
Importantly, nurturing existing friendships is crucial. Love is more likely to blossom with someone you already know. Maintaining social connections yields benefits beyond romance, including improved mental and physical health.
The Friend Zone Isn’t a Dead End
Even rejections can lead to valuable social expansion. Eastwick himself remained friends with a former crush, Anna, eventually gaining access to her social circle. The expanding network provided its own rewards, demonstrating that the “friend zone” isn’t necessarily a failure.
Ultimately, finding love requires an open mind, honesty, and kindness. There’s no need for cynical dating strategies. By focusing on genuine connection, individuals can improve their chances of finding a fulfilling relationship.
The key takeaway? Trust your evolving feelings, not superficial rankings. Real compatibility takes time, effort, and a willingness to look beyond the first impression.
