Eastwick and Finkel (2008) apply a longitudinal approach to
speed dating. A
Newsweek interview (2008) with the authors sums up their findings: Finkel: "There was a disconnect between what they said they wanted and what they actually wanted."
Eastwick: "People have theories, and those theories guide us, but they might not always be correct."
In short, men (more than women) rank attractiveness as more important, and women (more than men) rank earnings as more important. But the people these same men and women chose to date did not correlate with their stated preferences. After mates were found, the attraction One theory, espoused in Newsweek by Eastwick, is that people adjust their priorities to match the mates they find, rather than finding mates who match their priorities.
Don't tell my boyfriend*, but I suspect that I follow Eastwick's adjusted priorities model. Of course the person that I'm enjoying right now seems to have the qualities I admire: I notice myself admiring them in him. When filling out the "how would your ideal mate answer this question" forms on OKCupid, I usually find myself wondering how he would answer. However, I self-centeredly admit that I'd like to think I'm objectively awesome, and not just awesome because we're dating. The "adjusted priorities" model reminds me far too much of the Onion article
"You Are The Most Beautiful Woman In The World Who Will Sleep With Me" (Babcock, 2004) Eastwick and Finkel are apparently both in serious relationships, according to their interview, so I wonder how their partners feel about their research.
*this is a joke, because he reads D-blog