How Are They Different?: Gender and Group Differences in Romantic Relationships and Attitudes

주현덕; 박세니

Article Contents

Prev Next

e-Submission

Vol.10 No.4

Citation
Share

How Are They Different?: Gender and Group Differences in Romantic Relationships and Attitudes

The Korean Journal of Woman Psychology / The Korean Journal of Woman Psychology, (P)1229-0726;

2005, v.10 no.4, pp.573-601

& (2005). How Are They Different?: Gender and Group Differences in Romantic Relationships and Attitudes. The Korean Journal of Woman Psychology, 10(4), 573-601.

copy

Abstract

In this study, investigating the differences among subgroups by personal variables(Study1) of 1283 participants, such as dating status, the number of romantic relationship experiences, conservative-liberalistic tendency, economic status, appearance, satisfaction of appearance, importance of sex, possession of initiative in relationships, and importance of premarital virginity, we try to find out whether “the richer the men, and the prettier the women, the more romantic relationships they get.” We also try to find out which romantic relationship attitude is more important in romantic experiences, and whether there exist greater similarities in love attitudes between genders than the differences(Study2). Findings show that richer men have just little more experiences, but prettier women have not more experiences than those who are not. Appearance was a more important factor in men's romantic relationships than in women's. Among love(romantic) attitudes, the openness, which means active, open-minded to sexuality, outgoing, liberal attitude, was the most critical one in love relationships. And the gender differences in love attitudes were not significant, which supported the our hypothesis 3. The results of the current study seem to support the explanations of Social Construction Theories. But the these results do not contradict to the evolutionary psychology, which emphasizes that inclination and ways to share property is as important as having property in relationship with partners.

keywords: Romantic relationships, MALPS, love attitude, evolutionary psychology, social construction theory, 연애태도, 성차, 연애관계, MALPS, 진화심리학, 사회구성이론, Romantic relationships, MALPS, love attitude, evolutionary psychology, social construction theory

Reference

(2001) 사랑에서 관계지위와 성별에 따른 개인적 및 관계적 특성에서의 차이 남녀 대학생들을 중심으로,

(2000) 애착 유형에 따른 자기상이 대인지각에 미치는 효과,

(2005) 연애 관계에서 성인애착 유형 및 요인에 따른 관계만족 ,

(2001) 대학생의 이성 관계에서 애착이 갈등 해결 전략에 미치는 영향 부정적 기분 조절 기대치를 매개변인으로,

(1991) 연애 중인 커플의 애착 성향 비교 ‘선택가설’에 대한 검증,

(2002) 여성의 외모주의와 성형의료산업,

(2005) 친밀한 이성관계에서 이상과 현재의 차이가 관계만족에 미치는 영향,

(2002) 사춘기 여학생의 신체성장에 따른 신체이미지 및 자기존중감 의복태도 형성모델,

(2002) 애착과 사랑양식 및 관련 변인들의 관계,

10.

(2005) 한국 대학생들의 연애태도의 탐색적 연구 ‘연인으로서의 나(내 애인) 척도(MALPS)’의 타당성 검증. ,

11.

(2001) 배우자 선택 양식의 변화 친밀성의 혁명?,

12.

(1996) 한국 대학생의 사랑스타일과 이성상대 선택준거,

13.

(1998) 데이트 관계의 형성과 발전에 관련된 변인들 ,

14.

(2002) 연애와 결혼의 심리학,

15.

(2001) The Myth of Monogamy, Freeman and Company Inc

16.

(2004) Emotional responses to the sexual and emotional aspects of infidelity,

17.

(1987) Physical attractiveness and self-perception of mental disorder,

18.

(1999) The evolution of human personality Handbook of Personality, Guilford Press

19.

(1994) The Evolution of Desire, Basic Books

20.

(1986) Preferences in human mate selection,

21.

(1987) Cognitive-behavioral treatment of women's body-image dissatisfaction,

22.

(1985) Value orientation in heterosexual relationships,

23.

(1998) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

24.

(1998) social constructionism in the study of human sexuality Journal of Sex Research,

25.

(1997) Why is Sex Fun? The Evolution of Human Sexuality, Orion Publishing Group Inc

26.

(1975) Self-esteem and romantic love,

27.

(1973) Correlates of romantic love,

28.

(1992) Gender difference in mate selecting preferences:A test of the parental investment model,

29.

(1990) Gender difference in effects of physical attractiveness on romantic attraction:A comparison across five research paradigms,

30.

(1994) Anatomy of Love, Norton & Company

31.

(2005) Receptivity to sexual offer as a function of sex and intimacy of the offer,

32.

(1999) The nurture assumption: Why children turn out the way they do.,

33.

(1993) Integrating evolutionary and social exchange perspectives on relationships Effects of gender and involvement level on mate selection criteria Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

34.

(2000) The MIT Press,

35.

(1996) the role of alcohol and gender choices and judgements about hypothetical sexual encounters,

36.

(20042004) 유혹의 심리학,

37.

(1987) A ratio measure of sex stereotyping,

38.

(1975) The Journal of Psychology,

39.

(2000) How sexual choice shared the evolution of human nature? Brockman Inc,

40.

(1997) State University of New York Press,

41.

(1957) The Measurement of Meaning University of Illinois Press,

42.

(1998) A prospective study of personality and gender differences in romantic attraction,

43.

(1999) Falling in love,

44.

(2001) The illusion of asymmetric insight Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

45.

(2001) Human mate poaching:Tactics and temptations for infiltrating existing mateships,

46.

(1992) The evolution of female sexuality and mate selection in humans,

47.

(1987) Self acceptance and the selection of a marital partner:An assessment of the SVR model of Murstein,

48.

(1992) The Mismeasurement of Women,

49.

(1993) Measurement of Love and Intimate Relations and Applications for Love Development, Praeger Publishers

50.

(1987) The impact of physical attractiveness on achievement and psychological well-being,

51.

(2000) The frequency of temporal-self and social comparisons in people's personal appraisals,

바로가기메뉴

Article Contents

Vol.10 No.4

How Are They Different?: Gender and Group Differences in Romantic Relationships and Attitudes

Abstract

Reference

The Korean Journal of Woman Psychology