Page 68 - Demo

66Chapter 3Regarding the voluntary attention analysis, we found robust differencesin predictive accuracy between the three models (Table S24-26). Namely,the model that included Pre-date attractiveness rating had a substantiallyhigher predictive accuracy than the models included Post-date attractiveness rating (∆elpdLOO = 100.1 [17.4]) or Date outcome (∆elpdLOO = 133.5[17.9]) as predictors. Thus, the modal comparisons suggested that pre-dateattractiveness ratings might be a better predictor of voluntary attentionthan post-date attractiveness ratings or date outcome.DiscussionHere, we combined a naturalistic speed-date paradigm with cognitive taskson attentional biases to investigate how physical attractiveness shaped processes of immediate and voluntary attention, using a dot-probe task and apreferential looking paradigm, respectively. First, consistent with previousliterature, we found considerable variation in attractiveness ratings betweensubjects. With regard to immediate attention, we found that only men’sattention was modulated by attractiveness, but we found no consistent association between date outcome and immediate attention. With regard tovoluntary attention, we found that both men and women looked longer atfaces that they rated as attractive before their date. Furthermore, participants showed more attention towards the faces of people that they laterindicated they wanted to date, suggesting that voluntary attention can tosome extent reflect mate choice for both men and women. However, modelcomparisons showed that pre-date attractiveness ratings were more predictive of immediate and voluntary attention than date outcome and post-dateattractiveness, although the results are equivocal for immediate attention.Below, we discuss these findings and further address possible implicationsand limitations of our study.Similar to previous work on (dis)agreements in attractiveness ratings,we found an ICC of approximately 0.4 for the pre-date attractiveness ratings (Hönekopp, 2006; Bronstad & Russell, 2007), reinforcing the idea thatindividual attractiveness preferences can vary and should be taken into account when studying cognitive aspects of mate choice. Consistent with thisidea, we found that individual attractiveness ratings predicted immediateattention in men. This finding extends previous work (Roth et al., 2022) onimmediate attention and attractiveness that showed a general attentionalbias for faces that were predefined as attractive in a large community sample, but found no effect of sex on this bias. Crucially, this previous studydid not account for relationship status. Given that motivation can influenceimmediate attention (Y. Ma et al., 2015, 2019; Maner, Gailliot, & DeWall,2007), we only tested single participants who were interested in a relationship, and as mentioned above we used their individual attractiveness ratingsIliana Samara 17x24.indd 66 08-04-2024 16:35