The Role of Relational Communication Characteristics and Filial Piety in Mate Preferences: Cross-cultural Comparisons of Chinese and US College Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous cross-cultural mate preference studies have employed researcher-generated lists of traits constructed from Western samples. Yet people from different cultures may prefer traits that do not appear on the lists. Unexamined, too, is the importance of relational communication characteristics and filial piety in partner preferences. To examine similarities and differences in mate preferences, two studies were conducted with 277 college students from China and the United States. In Study I, responses from an open-ended question indicated that both groups listed honesty, physical attractiveness, ambitious and considerateness as preferred traits. Chinese students listed filial piety as one of their three most preferred traits in a partner. Study 2 explored the relative importance of students' preferred traits. As hypothesized, Chinese students valued social status and filial piety more highly than US students. Both groups preferred the relational communication traits of steadfast support and authentic ity over social status and physical attractiveness
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".