A new study published in Evolution and Human Behavior suggests that how people evaluate their own desirability as a romantic partner may be linked to conflict and competition within relationships. The research examined these patterns in both monogamous and consensually non-monogamous relationships.
The findings indicate that people who viewed themselves as more replaceable, or lower in mate value, tended to report more relationship conflict and greater competitiveness toward potential romantic rivals. Although some patterns differed depending on relationship structure and partner type, the study suggests that perceptions of one’s own mate value may play an important role in relationship dynamics.
What mate value really means
In relationship research, mate value refers to a person’s perceived desirability as a romantic partner based on characteristics such as physical attractiveness, personality, emotional stability, social status and resources. Researchers can also examine perceived differences in mate value between partners, sometimes described as mate value discrepancies.
Previous research has linked perceived differences in partner desirability with insecurity, jealousy and behaviors intended to maintain a relationship. From an evolutionary perspective, perceiving a partner as particularly desirable or difficult to replace could potentially heighten sensitivity to romantic competition.
However, mate value is not a fixed or objectively measurable characteristic. In studies such as this one, researchers are largely examining participants’ perceptions of themselves and their partners, which may themselves be influenced by self-esteem, relationship satisfaction and other psychological factors.
Study design across relationship styles
The study was led by Faith Swanson at Texas State University under the supervision of psychologist Rhonda Balzarini. The researchers sought to determine whether associations involving mate value operate similarly in monogamous and consensually non-monogamous relationships, an area that has received less attention in previous research.
They analyzed data from 512 adults, including 312 participants in monogamous relationships and 200 in consensually non-monogamous relationships. Participants from 62 countries completed online surveys about themselves and up to two current romantic partners.
Respondents evaluated how difficult it would be to replace themselves and their partners across characteristics including physical attractiveness, emotional stability and financial resources. They also answered questions about relationship conflict, anticipated jealousy if a partner became intimate with someone else, behaviors intended to retain a partner and competitiveness toward potential same-sex rivals.
The researchers then examined how participants’ perceptions of their own and their partners’ mate value were associated with these relationship outcomes.
Conflict and competitiveness show the clearest links
One of the most consistent patterns involved participants’ perceptions of their own mate value. People who regarded themselves as lower in mate value tended to report more frequent relationship conflict and greater intrasexual competitiveness, or a stronger tendency to perceive same-sex others as romantic competitors.
These associations appeared across both monogamous and consensually non-monogamous relationships, suggesting that perceived self-value may be relevant across different relationship structures.
However, mate value discrepancies did not consistently predict jealousy or mate-retention behaviors in primary relationships. This differed from some previous research and indicates that the relationship between perceived desirability and behaviors such as jealousy or mate guarding may be more complex than a straightforward comparison between partners.
The results also differed when participants in consensually non-monogamous relationships evaluated secondary partners. In those relationships, perceiving oneself as higher in mate value than a secondary partner was associated with greater conflict, jealousy and mate-retention behavior.
These findings suggest that the relevance of mate value perceptions may depend partly on the particular relationship and its position within a consensually non-monogamous arrangement.
Communication is linked to relationship outcomes
The researchers also examined relationship-maintenance strategies used by participants in consensually non-monogamous relationships. Several approaches were associated with differences in conflict, jealousy and other relationship experiences.
Behaviors involving communication about jealousy and attraction to other people, as well as compersion, were associated with more favorable relationship outcomes in some analyses. Compersion generally refers to positive feelings experienced in response to a partner’s romantic or sexual experiences with another person.
By contrast, greater emphasis on partner hierarchy was associated with higher levels of some negative relationship outcomes, including jealousy, conflict and mate-retention behaviors.
These findings should not be interpreted as evidence that particular communication practices directly reduce conflict or that relationship hierarchies cause jealousy. Because participants were surveyed at one point in time, the direction of these associations cannot be determined. People experiencing healthier relationships may communicate differently, for example, rather than communication alone producing those outcomes.
Gender differences also emerged
The study identified several gender-related patterns. Men who perceived their own mate value as lower tended to report greater competitiveness toward other men, a finding the researchers considered in relation to evolutionary theories of intrasexual competition.
Among women in monogamous relationships, greater perceived partner mate value was associated with increased competitiveness toward potential rivals. This could be consistent with greater vigilance when a partner is perceived as particularly desirable, although the study cannot establish the psychological mechanism behind the association.
Participants in consensually non-monogamous relationships also reported lower levels of some forms of jealousy compared with participants in monogamous relationships. However, these group differences should not be interpreted as showing that one relationship structure inherently produces less jealousy than another.
People who choose consensual non-monogamy may differ from those who choose monogamy in multiple ways, and the study was not designed to randomly assign participants to relationship structures.
Important limitations of the findings
Swanson emphasized that the associations identified in the study were generally modest. Perceived mate value is therefore only one of many factors that may contribute to conflict, jealousy and competition in romantic relationships.
The cross-sectional design is particularly important when interpreting the results. The study cannot establish whether feeling less desirable contributes to relationship conflict, whether conflict changes how people evaluate themselves, or whether another factor influences both.
The findings involving secondary partners in consensually non-monogamous relationships were also based on a smaller subgroup, making those results less certain.
In addition, the study relied on self-reported perceptions and behaviors. Participants’ assessments of their own and their partners’ desirability do not necessarily represent objective differences between partners.
Implications for relationship science
One of the study’s broader contributions is its inclusion of consensually non-monogamous relationships in research on mate value, jealousy and romantic competition. The results suggest that some associations involving perceived desirability occur across relationship structures, while others may vary according to partner type and relationship arrangement.
Future longitudinal research could help determine how these factors influence one another over time. Collecting information from multiple partners within the same relationship could also provide a more complete picture than relying on one person’s perceptions alone.
For now, the study suggests that feeling relatively undesirable or replaceable may be associated with greater conflict and romantic competitiveness. But it also shows that relationship dynamics cannot be explained by mate value alone. Communication patterns, individual differences and the structure of the relationship may all be relevant to understanding how people respond to insecurity and romantic competition.
