The Profile Starter Kit

• Townsend & Levy, 1990. High-status clothing (Armani suit) significantly increased women's willingness to date, have sex with, and marry a man - especially when physical attractiveness was low - compared to medium-status (white t-shirt) or low-status (Burger King uniform).
• Fromkin & Brock, 1971. Any psychological stimulus will be perceived as significantly more valuable and desirable to an observer to the extent that it is scarce, restricted, or hard to obtain (Commodity theory).
• Kelton Research, 2011. 91% of people believe dressing sharply makes a man appear significantly more attractive than he naturally is. Additionally, 78% of women state that structured, tailored suits or blazers are one of the most powerful visual indicators of sophistication and success.

Kelton Research is a commercial study, but consistent with my own research and experiences.

• Buss, 1989. Intelligence ranked among the top characteristics both men and women sought in a long-term partner - rated as indispensable or highly important across virtually every culture studied.
• Li, Bailey, Kenrick & Linsenmeier, 2002. Given a limited budget to design a long-term partner, intelligence was bought before anything else. Across three studies it was a necessity to both men and women, not a luxury.
• Prokosch et al., 2009. Cognitive ability and creative expression independently predict male attractiveness. Women evaluate intelligence as a marker of genetic quality and resource potential.

• Waynforth, 2007. Women rated a man as more attractive when he was pictured with a female partner, but only when that partner was herself physically attractive. Men with less mate-choice experience were the most influenced.
• Little, Burriss, Jones, DeBruine & Caldwell, 2008. Women rated men as significantly more desirable when shown alongside an attractive woman compared to an unattractive one - and this effect was stronger for long-term relationship evaluations than short-term ones.
• Place, Todd, Penke & Asendorpf, 2010. Both men and women expressed more interest in a potential mate when that person was paired with an attractive partner.

• McGloin & Denes, 2018. Highly attractive dating profile photos are perceived as less authentic by viewers. Users simultaneously distrust others' polished photos while still using deception on their own profiles.
• Berger & Barasch, 2018. Candid photos increase connection, dating interest, and likeability - because they make people seem more genuine. The benefit disappeared when observers learned the photo was staged.

• Hall, Coats & LeBeau, 2005. Open, expansive postures are consistently linked to higher dominance and status, while closed, contractive postures signal lower power - confirmed across body movement, gaze, interpersonal distance, and facial behavior.
• Vacharkulksemsuk et al., 2016. Open, expansive posture was the strongest predictor of romantic attraction - nearly doubling the odds of a “yes” in speed dating and making online profiles 27% more likely to receive a like. The effect was stronger for men than women.

• Sutherland, Young & Rhodes, 2017. Emotional expression is the single biggest driver of first impressions - shaping perceived trustworthiness, dominance, and attractiveness more than any other factor. Happy expressions boost all three; angry and disgusted ones drag them down.
• Golle, Mast & Lobmaier, 2014. A happy facial expression significantly boosts attractiveness ratings. Participants consistently chose happier faces as more attractive, even when the underlying facial structure was less attractive.
• Mehu, Little & Dunbar, 2007. Duchenne smiles - where the eye muscles activate alongside the mouth - received significantly higher ratings than non-Duchenne smiles across 10 rated attributes.

• Date Psychology, 2024. Women rated 74 male hobbies as attractive or unattractive. Reading ranked first (98.2%), followed by learning foreign languages, playing an instrument, cooking, and woodworking. The least attractive: watching manosphere content, collecting comic books, arguing online, and collecting Funko figurines.
• Petraitis, Lampman, Boeckmann & Falconer, 2014. Hunter-gatherer risks - rock climbing, handling dangerous animals, physical adventure - were rated as attractive in men. Modern risks - driving while on a cell phone, playing with electricity, driving without a seatbelt - were rated as unattractive for both sexes.

Date Psychology is a commercial study, but consistent with my own research and experiences.

• Shackelford, Schmitt & Buss, 2005. Sociability (aka social skills) emerged as one of four universal dimensions of mate preference - consistently valued across all cultures studied, by both men and women.
• Walker & Vul, 2014. Faces were consistently rated as more attractive when presented in a group photo than when shown alone. The brain averages the faces in a group, and since average faces are more attractive than individual ones, everyone benefits.
• Kenrick & Gutierres, 1980. Being seen next to someone significantly more attractive lowers how attractive you appear - the same face is rated noticeably differently depending purely on who else is in the frame.