Figure 1.
The stimuli used for assessing preferred and actual relative height among partners.
The question asked: ‘Indicate your preferred/actual height of your partner (white figure) compared to your own height (grey figure) - individuals in couple 5 are of the same height’.
Figure 2.
Preferred relative height among partners (mean ± SE) as a function of actual relative height among partners.
The horizontal line reflects a preference for a partner of similar height. The diagonal line reflects (y = x).
Table 1.
Descriptive statistics for preferences and actual choice of the partner relative height. For both variables mean height (±SD) of the male participants is reported.
Table 2.
Frequencies (%) of preferred dominance role, actual dominance role and actual sex role.
Figure 3.
The relationship between own height and preferred and actual relative partner height (mean ± SE).
Height was divided into 2.5(bins below 167.5 and above 192.5 were collapsed). The horizontal line reflects no partner height difference. Height correlated positively with both preferred and actual relative height among partners.
Figure 4.
The correlation between preferred/actual relative height among partners and preferred dominance role (mean ± SE).
The horizontal line reflects neither submissive nor dominant.
Figure 5.
The correlation between preferred/actual relative height among partners and sexual role (mean ± SE).
The horizontal line reflects neither passive nor active role during intercourse.