(PDF) It Takes Two to Tango: Development, Validation, and Personality Correlates of the Acceptance of Sugar Relationships in Old

BRIEF RESEARCH REPORT published: 09 April 2021 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.592138 It Takes Two to Tango: Development, Validation, and Personality Correlates of the Acceptance of Sugar Relationships in Older Men and Women Scale (ASR-OMWS) András Láng 1 , Béla Birkás 2 , András N. Zsidó 1 , Dóra Ipolyi 1 and Norbert Meskó 1* 1 Institute of Psychology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary, 2 Department of Behavioral Sciences, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary Sugar relationships can be considered contemporary forms of transactional sex, that is, offering sexual services for material resources or other benefits. Considering the Edited by: Peter Karl Jonason, common age differences in these relationships, sugar relationships might be of relevance University of Padua, Italy for older adults as well on the mating market. As a sequel to Birkás et al. (2020), in Reviewed by: the present study, an attitude scale was developed to assess older women’s and Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair, men’s acceptance of sugar relationships. We also explored whether the acceptance Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway of sugar relationships was associated with love styles, sociosexual orientation, sexual Scott William Semenyna, motivation, and certain socially aversive personality traits. In two online studies with a University of Lethbridge, Canada total number of 836 participants (N = 277 women and 559 men), the results showed that *Correspondence: Norbert Meskó the Acceptance of Sugar Relationships in Older Men and Women Scale (ASR-OMWS)

proved to be a reliable and conceptually valid measure of older individuals’ attitude toward sugar relationships. A more accepting attitude toward sugar relationships was Specialty section: This article was submitted to found to be associated with more unrestricted sociosexuality, preference to engage in Evolutionary Psychology, playful love relationships and more self-focused sexual motivation (study 1; N = 481, a section of the journal 167 women and 314 men), and with more pronounced Dark Triad and borderline Frontiers in Psychology traits (study 2; N = 355, 110 women and 245 men). Our findings are discussed in an Received: 06 August 2020 Accepted: 12 March 2021 evolutionary framework. Published: 09 April 2021 Keywords: acceptance of sugar relationships, scale development, validation, personality correlates, transactional Citation: sex Láng A, Birkás B, Zsidó AN, Ipolyi D and Meskó N (2021) It Takes Two to Tango: Development, Validation, and Personality Correlates INTRODUCTION of the Acceptance of Sugar Relationships in Older Men and Sugar relationship can be described as a form of affair between a well-to-do man (sugar daddy) and Women Scale (ASR-OMWS). less frequently woman (sugar mommy) who is willing to financially compensate (through monetary Front. Psychol. 12:592138. or other form of rewards) his/her young in-need partner (sugar baby; a female, or less frequently, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.592138 sugar boy, a male) in return for a form of companionship they agreed upon (Nayar, 2016). Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 592138 Láng et al. Acceptance of Sugar Relationships Scale This transactional form of relationship could be well understood personality-related characteristics (Alterovitz and Mendelsohn, and investigated in a model describing the variations of mating 2011; Fales et al., 2016). Thus, it is plausible to suggest that preferences referred to as the “mating market” (Pawlowski personality traits and individual attitudes play a central role in and Dunbar, 1999). As suggested by its name, the mating relationship choices and might be important factors in forming market describes a two-way process of finding romantic partners. sugar relationships, but in different ways for younger and Individuals on the market advertise their potentially desirable older counterparts. Birkás et al. (2020) recently published their characteristics as a potential partner, whereas they also proclaim research report about a questionnaire that was developed to desired qualities of their potential mates (Pawlowski and measure the accepting attitude of young women and men toward Dunbar, 1999). Sugar relationships might be specific in the a sugar relationship. However, sugar relationships are dyadic sense that advertised and desired partner qualities are explicitly and asymmetric (e.g., Nayar, 2016; Hoss and Blokland, 2018). stated and negotiated. The previously mentioned measure only taps the mindset of Within the evolutionary context, human mating strategies younger partners, who provide companionship and/or sexual vary according to the individual’s reproductive potential and relationship for resources. This paper presents the development reproductive investment (Buss, 1994). Since women invest more of a supplementary questionnaire to measure the acceptance in parenting (a potential outcome of mating compared with of sugar relationships among older men and women, i.e., men), they show stronger preferences for partners with signs among those who might be willing to provide resources for of capability of parental investment (i.e., financial stability or (sexual) companionship. higher level of education; Buss, 1989; Anderson and Klofstad, 2012; Walter et al., 2020). More for men than for women, partners with physical signs of reproductive potential (youth, AIM OF THE CURRENT STUDIES attractiveness) are evaluated as more desirable mates (e.g., Buss, 1989; Walter et al., 2020). However, it is important to note, The primary aim of the current studies was to develop and that in long-term relationships, both men and women prefer validate an instrument that allows for the measurement of physical attractiveness, but men value it more (Buss, 1989; attitudes toward sugar relationships in older adults. Thus, these Walter et al., 2020). studies are a sequel to the studies in Birkás et al. (2020). Using Mating preferences also vary according to the “mate value” the same instruments as in Birkás et al. (2020) also allowed us of the individual, that is, the ability and willingness to invest to compare the pattern of correlations in the two samples as a resources in the relationship (i.e., quality and stability) and in function of age. Thus, these studies also add to our knowledge the raising offspring. The structure of the mating market suggests nomological network of the attitude toward sugar relationships that individuals with higher mate value are rated as more in two different age groups. Furthermore, our study also aimed desirable by potential partners; thus, they can aim for a similarly to provide some additional support for the mating market model high-valued partner. Correspondingly, individuals with more and the relevance of personality-related factors in forming mating desirable traits can expect higher mate value for their “offer” in strategies and preferences when bargaining for a partner. As basic the mating market (Pawlowski and Dunbar, 1999). Reproductive mate preferences only decrease in magnitude with age (Buss, potential declines with age, especially for women. As a result, 1989; Li et al., 2002; Conroy Beam and Buss, 2019; Conroy-Beam mating strategies might change over time, but basic mate et al., 2019; Walter et al., 2020), in this older sample, we expected preferences only decrease in magnitude (Buss, 1989; Li et al., the same pattern of correlations as reported in Birkás et al. (2020). 2002; Conroy Beam and Buss, 2019; Conroy-Beam et al., 2019; Walter et al., 2020). Thus, both older women and men value physical attractiveness and social status of the potential partner METHOD as less important and prefer indicators of commitment and other traits promoting to engage in a more intimate relationship Sample and Procedure (Alterovitz and Mendelsohn, 2011; Fales et al., 2016). Moreover, We used two separate samples in this study. The first sample older individuals tend to be less selective and expect less mate completed the Acceptance of Sugar Relationships in Older Men value from their partners; perhaps as a trade-off due to the and Women Scale (ASR-OMWS), Love Attitudes Scale, Short decrease of their mate value (lower levels of health and physical Form (LAS-SF), Sociosexual Orientation Inventory, Revised attractiveness) (Li et al., 2002; Fales et al., 2016; Seto, 2017). (SOI-R), and Reasons for Having Sex Questionnaire, Hungarian Accordingly, sugar relationship can be considered an alternative Short Form (YSEX?-HSF) and consisted of 481 Hungarian platform for adaptive mating preferences. Older individuals participants (314 males), aged 40–69 years (M = 47.8, SD = 6.46). in modern societies frequently accumulate financial resources The second sample completed the ASR-OMWS, Borderline which they can possibly offer to potential partners, whereas Personality Inventory (BPI), and Short Dark Triad (SD3) and the companionship of younger individuals can be valuable not consisted of 355 Hungarian participants (245 males), aged 40– only for intimacy but also for increasing the social prestige of 71 years (M = 48.7, SD = 7.43). (See complete demographic data the older partner. for both samples in Table 1). Personality traits are keys to advertise and to identify desirable We used separate samples for the love, sociosexuality, sexual characteristics on the mating market (e.g., Birkás et al., 2018). motivation (first sample), and personality trait (second sample) With age, mating preferences shift from physical traits to more scales as participants filled out these scales as part of various Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 592138 Láng et al. Acceptance of Sugar Relationships Scale TABLE 1 | Demographic data of the two samples of the study. studies (N = 836, 277 women and 559 men, age range: 40– 71, M = 48.2, SD = 6.90) and conducted a confirmatory Demographics First Second factor analysis (CFA) with the robust weighted least squares sample sample with mean and variance adjustment (WLSMV) estimator. The N = 481 N = 355 single-factor CFA (CFI = 0.992; TLI = 0.984; RMSEA = 0.055 [90% CI = 0.028–0.083]; SRMR = 0.017) showed an excellent Relationship status fit (based on the cutoffs proposed by Browne and Cudeck, Currently single 12.1% 15.2% 1992 and Hu and Bentler, 1998). An exploratory principle Has casual relationships but no permanent partner 6.2% 5.9% component analysis supported the unidimensional nature of the Is in a committed relationship/married but does not live 15.4% 12.7% scale. Component loadings on the single component ranged from with the partner 0.697 to 0.857 for the five items. The single component explained Is in a committed relationship/married and lives with the 66.3% 66.2% partner 80.71% of the five items’ total variance. Registered website user Registered at a dating site 13.7% 13.8% Instruments Registered at a site designated to arrange sugar 4.4% 2.5% Acceptance of Sugar Relationships in Older Men and relationships Women Scale Registered at both types of sites 5.0% 5.9% The ASR-OMWS is the scale whose development, reliability Not registered at either type of sites 76.9% 77.7% analysis, and validation were the objectives of the present study. Currently involved in a sugar relationship 8.3% The item generation procedure was as presented previously (for Lifetime sexual partners the questionnaire, see Appendix 1), while the psychometric 0 0 0 properties of the scale are discussed below. The scale contains 1 3.7% 1.4% five items. Cronbach’s α values were 0.95 and 0.93 for the first 2 3.5% 5.9% and second samples, respectively. 3 3.3% 6.8% 4 4.4% 4.5% Love Attitudes Scale, Short Form 5–6 11.6% 5.6% The LAS-SF (Hendrick et al., 1998; adapted to Hungarian by 7–9 12.1% 15.8% Meskó et al., 2021) contains 24 items that compose the following 10–19 22.5% 40.8% six subscales: Eros (erotic, romantic, passionate love style), 20 or more 38.9% 19.2% Ludus (game-playing love style), Storge (affectionate, friendship- Place of residence oriented love style), Pragma (rational, shopping-list love style), Small village 2.9% 5.6% Mania (possessive, dependent love style), and Agape (selfless love Large village 2.1% 3.1% style). Each subscale has four items, and respondents indicate Small/medium-sized town 13.1% 13.5% the extent to which each item applies to them on a five-point Municipal town/city 19.5% 20.6% Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly Capital city and its agglomeration 62.4% 57.2% agree). Thus, higher scores reflect stronger identifications with specific love styles. Cronbach’s α values for the six subscales were as follows: 0.83, 0.75, 0.85, 0.66, 0.73, and 0.84 for Eros, Ludus, other, larger studies. Data were collected online. The survey was Storge, Pragma, Mania, and Agape, respectively. edited in Google Forms. The link to the survey was disseminated via Facebook and via one of the most popular and influential Sociosexual Orientation Inventory, Revised Hungarian Internet portals to time, Index1 . All participants The SOI-R (Penke and Asendorpf, 2008; adapted to Hungarian by gave informed consent, and none of them was rewarded for Meskó et al., 2014) contains nine items assessing one’s willingness participation. The research plan received ethical approval from to engage in uncommitted sexual encounters. The items compose the Hungarian United Ethical Review Committee for Research in three subscales measuring the three components of behavior, Psychology (Ref. No. 2018/115 and Ref. No. 2019/51). attitude, and desire. Responses are given on nine-point rating scales (scale anchors vary across items). Higher scores on each Item Generation and Selection subscale indicate more unrestricted sociosexuality in terms of Since the items were identical in ASR-YWMS (Birkás et al., behavior, attitude, and desire. Cronbach’s α values for the three 2020) and ASR-OMWS with the exception of the subject of the subscales and the overall scale were as follows: 0.78, 0.82, 0.91, sentences, we used reformulated items from ASR-YMWS (Birkás and 0.87 for behavior, attitude, and desire subscales and for the et al., 2020). For further information about item generation, total score, respectively. see Birkás et al. (2020) (see the questionnaire in Appendix 1). To test the psychometric feasibility of the one-factor short Reasons for Having Sex Questionnaire, Hungarian form of the questionnaire, we pooled the sample of the two Short Form The YSEX-HSF (Meskó et al., unpublished data) is a self-report instrument assessing sexual motivation. The scale comprises 73 1 https://index.hu/ items, which compose the following three subscales: Personal Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 592138 Láng et al. Acceptance of Sugar Relationships Scale goal attainment, Relational reasons, and Sex as coping. Each TABLE 2 | Pearson’s correlations between acceptance of sugar relationships and sexual motivation, sociosexuality, and love attitudes (sample 1). item is rated on a five-point scale offering the following options: 1 = “None of my sexual experiences”; 2 = “Few (. . .)”; 3 = “Some Correlation with ASR-OMWS Fisher’s r-to-Z (. . .)”; 4 = “Many (. . .)”; and 5 = “All of my sexual experiences.” ASR-YWMS (Birkás (current transformation Thus, higher scores reflect higher levels of the measured sexual et al., 2020) study) motive. Cronbach’s α values were as follows: 0.91, 0.91, and N = 319 N = 481 0.92 for personal goal attainment, relational reasons, and sex as coping, respectively. r r Z p Borderline Personality Inventory YSEX?-HSF The BPI (Leichsenring, 1999) is a 53-item self-report measure Personal goal attainment 0.457** 0.482** −0.44 0.660 of borderline personality organization (BPO). Since the non- Relational reasons −0.029 0.225** −3.56 < 0.001 clinical sample of study 2 was expected to show relatively mild Sex as coping 0.358** 0.220** 2.08 0.038 features of BPO, the original “yes-no” response format of the BPI LAS-SF was replaced with four-point rating scales (ranging from “never” Eros −0.267** −0.193** −1.08 0.280 to “always”) more sensitive to subclinical intensity. Thus, BPI Ludus 0.543** 0.540** 0.06 0.952 was used in a Likert scale format (for a previous application of Storge −0.016 0.005 −0.29 0.772 this procedure, see Láng, 2015). The BPI measures four aspects Pragma −0.010 −0.002 −0.11 0.912 of BPO: identity diffusion, fear of fusion, primitive defense Mania 0.116 0.078 0.53 0.596 mechanisms, and impaired reality testing. In this study, the Agape −0.154* −0.034 −1.67 0.095 total BPI score was used. BPI showed high internal consistency SOI-R (Cronbach’s α = 0.90) as a unidimensional scale. Behavior 0.438** 0.418** 0.34 0.734 Attitude 0.396** 0.465** −1.17 0.242 Short Dark Triad Desire 0.459** 0.466** −0.12 0.905 The SD3 (Jones and Paulhus, 2014) is a 27-item self-report Total 0.529** 0.555** −0.51 0.610 instrument. Its three subscales measure three socially aversive *p < 0.01 and **p < 0.001 for correlations. ASR-OMWS, Acceptance of Sugar personality traits: Machiavellianism (e.g., “Generally speaking, Relationship in Older Men and Women Scale; YSEX?-HSF, Why Have Sex— people won’t work hard unless they have to”), subclinical Hungarian Short Form; SOI-R, Sociosexual Orientation Inventory Revised; LAS-SF, narcissism (e.g., “Many group activities tend to be dull without Love Attitude Scale—Short Form. me”), and subclinical psychopathy (e.g., “It’s true that I can be nasty”). Each subscale consists of nine items rated on a love styles. This means that individuals with a more positive five-point Likert scale. Cronbach’s α values were as follows: attitude toward sugar relationships tended to see love as a 0.79, 0.71, and 0.72 for Machiavellianism, Narcissism, and source of pure pleasure without striving for exclusivity in their Psychopathy, respectively. love relationships. Next, we compared the strength of the correlations with that RESULTS obtained in the study of Birkás et al. (2020) that tested the same associations in a young adult sample. According to the results of Relationships between acceptance of sugar relationships and Fisher r-to-Z transformations (i.e., statistical analyses that test sexual motives, sociosexuality, and love styles were tested with whether two correlation coefficients are significantly different Pearson’s correlations. Results of these analyses along with the from each other; Table 2), acceptance of sugar relationships means and standard deviations of the variables are shown in correlated significantly stronger with relational reasons as sexual Table 2. Acceptance of sugar relationships showed significant motives and significantly weaker with sex as coping in the positive associations with all three sexual motives with all current older sample. All other correlations were statistically correlations being low to moderate in strength. This means identical in strength. that individuals with a more positive attitude toward sugar Associations between acceptance of sugar relationships relationships tended to have sex out of self-focused reasons, and and personality traits were tested with Pearson’s correlations. they also tended to use sex as a means of coping with distress or The results (Table 3) revealed significant positive moderate relational problems. Regarding sociosexuality, all subscales and associations between the acceptance of sugar relationships and the total score showed significant positive associations with the all four personality traits. Thus, participants with a more positive acceptance of sugar relationships. All correlations were moderate attitude toward sugar relationships reported more pronounced in strength. Accordingly, individuals with a more positive attitude narcissistic (weak correlation), Machiavellian and psychopathic toward sugar relationships were less restricted in sociosexual traits (moderately strong correlations), and more pronounced orientation and more willing to engage in sexual relationships signs of BPO (weak correlation). without commitment. Concerning love styles, the acceptance Next, we compared the strength of the correlations to that of sugar relationships was significantly associated with Eros obtained in the study of Birkás et al. (2020) that tested the same (negative correlation with negligible strength) and Ludus (weak associations in a young adult sample. According to the results positive correlation) love styles. Acceptance of sugar relationships of Fisher r-to-Z transformations, the associations of acceptance was unrelated to any of the Storge, Pragma, Mania, and Agape of sugar relationships with Machiavellianism and psychopathy Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 592138 Láng et al. Acceptance of Sugar Relationships Scale TABLE 3 | Pearson’s correlations between acceptance of sugar relationships and traits (i.e., Dark Triad) and BPO. This suggests that to some personality traits (Sample 2). extent, partner preferences of older adults are affected by these Correlation with Correlation with Fisher’s r-to-Z personality traits. As pointed out earlier, personality affects both ASR-YWMS (Birkás ASR-OMWS transformation advertised and expected partner qualities. Thus, it forms the et al., 2020) (current study) nature of the desirable relationship. Connecting our results with previous findings regarding the mating strategies of the N = 1,733 N = 355 Dark Triad and BPO, sugar relationship appears to be endorsed r r Z p by individuals preferring short-term sexual relationships with less commitment and intimacy (e.g., Jonason et al., 2009, BPI 0.267 0.211 1.02 0.308 2019; Lavner et al., 2015; Muñoz Centifanti et al., 2016; Mach 0.351 0.459 −2.21 0.027 Birkás et al., 2018). Psych 0.349 0.490 −2.94 0.003 The question may arise as to why these psychologies are Narc 0.191 0.213 −0.39 0.697 so similar (i.e., openness to offer sexual companionship in All correlations are significant at the level of p < 0.001. ASR-YWMS, Acceptance of exchange for resources or openness to offer resources in Sugar Relationship in Younger Women and Men Scale; ASR-OMWS, Acceptance exchange for sex). The provision of resources by males to of Sugar Relationship in Older Men and Women Scale; Mach, Machiavellianism; the sexual partner (not specifically in exchange for sex) is Psych, subclinical psychopathy; Narc, subclinical narcissism; BPI, Borderline Personality Inventory. an adaptive behavior that plays an important role in the functioning of long-term, emotionally committed relationships, were significantly stronger in the current older sample. All other especially in the care of offspring (Buss and Schmitt, 1993, correlations were statistically identical in strength. 2019; Conroy Beam and Buss, 2019; Luberti et al., 2020). Therefore, the sensitivity of females to resources in the mating context is also an adaptive trait that may have contributed to DISCUSSION their reproductive success in the past. However, direct sexual transaction, free from commitment and mutual reproductive The present study evaluated a self-report measure regarding goals, is part of a short-term-focused mating strategy (Anderson the acceptance of sugar relationships in older adults. Compared and Klofstad, 2012; Whyte et al., 2019; Buss et al., 2020). with the mating strategies of young adults, there is much less The psychological characteristics of this strategy, which exploits known about the partner preferences of individuals in older herself/himself and others, are very similar from both the ages. Accordingly, this is the first empirical test of the correlates supply and demand sides: to get as many benefits as possible of attitudes toward sugar relationships in a predominantly in the shortest possible time, without considering the possible evolutionary approach in a sample beyond young adulthood. long-term consequences. Moreover, the ASR-OMWS was used to test the association Our study has some limitations as well. Perhaps, the between personality characteristics, relational attitudes, and sample is biased due to the possibility that individuals attitudes toward sugar relationships in older adults. More with an increased interest in sex-related topics can be accepting individuals can be characterized not only by a more overrepresented in our sample, leading to an increased openness instrumental motivation toward sex but also by respecting the toward sugar relationships. Moreover, the majority of the relational aspect of the sugar relationship. participants had no direct experience with sugar relationships, This might suggest that intimacy could also be a product or and accordingly, their attitudes might be more biased by their service that is desired and valued by older individuals (Alterovitz personality or impulses. Still, our findings are in line with and Mendelsohn, 2011; Fales et al., 2016). Furthermore, older the prequel to this study (Birkás et al., 2020) showing that adults scoring high on ASR-OMWS preferred relationships older adults who are accepting toward sugar relationships offering fun and taking advantage of partners and were less have similar motives and personality traits as young adults interested in romantic and emotional love (see section “Results” who are willing to engage in transactional sex. The most for love styles). More unrestricted sociosexuality was also prominent difference between the results obtained from the positively associated with the acceptance of sugar relationships two studies (i.e., Birkás et al., 2020 and the current study) showing, that despite of their older age and declining mate value, was that acceptance of sugar relationships was weakly but individuals willing to take part in a sugar relationship are sexually significantly positively associated with relational motives for more active. These love and sexual motives might play a key having sex in the current study with older sample. Thus, role in shaping the mating strategies of older adults. Elevated a more direct comparison of age-groups and/or inclusion sexual impulses increase the focus on the physical characteristics of behavioral measures might be a fruitful direction of of the potential partner and put more value on these signs. future research. Since older adults possess rather material resources than physical appeal, sugar relationships might represent an undertakable and accessible form of affair (e.g., Jonason and Kavanagh, 2010; Allen DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT and Desille, 2017; Træen et al., 2019). On the personality level, acceptance of sugar relationships The datasets generated for this study are available on request to was positively associated with socially aversive personality the corresponding author. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 592138 Láng et al. Acceptance of Sugar Relationships Scale ETHICS STATEMENT investigation. AL and BB: writing (original draft preparation). AL and NM: funding acquisition and resources. NM: supervision. The studies involving human participants were reviewed and All authors contributed to the article and approved the approved by the Hungarian United Ethical Review Committee submitted version. (http://epkeb.ttk.hu/). The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. FUNDING AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS This project was supported by the European Union and co- financed by the European Social Fund (EFOP-3.6.1.-16-2016- NM, AL, and BB: conceptualization. NM and DI: methodology 00004—Comprehensive Development for Implementing Smart and writing (review and editing). AL and AZ: formal analysis and Specialization Strategies at the University of Pécs). REFERENCES men. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 28, 306–317. doi: 10.1002/casp. 2361 Allen, M. S., and Desille, A. E. (2017). Personality and sexuality in older adults. Hu, L. T., and Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Psychol. Health 32, 843–859. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2017.1307373 sensitivity to under parameterized model misspecification. Psychol. Methods 3, Alterovitz, S. S.-R., and Mendelsohn, G. A. (2011). Partner preferences across the 424–453. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424 life span: online dating by older adults. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult. 1, 89–95. Jonason, P. K., and Kavanagh, P. (2010). The dark side of love: love styles doi: 10.1037/2160-4134.1.S.89 and the dark triad. Pers. Individ. Diff. 49, 606–610. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010. Anderson, R. C., and Klofstad, C. A. (2012). For love or money? The influence 05.030 of personal resources and environmental resource pressures on human Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., Webster, G. D., and Schmitt, D. P. (2009). The dark mate preferences. Ethology 118, 841–849. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2012. triad: facilitating a short term mating strategy in men. Eur. J. Pers. 23, 5–18. 02077.x doi: 10.1002/per.698 Birkás, B., Láng, A., and Meskó, N. (2018). Self-rated attractiveness moderates Jonason, P. K., Zeigler Hill, V., and Hashmani, T. (2019). Love, sex, and personality the relationship between dark personality traits and romantic ideals in women. pathology: a life history view of personality pathologies and socio sexuality. Psychol. Rep. 121, 184–200. doi: 10.1177/0033294117738021 J. Sex Res. 56, 239–248. Birkás, B., Meskó, N., Zsidó, A. N., Ipolyi, D., and Láng, A. (2020). Providing Jones, D. N., and Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Introducing the short Dark Triad (SD3) sexual companionship for resources: development,validation,and personality :a brief measure of dark personality traits. Assessment 21, 28–41. doi: 10.1177/ correlates of the acceptance of sugar relationships in young women and 1073191113514105 menscale (ASR-YWMS). Front. Psychol. 11:1135. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020. Láng, A. (2015). Borderline personality organization predicts Machiavellian 01135 inter personal tactics. Pers. Individ. Diff. 80, 28–31. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015. Browne, M. W., and Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing modelfit. 02.022 Sociol. Methods Res. 21, 230–258. doi: 10.1177/0049124192021002005 Lavner, J. A., Lamkin, J., and Miller, J. D. (2015). Borderline personality Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary disorder symptoms and newlyweds’ observed communication, partner hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behav. Brain Sci. 12, 1–14. doi: 10.1017/ characteristics, and longitudinal marital outcomes. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 124: S0140525X00023992 975–981. Buss, D. M. (1994). The Evolution of Desire :Strategies of Human Mating. NewYork, Leichsenring, F. (1999). Development and first results of the borderline personality NY: Basic Books. inventory: a self-report instrument for assessing border line personality Buss, D. M., Durkee, P. K., Shackelford, T. K., Bowdle, B. F., Schmitt, D. P., organization. J. Pers. Assess. 73, 45–63. doi: 10.1207/S15327752JPA73 Brase, G. L., et al. (2020). Human statuscriteria: sex differences and similarities 0104 across 14 nations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 119, 979–998. doi: 10.1037/pspa00 Li, N. P., Bailey, J. M., Kenrick, D. T., and Linsenmeier, J. A. W. (2002). The 00206 necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: testing the tradeoffs. J. Pers. Soc. Buss, D. M., and Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary Psychol. 82, 947–955. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.947 perspective on human mating. Psychol. Rev. 100, 204–232. doi: 10.1037/0033- Luberti, F. R., Blake, K. R., and Brooks, R. C. (2020). The effects of the mating 295x.100.2.204 market, sex, age, and income on sociopolitical orientation: insights from Buss, D. M., and Schmitt, D. P. (2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral evolutionary theory and sexual economics theory. Hum. Nat. 31, 88–111. doi: manifestations. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 70, 77–110. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych- 10.1007/s12110-019-09361-5 010418-103408 Meskó, N., Láng, A., and Kocsor, F. (2014). The Hungarian version of socio sexual Conroy Beam, D., and Buss, D. M. (2019). Why is age so important in orientation inventory revised (SOI-R): sex and age differences. Interpersonal 8, humanmating? Evolvedage preferences and their in fluences on multiple mating 85–99. doi: 10.5964/ijpr.v8i1.130 behaviors. Evol. Behav. Sci. 13, 127–157. doi: 10.1037/ebs0000127 Meskó, N., Zsidó, A., Láng, A., and Karádi, K. (2021). Sex and relationship Conroy-Beam, D., Buss, D. M., Asao, K., Sorokowska, A., Sorokowski, P., Aavik, T., differences on the short love attitude scale: insights from the hungarian et al. (2019). Contrasting computational model sofmate preference integration adaptation. Sex. Cult. doi: 10.1007/s12119-021-09830-z across 45 countries. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–13. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-52748-8 Muñoz Centifanti, L. C., Thomson, N. D., and Kwok, A. H. (2016). Identifying Fales, M. R., Frederick, D. A., Garcia, J. R., Gildersleeve, K. A., Haselton, M. G., and the manipulative mating methods associated with psychopathic traits and BPD Fisher, H. E. (2016). Mating markets and bargaining hands: mate preferences features. J. Pers. Disord. 30, 721–741. doi: 10.1521/pedi_2015_29_225 for attractiveness and resources in two national US studies. Pers. Individ. Diff. Nayar, K. I (2016). Sweetening the deal: dating for compensation in the 88, 78–87. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.08.041 digital age. J. Gend. Stud. 26, 1–12. doi: 10.1080/09589236.2016.127 Hendrick, C., Hendrick, S. S., and Dicke, A. (1998). The love attitudes scale: short 3101 form. J. Soc. Pers. Relationsh. 15, 147–159. doi: 10.1177/0265407598152001 Pawlowski, B., and Dunbar, R. I (1999). Impact of market value on human mate Hoss, J., and Blokland, L. M. E. (2018). Sugar daddies and blessers: a contextual choice decisions. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 266, 281–285. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999. study of transactional sexual interactions among young girls and older 0634 Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 592138 Láng et al. Acceptance of Sugar Relationships Scale Penke, L., and Asendorpf, J. B. (2008). Beyond global socio sexual orientations: Whyte, S., Brooks, R. C., and Torgler, B. (2019). Sexual economic theory & the a more differentiated look at socio sexuality and its effects on courtship and human mating market. Appl. Econ. 51, 6100–6112. doi: 10.1080/00036846.2019. romantic relationships. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 95, 1113–1135. doi: 10.1037/0022- 1650886 3514.95.5.1113 Seto, M. C. (2017). The puzzle of male chronophilias. Arch. Sex. Behav. 46, 3–22. Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the doi: 10.1007/s10508-016-0799-y absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a Træen, B., Carvalheira, A. A., Hald, G. M., Lange, T., and Kvalem, I. L. potential conflict of interest. (2019). Attitudes towards sexuality in older men and women across Europe: similarities, differences, and associations with their sex lives. Sex. Cult. 23, 1–25. Copyright © 2021 Láng, Birkás, Zsidó, Ipolyi and Meskó. This is an open-access doi: 10.1007/s12119-018-9564-9 article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License Walter, K. V., Conroy Beam, D., Buss, D. M., Asao, K., Sorokowska, A., (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided Sorokowski, P., et al. (2020). ). Sex differences in mate preferences across the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original 45 countries: a large-scale replication. Psychol. Sci. 31, 408–423. doi: 10.1177/ publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No 0956797620904154 use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 7 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 592138 Láng et al. Acceptance of Sugar Relationships Scale APPENDIX 1 Acceptance of Sugar Relationship in Older Men and Women Scale (ASR-OMWS) A sugar relationship is a transactional sexual relationship in which an older and wealthier partner (sugar daddy/mommy) provides material resources to a younger partner (sugar baby/boy) in return for her or his companionship. Partners usually meet to spend leisure time together, and sexual activity is only involved if both partners give their consent. Please indicate the extent to which you agree with each of the below statements using the seven-point rating scales ranging from (1) “absolutely disagree” to (7) “absolutely agree.” Absolutely Absolutely Disagree Agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. A sugar relationship is a good thing because it can help people feel better. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. In the future, I could end up engaging in a sugar relationship. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3. If I knew I would not incur negative judgment or consequences, I would like to try a sugar relationship. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4. If it would be beneficial for my sex life or for others’ judgment of me, I would consider engaging in a sugar relationship. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5. I would seriously consider engaging in a sugar relationship if that was the way to find a partner who would meet all my needs. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 592138