Mate choice in humans is specific by the involvement of kin both in partner choice and in the functioning of the relationship. The influence of relatives ranges from providing advice all the way to arranged marriages. Existing research so far tended to map neither the actual parental interventions and further reactions (counteractions) nor the independently pursued behavior (actions) by which the offspring or their partners assert their interests. This study identified such sets of behaviors through semi-structured individual interviews with members of 20 dyads of adult offspring and their biological parents (five son-mother, five son-father, five daughter-mother, and five daughter-father dyads). Thematic analysis revealed sets of parental actions aimed at the offspring, their partners, and the couple as a whole, as well as further counteractions (reactions to parental interference) and independently pursued behavior (actions) of the offspring and their partners aimed at the parents in the context of the offspring's previous or current relationship. Our findings showed that parental interference differed depending on the recipient: toward the couple were applied mainly indirect and supportive parental actions, whereas when facing their offspring or offspring's partner, parents' actions were more direct and disruptive. Our results thus indicate the importance of reporting about actual interactions which differ from the hypothetical settings used in prior studies by lower intensity. Moreover, by interviewing both members of dyads, we expanded the sets of actions and counteractions identified by prior studies and managed to limit self-reporting bias.

Faculty of Arts Charles University Prague Czech Republic

Faculty of Humanities Charles University Prague Czech Republic

Faculty of Science Charles University Viničná 7 128 00 Prague Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Apostolou M. Sexual selection under parental choice: The role of parents in the evolution of human mating. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2007;28(6):403–409. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.05.007. DOI

Apostolou M. Sexual selection under parental choice in agropastoral societies. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2010;31(1):39–47. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.06.010. DOI

Apostolou M. Parental influence over mate choice in a post-industrial context. Letters on Evolutionary Behavioral Science. 2011;2(1):13–15. doi: 10.5178/lebs.2011.12. DOI

Apostolou M. ‘Oh my child, what an inappropriate spouse for you!’: Asymmetrical preferences and parent-offspring conflict over mating. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2011;5(5):285–295. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00346.x. DOI

Apostolou M. Sexual selection under parental choice: Evidence from sixteen historical societies. Evolutionary Psychology. 2012;10(3):504–518. doi: 10.1177/147470491201000308. PubMed DOI

Apostolou M. Do as we wish: Parental tactics of mate choice manipulation. Evolutionary Psychology. 2013;11(4):795–813. doi: 10.1177/147470491301100404. PubMed DOI

Apostolou M. Accept my choices, but I will not accept yours! Children’s tactics of mate choice manipulation. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences. 2015;9(2):128–139. doi: 10.1037/ebs0000033. DOI

Apostolou M. Stay away, but I may need your help! Mate choice and manipulation of prospective parents-in-law. Personal Relationships. 2017;24(2):323–335. doi: 10.1111/pere.12184. DOI

Apostolou M, Kasapi K, Arakliti A. Will they do as we wish? An investigation of the effectiveness of parental manipulation on mating behavior. Evolutionary Psychological Science. 2015;1(1):28–36. doi: 10.1007/s40806-014-0005-1. DOI

Apostolou M, Papageorgi I. Parental mate choice manipulation tactics: Exploring prevalence, sex and personality effects. Evolutionary Psychology. 2014;12(3):588–620. doi: 10.1177/147470491401200307. PubMed DOI

Aquilino WS. Two views of one relationship: comparing parents’ and young adult children’s reports of the quality of intergenerational relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1999;61(4):858–870. doi: 10.2307/354008. DOI

Attride-Stirling J. Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research. 2001;1(3):385–405. doi: 10.1177/146879410100100307. DOI

Bates A. Parental roles in courtship. Social Forces. 1942;20(4):483–486. doi: 10.2307/2570885. DOI

Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Funder, D. C Psychology as the science of self-reports and finger movements: Whatever happened to actual behavior? Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2007;2(4):396–403. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00051.x. PubMed DOI

Bejanyan K, Marshall TC, Ferenczi N. Associations of collectivism with relationship commitment, passion, and mate preferences: Opposing roles of parental influence and family allocentrism. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(2):1–24. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117374. PubMed DOI PMC

Bell DC, Bell LG. Accuracy of retrospective reports of family environment. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2018;27(4):1029–1040. doi: 10.1007/s10826-017-0948-5. PubMed DOI PMC

Bergen N, Labonté R. “Everything is perfect, and we have no problems”: Detecting and limiting social desirability bias in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research. 2020;30(5):783–792. doi: 10.1177/1049732319889354. PubMed DOI

Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2006;3(2):77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. DOI

Braun V, Clarke V. To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health. 2021;13(2):201–216. doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1704846. DOI

Buss DM. Selection, evocation, and manipulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987;53(6):1214–1221. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1214. PubMed DOI

Buss DM. Manipulation in close relationships: Five personality factors in interactional context. Journal of Personality. 1992;60(2):477–499. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00981.x. PubMed DOI

Buss DM, Gomes M, Higgins DS, Lauterbach K. Tactics of manipulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987;52(6):1219–1229. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1219. PubMed DOI

Butkovic A, Bratko D. Family study of manipulation tactics. Personality and Individual Differences. 2007;43(4):791–801. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.02.004. DOI

Buunk AP, Park JH, Dubbs SL. Parent-offspring conflict in mate preferences. Review of General Psychology. 2008;12(1):47–62. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.12.1.47. DOI

Camerer C, Mobbs D. Differences in behavior and brain activity during hypothetical and real choices. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2017;21(1):46–56. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.11.001. PubMed DOI PMC

Cohen LH, Towbes LC, Flocco R. Effects of induced mood on self-reported life events and perceived and received social support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1988;55(4):669–674. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.55.4.669. PubMed DOI

Cowan G, Avants SK. Children’s influence strategies: Structure, sex differences, and bilateral mother-child influence. Child Development. 1988;59(5):1303–1313. doi: 10.2307/1130493. DOI

Cowan G, Drinkard J, MacGavin L. The effects of target, age, and gender on use of power strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1984;47(6):1391–1398. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1391. DOI

Faulkner J, Schaller M. Nepotistic nosiness: Inclusive fitness and vigilance of kin members’ romantic relationships. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2007;28(6):430–438. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.06.001. DOI

Fingerman KL, Cheng Y, Tighe L, Birditt KS, Zarit S. Relationships between young adults and their parents. In: Booth A, Brown S, Landale N, Manning W, McHale S, editors. Early adulthood in a family context. New York: Springer; 2012. pp. 59–85.

Fišerová A, Fiala V, Fayette D, Lindová J. The self-fulfilling prophecy of insecurity: Mediation effects of conflict communication styles on the association between adult attachment and relationship adjustment. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 2021;38(4):1279–1302. doi: 10.1177/0265407521988974. DOI

Hamplová, D. (2000). Náboženství a nadpřirozeno ve společnosti. Mezinárodní srovnání na základě empirického výzkumu [Religion and the supernatural in society: An international comparison based on empirical research]. Sociologický ústav AV ČR, Praha.

Havlíček J, Štěrbová Z, Csajbók Z. Human mate choice. In: Freeberg TM, Ridley AR, d’Ettorre P, editors. The Routledge international handbook of comparative psychology. Routledge; 2022. pp. 338–354.

Hofstede G. Culture and organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization. 2010;10(4):15–41. doi: 10.1080/00208825.1980.11656300. DOI

Ikels C. Parental perspectives on the significance of marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1985;47(2):253–264. doi: 10.2307/352126. DOI

Kalpokaite N, Radivojevic I. I wish I knew what I know now exploring psychology undergraduate students experiences when learning about qualitative research and CAQDAS. The Qualitative Report. 2020;25(7):1817–1840. doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2020.4316. DOI

Kim K, Zarit SH, Birditt KS, Fingerman KL. Discrepancy in reports of support exchanges between parents and adult offspring: Within- and between-family differences. Journal of Family Psychology. 2014;28(2):168–179. doi: 10.1037/a0035735. PubMed DOI PMC

Krueger J. Enhancement bias in descriptions of self and others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1998;24(5):505–516. doi: 10.1177/0146167298245006. DOI

Kuhle BX, Melzer DK, Cooper CA, Merkle AJ, Pepe NA, Ribanovic A, Verdesco AL, Wettstein TL. The “birds and the bees” differ for boys and girls: Sex differences in the nature of sex talks. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences. 2015;9(2):107–115. doi: 10.1037/ebs0000012. DOI

Laham SM, Gonsalkorale K, Von Hippel W. Darwinian grandparenting: Preferential investment in more certain kin. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2005;31(1):63–72. doi: 10.1177/0146167204271318. PubMed DOI

Lee K-H, Swenson AVR, Niehuis S. His or her parents? perceived parental approval of romantic relationships among college students and their partners. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships. 2010;4(2):213–236. doi: 10.5964/ijpr.v4i2.50. DOI

Lindová J, Průšová D, Klapilová K. Power distribution and relationship quality in long-term heterosexual couples. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy. 2020;46(6):528–541. doi: 10.1080/0092623X.2020.1761493. PubMed DOI

Michalski RL, Shackelford TK. Grandparental investment as a function of relational uncertainty and emotional closeness with parents. Human Nature. 2005;16(3):293–305. doi: 10.1007/s12110-005-1012-5. PubMed DOI

Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ. Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2017;16(1):1–13. doi: 10.1177/1609406917733847. DOI

Perilloux C, Fleischman DS, Buss DM. Meet the parents: Parent-offspring convergence and divergence in mate preferences. Personality and Individual Differences. 2011;50(2):253–258. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.039. DOI

Pope C. Qualitative research in health care: Analysing qualitative data. British Medical Journal. 2000;320(7227):114–116. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114. PubMed DOI PMC

Riesch SK, Jackson NM, Chanchong W. Communication approaches to parent-child conflict: Young adolescence to young adult. Journal of Pediatric Nursing. 2003;18(4):244–256. doi: 10.1053/S0882-5963(03)00083-6. PubMed DOI

Rodrigues D, Lopes D, Monteiro L, Prada M. Perceived parent and friend support for romantic relationships in emerging adults. Personal Relationships. 2017;24(1):4–16. doi: 10.1111/pere.12163. DOI

Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences (Third ed.). New York: Teachers College Press. http://access.portico.org/stable?au=phzm39884

Shapiro A. Revisiting the generation gap: Exploring the relationships of parent/adult-child dyads. International Journal of Aging and Human Development. 2004;58(2):127–146. doi: 10.2190/EVFK-7F2X-KQNV-DH58. PubMed DOI

Sinclair HC, Felmlee D, Sprecher S, Wright BL. Don’t tell me who I can’t love. Social Psychology Quarterly. 2015;78(1):77–99. doi: 10.1177/0190272514565253. DOI

Steinbach A, Kopp J, Lazarevic P. Divergent perceptions of intergenerational relationships: What implications, if any? Journal of Family Studies. 2019;25(4):368–384. doi: 10.1080/13229400.2016.1269659. DOI

Štěrbová, Z., Tureček, P., & Kleisner, K. (2019). She always steps in the same river: Similarity among long-term partners in their demographic, physical, and personality characteristics. Frontiers in Psychology,10(52). 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00052 PubMed PMC

Suri H. Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis. Qualitative Research Journal. 2011;11(2):63–75. doi: 10.3316/QRJ1102063. DOI

Sussman MB. Parental participation in mate selection and its effect upon family continuity. Social Forces. 1953;32(1):76–81. doi: 10.2307/2572863. DOI

Tighe LA, Birditt KS, Antonucci TC. Intergenerational ambivalence in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for depressive symptoms over time. Developmental Psychology. 2016;52(5):824–834. doi: 10.1037/a0040146. PubMed DOI PMC

Trivers RL. Parent-offspring conflict. American Zoologist. 1974;14(1):249–264. doi: 10.1093/icb/14.1.249. DOI

van den Berg P, Fawcett TW, Buunk AP, Weissing FJ. The evolution of parent-offspring conflict over mate choice. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2013;34(6):405–411. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.07.004. DOI

Van Houdt K, Kalmijn M, Ivanova K. Perceptions of closeness in adult parent-child dyads: Asymmetry in the context of family complexity. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences. 2020;75(10):2219–2229. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbaa122. PubMed DOI PMC

Willson AE, Shuey KM, Elder GH, Wickrama KAS. Ambivalence in mother-adult child relations: A dyadic analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly. 2006;69(3):235–252. doi: 10.1177/019027250606900302. DOI

Zarit SH, Eggebeen DJ. Parent-child relationships in adulthood and later years. In: Bomstein MH, editor. Handbook of parenting. Erlbaum; 2022. pp. 135–161.

Zhang S, Kline SL. can i make my own decision? A cross-cultural study of perceived social network influence in mate selection. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2009;40(1):3–23. doi: 10.1177/0022022108326192. DOI

The Context Matters: Women's Experiences of Their Partner's Odor in Intimate and Sexual Encounters