Evidence of correlations between human partners based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of 22 traits and UK Biobank analysis of 133 traits

Tanya B. Horwitz (), Jared V. Balbona, Katie N. Paulich and Matthew C. Keller ()
Additional contact information
Tanya B. Horwitz: University of Colorado Boulder
Jared V. Balbona: University of Colorado Boulder
Katie N. Paulich: University of Colorado Boulder
Matthew C. Keller: University of Colorado Boulder

Nature Human Behaviour, 2023, vol. 7, issue 9, 1568-1583

Abstract: Abstract Positive correlations between mates can increase trait variation and prevalence, as well as bias estimates from genetically informed study designs. While past studies of similarity between human mating partners have largely found evidence of positive correlations, to our knowledge, no formal meta-analysis has examined human partner correlations across multiple categories of traits. Thus, we conducted systematic reviews and random-effects meta-analyses of human male–female partner correlations across 22 traits commonly studied by psychologists, economists, sociologists, anthropologists, epidemiologists and geneticists. Using ScienceDirect, PubMed and Google Scholar, we incorporated 480 partner correlations from 199 peer-reviewed studies of co-parents, engaged pairs, married pairs and/or cohabitating pairs that were published on or before 16 August 2022. We also calculated 133 trait correlations using up to 79,074 male–female couples in the UK Biobank (UKB). Estimates of the 22 mean meta-analysed correlations ranged from rmeta = 0.08 (adjusted 95% CI = 0.03, 0.13) for extraversion to rmeta = 0.58 (adjusted 95% CI = 0.50, 0.64) for political values, with funnel plots showing little evidence of publication bias across traits. The 133 UKB correlations ranged from rUKB = −0.18 (adjusted 95% CI = −0.20, −0.16) for chronotype (being a ‘morning’ or ‘evening’ person) to rUKB = 0.87 (adjusted 95% CI = 0.86, 0.87) for birth year. Across analyses, political and religious attitudes, educational attainment and some substance use traits showed the highest correlations, while psychological (that is, psychiatric/personality) and anthropometric traits generally yielded lower but positive correlations. We observed high levels of between-sample heterogeneity for most meta-analysed traits, probably because of both systematic differences between samples and true differences in partner correlations across populations.

Date: 2023
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-023-01672-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:nathum:v:7:y:2023:i:9:d:10.1038_s41562-023-01672-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/nathumbehav/

DOI: 10.1038/s41562-023-01672-z

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Human Behaviour is currently edited by Stavroula Kousta

More articles in Nature Human Behaviour from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().