Gift-Giving for Lovers

Research suggests that women don't seem to mind if they receive the less-than-perfect gift. Men, on the other hand, are a different story. Susannah F. Locke reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[Below is the original script. But a few changes may have been made during the recording of this audio podcast.]

Don't have the perfect gift for your sweetheart this holiday season? Don't sweat it . . . unless your partner is a man. Apparently, men are more sensitive than women when receiving gifts.

A team of psychologists published the findings this fall in the journal Social Cognition. They surveyed 32 heterosexual couples on their gift preferences. Then the researchers picked either someone's least favorite choice or the perfect present, but made it seem like it was coming from that person's partner instead.

Predictably, men who got bad gifts reacted more negatively than men who got good ones. No surprise there.

But, oddly enough, women showed the opposite trend. Women who got an undesired gift were actually more accepting of it than if they’d received their ideal item.

They launched into a rational defense of their boyfriends. Women saw themselves as more similar to their partners, which the authors use as a measure of relationship satisfaction. And women viewed their relationship as having just as much long-term potential.

But be careful. This study doesn't mean that you should go around buying your lady holiday-themed sweaters and fruitcake. The long-term effects of bad presents are still unknown.

—Susannah Locke


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


60-Second Psych is a weekly podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast:

RSS | iTunes

 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe