{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0299625468164794, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03495630461922597, 'mean_word_length': 4.985074626865671, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 2, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Place of Attachment in Human Mating

Application of the principles of evolution and natural selection to the phenomena of human mating does not lead inevitably to a single theoretical model. According to the standard evolutionary model, formally known as sexual strategies theory (D. M. Buss & D. P. Schmitt, 1993), biologically based sex differences in parental investment have resulted in hard-wired sex differences in mate preferences and mating strategies. A critical analysis of the logical and empirical foundations of the theory reveals several weaknesses and limitations. This article demonstrates how attachment theory (J. Bowlby, 1969/1982, 1973, 1979, 1980, 1988) can be used to integrate a diverse set of ideas and research findings and provide a more grounded account of human mating.