<p>I'm not sure I can give you the data purely for <em>physical attractiveness</em>, but what <em>has</em> been intensively researched is <em>passionate love</em>, which includes physical attraction. Passionate love is usually assumed to include sexual desire, and correlates quite well with rated attraction. As <a href="http://www.elainehatfield.com/ch113.pdf" rel="noreferrer">Hatfield writes</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Generally, passionate love is associated with the terms “arousal,” “desire,” “lust,” “passion,” and “infatuation".</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I hope that's what you're asking for.
Elaine Hatfield (of the "would you go to bed with me?" study fame) has developed the <a href="http://www.elainehatfield.com/ch113.pdf" rel="noreferrer">Passionate Love Scale</a>; Tennov has researched Limerence. Other famous names in this regard are Liebowitz and (Helen) Fisher. The counterpart to passionate love is often called companionate love, attachment, or affection.</p>

<p>Qualitatively speaking, on average, passionate love goes down with relation length. As Hatfield says, time has a <a href="http://interpersona.psychopen.eu/article/view/17" rel="noreferrer">"corrosive effect"</a>. Past researchers conceptualize this in a multi-stage model of relationships, where relationships naturally transition from passionate love into compassionate attachment. A well-known correlate of this is the "7-year itch", corresponding to a globally consistent mode around 4 years after marriage for divorces. However, some people report passionate love after decades of being together.</p>

<p>In all attempts to quantify any of this, there are a number of critical cofounds. @what has already brought up that some objective component of attractiveness might naturally decline with age. I'm not so sure this is that dramatic though, because there are <a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~grpproc/crisp/crisp.6.5.htm" rel="noreferrer">well-known compensatory mechanisms</a> for attraction within relationships that might be more important than e.g. decline of outsider-rated attractiveness with age. After all, what correlates with how attractive you rate someone is not the same as how attractive your partner is to you.<br>
Moreover, there is a reliable difference between studies on younger and on older couples; the correlation between relationship length and passionate love/attraction is very reliable in young couples, but much weaker in older couples, and while younger couples often break up seemingly because passion has waned (as passion and satisfaction are correlated), there are older couples who're passionately in love (<a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&amp;id=2009-02787-006" rel="noreferrer">here</a> and <a href="http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/01/05/scan.nsq092.full" rel="noreferrer">here</a>). As Hatfield speculates, this might be because couples were passion is stable have a much higher chance to last, but those where it wanes quicker, end quicker. So that's for cofounds. I did not find any clear solution to this problem, and I can't really think of a good way of dealing with the self-selection problem (where longer relationships will inherently qualitatively differ from younger ones because they <em>must</em> have certain qualities to have come that far).<br>
However, the relationship <em>within</em> relationships seems to hold, with a negative correlation within both older and younger relationships.</p>

<p>Quantitatively speaking, a much-quoted figure is Tennov's <a href="http://www.helenfisher.com/downloads/articles/04natofrl.pdf" rel="noreferrer">"18 months to three years"</a>. Exceptions are assumed to be comparatively rare, but also known to exist.<br>
I can't give you the standard deviation on this, but I can give you something better: a regression model. One is by <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1998.tb00459.x/abstract" rel="noreferrer">Sprecher &amp; Regan, page 172</a>, one by <a href="http://www2.hawaii.edu/~elaineh/71.pdf" rel="noreferrer">Hatfield, page 404</a>.<br>
Of course, this will not give you the single point in time where passionate love suddenly ends; but this is not realistic either. In relationships, attraction usually doesn't suddenly stop, it wanes. Graphically speaking:
<img src="https://i.sstatic.net/kv3zb.png" alt="passion over time"></p>

<p>However, I also found a much more optimistic picture for physical attractiveness over time in a <a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~grpproc/crisp/crisp.6.5.htm" rel="noreferrer">large (almost 2000 people) sample</a>:
<img src="https://i.sstatic.net/HceET.gif" alt="passion over time 2"></p>

<p>What is clear even here however is the "7th-year itch".</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-22T08:04:21.893Z
This is not answer to original question. First: I can see analogy that someone asked how iq is related to work success and you answered i dont know but i can tell you how school success is rated to work success. after that you didnt explain how iq is related to school success and how iq is related to work success.; Second: it is very deceptive because the form of answer is what person who asked was looking for.
ICanFeelIt
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-22T09:55:01.813Z
However, the optimistic study from 2000, while it's the only one directly reporting Attractiveness, seems to be in disagreement with some of the other research, right? I think  this might be deceivingly optimistic and caused by the pre-selection of those couples who've lasted. Or maybe Spanish people just age really well. Either way, more research is necessary.
jona
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-22T10:18:50.413Z
@ICanFeelIt, I must admit, I do not understand your comment and I don't see how I could improve my answer to your satisfaction so you'd undo the downvote you gave me.
jona
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-21T17:27:36.700Z
2014-06-21T17:27:36.700Z
jona
<p>I think here is study you are looking for: Sex Differences in the Implications of Partner Physical Attractiveness for
the Trajectory of Marital Satisfaction</p>

<p>Report from 4 independent longitudional studies.</p>

<p>This is not so easy question to answer. For sure there are difference between male and female in M and sd. Especially it is determined by interpersonal dynamics (Koch, Mansfield...)</p>

<p>The second difference is in love style (Sternberg, Triangular theory of love)</p>

<p>Also it is known that attractivnes at age 16 is also important (Benzeval, Green...)</p>

<p>Andy many other variables is important for this simple question...</p>

<p>0) <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24128188" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24128188</a>
1) <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19817035" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19817035</a>
2) <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_theory_of_love" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_theory_of_love</a>
3) <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0063975" rel="nofollow">http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0063975</a></p>

<p>EDIT: Im sorry for bad formating. I am on work now so I wanted to reply quick. In first study (you have to download the study and read it) you have a lot of predictors of martial satisfaction including atractivnes of wife) at beginning  of relationship and later. So you can track how physical atractivness decline and other predictors raise in concept of martial satisfaction) </p>

<p>Other articles are here to describe other influential variables which are not described in first article.</p>

<p>Please read the first article, you have APA full text in the upper right corner.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-21T15:49:17.783Z
The formatting of this answer is dreadful (so much that I don't think I could edit it because I don't understand what's intended) and neither of the articles linked directly addresses changes in physical attraction over time for all I can tell.
jona
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-21T16:09:57.813Z
APA hates me, but here is a link to the full text: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-5-JeCa2Z7hcTlXQjV1NEMzblE/edit  
To me, they seem to discuss attractiveness only as an IV predicting satisfaction (see p. 6-7). They do not present change over time. They present change in martial satisfaction.
jona
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-21T16:27:23.920Z
...and both partners reported their marital satisfaction up to 8 times over the first 4 years of marriage (it is combination of longitudinal transversal study)
ICanFeelIt
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-21T16:30:19.840Z
The question is not about martial satisfaction. The question is about attraction. They also collect the partner's physical attractiveness, but they don't *report* it (they only use it as a predictor for satisfaction, as I said).
jona
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-21T16:40:16.710Z
You have in parentheses: ... (and with as much other statistical data, e.g. standard deviation, as possible)
ICanFeelIt
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-21T16:57:42.767Z
Do you mean table 2, which reports independently rated attractiveness at time 1?
jona
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-21T15:39:55.077Z
2014-06-21T16:02:00.307Z
2014-06-21T16:02:00.307Z
ICanFeelIt
<p>How long, on average (and with as much other statistical data, e.g. standard deviation, as possible) does physical attraction between male and female in a permanent relationship last? </p>

<p>I believe this is a well-founded question based on the assumption that elderly couples are almost never physically attracted to one another, so almost always there is a point of earliest physical attraction loss. If you think that assumption is false, please let me know.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-21T15:42:39.483Z
@what, with all due respect, that sounds like utter crap and I would require some very solid evidence for any number close to 14 years of age.
jona
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-22T09:57:52.063Z
Must have been one hell of an ethics proposal that got a study basically presenting pictures of minors in a sexual context green lighted.
jona
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-06-22T10:17:44.250Z
Arguably, presenting pictures of non-sexual body parts is a crass cofound, too. Maybe teens have the smoothest skin (do they? I know I didn't!), but teenage girls also look like teenage boys for the most part. Either way, would have to see the actual research.
jona
<social-psychology><statistics><sexuality><physical-attraction>
How long does physical attraction typically last in a permanent relationship?
Quinn Culver
# How long does physical attraction typically last in a permanent relationship?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-06-17)

How long, on average (and with as much other statistical data, e.g. standard deviation, as possible) does physical attraction between male and female in a permanent relationship last?

I believe this is a well-founded question based on the assumption that elderly couples are almost never physically attracted to one another, so almost always there is a point of earliest physical attraction loss. If you think that assumption is false, please let me know.

**Tags:** social-psychology, statistics, sexuality, physical-attraction

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: @what, with all due respect, that sounds like utter crap and I would require some very solid evidence for any number close to 14 years of age.  
> **username_1**: Must have been one hell of an ethics proposal that got a study basically presenting pictures of minors in a sexual context green lighted.  
> **username_1**: Arguably, presenting pictures of non-sexual body parts is a crass cofound, too. Maybe teens have the smoothest skin (do they? I know I didn't!), but teenage girls also look like teenage boys for the most part. Either way, would have to see the actual research.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2014-06-21. Score: 5

I'm not sure I can give you the data purely for *physical attractiveness*, but what *has* been intensively researched is *passionate love*, which includes physical attraction. Passionate love is usually assumed to include sexual desire, and correlates quite well with rated attraction. As [Hatfield writes](http://www.elainehatfield.com/ch113.pdf):

> Generally, passionate love is associated with the terms “arousal,” “desire,” “lust,” “passion,” and “infatuation".

I hope that's what you're asking for.
Elaine Hatfield (of the "would you go to bed with me?" study fame) has developed the [Passionate Love Scale](http://www.elainehatfield.com/ch113.pdf); Tennov has researched Limerence. Other famous names in this regard are Liebowitz and (Helen) Fisher. The counterpart to passionate love is often called companionate love, attachment, or affection.

Qualitatively speaking, on average, passionate love goes down with relation length. As Hatfield says, time has a ["corrosive effect"](http://interpersona.psychopen.eu/article/view/17). Past researchers conceptualize this in a multi-stage model of relationships, where relationships naturally transition from passionate love into compassionate attachment. A well-known correlate of this is the "7-year itch", corresponding to a globally consistent mode around 4 years after marriage for divorces. However, some people report passionate love after decades of being together.

In all attempts to quantify any of this, there are a number of critical cofounds. @what has already brought up that some objective component of attractiveness might naturally decline with age. I'm not so sure this is that dramatic though, because there are [well-known compensatory mechanisms](http://www.uiowa.edu/~grpproc/crisp/crisp.6.5.htm) for attraction within relationships that might be more important than e.g. decline of outsider-rated attractiveness with age. After all, what correlates with how attractive you rate someone is not the same as how attractive your partner is to you.  
Moreover, there is a reliable difference between studies on younger and on older couples; the correlation between relationship length and passionate love/attraction is very reliable in young couples, but much weaker in older couples, and while younger couples often break up seemingly because passion has waned (as passion and satisfaction are correlated), there are older couples who're passionately in love ([here](http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2009-02787-006) and [here](http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/01/05/scan.nsq092.full)). As Hatfield speculates, this might be because couples were passion is stable have a much higher chance to last, but those where it wanes quicker, end quicker. So that's for cofounds. I did not find any clear solution to this problem, and I can't really think of a good way of dealing with the self-selection problem (where longer relationships will inherently qualitatively differ from younger ones because they *must* have certain qualities to have come that far).  
However, the relationship *within* relationships seems to hold, with a negative correlation within both older and younger relationships.

Quantitatively speaking, a much-quoted figure is Tennov's ["18 months to three years"](http://www.helenfisher.com/downloads/articles/04natofrl.pdf). Exceptions are assumed to be comparatively rare, but also known to exist.  
I can't give you the standard deviation on this, but I can give you something better: a regression model. One is by [Sprecher & Regan, page 172](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1998.tb00459.x/abstract), one by [Hatfield, page 404](http://www2.hawaii.edu/~elaineh/71.pdf).  
Of course, this will not give you the single point in time where passionate love suddenly ends; but this is not realistic either. In relationships, attraction usually doesn't suddenly stop, it wanes. Graphically speaking:
![passion over time](https://i.sstatic.net/kv3zb.png)

However, I also found a much more optimistic picture for physical attractiveness over time in a [large (almost 2000 people) sample](http://www.uiowa.edu/~grpproc/crisp/crisp.6.5.htm):
![passion over time 2](https://i.sstatic.net/HceET.gif)

What is clear even here however is the "7th-year itch".

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: This is not answer to original question. First: I can see analogy that someone asked how iq is related to work success and you answered i dont know but i can tell you how school success is rated to work success. after that you didnt explain how iq is related to school success and how iq is related to work success.; Second: it is very deceptive because the form of answer is what person who asked was looking for.  
> **username_1**: However, the optimistic study from 2000, while it's the only one directly reporting Attractiveness, seems to be in disagreement with some of the other research, right? I think  this might be deceivingly optimistic and caused by the pre-selection of those couples who've lasted. Or maybe Spanish people just age really well. Either way, more research is necessary.  
> **username_1**: @username_2, I must admit, I do not understand your comment and I don't see how I could improve my answer to your satisfaction so you'd undo the downvote you gave me.  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2014-06-21. Score: -1

I think here is study you are looking for: Sex Differences in the Implications of Partner Physical Attractiveness for
the Trajectory of Marital Satisfaction

Report from 4 independent longitudional studies.

This is not so easy question to answer. For sure there are difference between male and female in M and sd. Especially it is determined by interpersonal dynamics (Koch, Mansfield...)

The second difference is in love style (Sternberg, Triangular theory of love)

Also it is known that attractivnes at age 16 is also important (Benzeval, Green...)

Andy many other variables is important for this simple question...

0) <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24128188>
1) <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19817035>
2) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_theory_of_love>
3) <http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0063975>

EDIT: Im sorry for bad formating. I am on work now so I wanted to reply quick. In first study (you have to download the study and read it) you have a lot of predictors of martial satisfaction including atractivnes of wife) at beginning of relationship and later. So you can track how physical atractivness decline and other predictors raise in concept of martial satisfaction)

Other articles are here to describe other influential variables which are not described in first article.

Please read the first article, you have APA full text in the upper right corner.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: The formatting of this answer is dreadful (so much that I don't think I could edit it because I don't understand what's intended) and neither of the articles linked directly addresses changes in physical attraction over time for all I can tell.  
> **username_1**: APA hates me, but here is a link to the full text: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-5-JeCa2Z7hcTlXQjV1NEMzblE/edit   To me, they seem to discuss attractiveness only as an IV predicting satisfaction (see p. 6-7). They do not present change over time. They present change in martial satisfaction.  
> **username_2**: ...and both partners reported their marital satisfaction up to 8 times over the first 4 years of marriage (it is combination of longitudinal transversal study)  
> **username_1**: The question is not about martial satisfaction. The question is about attraction. They also collect the partner's physical attractiveness, but they don't *report* it (they only use it as a predictor for satisfaction, as I said).  
> **username_2**: You have in parentheses: ... (and with as much other statistical data, e.g. standard deviation, as possible)  
> **username_1**: Do you mean table 2, which reports independently rated attractiveness at time 1?  

---

