The phrase "attractiveness preference" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing individual or societal preferences regarding physical attractiveness or desirability in various contexts, such as psychology, marketing, or social studies.
Example: "Research indicates that cultural factors significantly influence attractiveness preference among different demographics."
Alternatives: "preference for attractiveness" or "attractiveness inclination".
For example, one of the biological mechanisms proposed on the basis of natural and sexual selection and explaining the existing cross-cultural differences in attractiveness preferences is the central tendency (Symons, 1979), i.e., preference for the average for particular traits.
Virus infection causes biochemical, cellular, molecular, and physiological changes in host plants [ 13, 33, 34], some of which increase plant attractiveness and preference to vectors [ 35- 40].
The realized heritabilities in both attractiveness and preference are inconsistent in magnitude and direction among lines such that the mean heritability estimates are small, and not significantly different from zero (Table 2).
Here we investigate several unresolved aspects of mating preferences in Drosophila melanogaster by using isogenic lines to measure attractiveness and preferences.
Importantly, we demonstrate that attractiveness and preferences of both males and females have a substantial genetic component, a result that agrees well with many other studies of the genetic basis of traits involved in sexual selection in a wide range of taxa (Merilä and Sheldon 1999; Rodriguez et al. 2013).
Neither male attractiveness nor female preference for attractive males responded significantly to direct selection (Table 2).
In the partitioned-aquaria trials, male attractiveness and female preference for attractive males were measured as described above for selection.
These results indicate that there may be a fecundity cost associated with male attractiveness and female preference for attractive males.
Survival did not differ significantly between the selection treatments (one-way ANOVA F3,4 = 0.98, P = 0.492), and does not appear to have responded indirectly to selection on either male attractiveness or female preference for attractive males.
Our findings that neither male attractiveness nor female preference for attractive males responded significantly to three generations of selection (direct or indirect) have important implications for the evolution of mate choice by indirect selection.
