Study Finds Intelligence May Affect How Men Treat Their Partners

A small study of 202 men has produced a finding that sounds brutal when reduced to a headline: lower intelligence scores were linked to a greater likelihood of certain harmful behaviors toward romantic partners. Before anyone starts treating an IQ test as a dating app screening tool, however, the researchers have urged people to take the results with caution.

The study did not prove that intelligence makes someone a good boyfriend. It found correlations, and a second sample failed to reproduce the broader pattern, making the viral claim far more complicated than it first appears.

The Study Combined Intelligence and Relationship Questions

The research came from Oakland University, where Gavin S. Vance, Tara DeLecce, and Todd K. Shackelford published their analysis in the journal Personality and Individual Differences. The 202 participants were recruited online through Prolific, and every man was in a heterosexual relationship that had lasted for at least six months.

The men ranged from 18 to 65 years old, with an average age of around 25. Their relationships had lasted for just over three years on average, giving researchers a group with varying levels of romantic experience.

The participants completed the 16-item International Cognitive Ability Resource, or ICAR. The assessment included letter and number sequences, matrix reasoning, verbal reasoning, and three-dimensional rotation problems.

Researchers then compared those results with answers about relationship behavior and personal traits. The questions covered partner-directed insults, sexual coercion, mate retention tactics, relationship power, psychopathic traits, and relationship investment.

Intelligence Wasn’t the Original Focus

The intelligence analysis emerged after the researchers had already collected the data for another purpose. Vance told PsyPost that the information had originally been gathered as part of a larger project examining men’s experiences with erectile dysfunction and their behavior in romantic relationships.

Once the researchers realized the dataset contained both cognitive and relationship measures, they saw an opportunity to examine whether the two were connected. That produced the finding now spreading under headlines suggesting that some men may simply be too unintelligent to become good partners.

The strongest association, however, came from one specific part of the intelligence test rather than from every measure equally. That detail is crucial because it narrows what the study can actually tell us.

One Type of Puzzle Appeared to Matter Most

The letter and number series section appeared to carry much of the weight. Participants were shown a sequence and asked to identify what should come next, requiring them to recognize a pattern and work out an unfamiliar rule.

This type of task is commonly used as a proxy for fluid intelligence. Unlike recalling facts learned at school, fluid intelligence involves solving new problems without relying entirely on existing knowledge.

The study found that stronger performance on these items was associated with lower self-reported levels of several harmful behaviors toward romantic partners. Researchers could identify the association, but the study could not determine why it existed.

A Possible Explanation Remains Unproven

One proposed explanation is that stronger fluid intelligence may help some people control negative impulses or respond more effectively to another person’s needs. That idea has been discussed in coverage of the research, but it remains a hypothesis rather than a proven explanation.

The data cannot establish whether intelligence directly affects relationship behavior. Other factors could also influence both cognitive performance and the way someone behaves with a partner.

Higher Scores Were Linked to Fewer Harmful Behaviors

The paper’s summary was direct about what researchers found. The authors wrote that men’s general intelligence, particularly their performance on letter and number series, was negatively associated with “a range of aversive, partner-directed behaviors including insults, and sexual coercion.”

Higher scores were also linked with lower levels of several other measured traits and behaviors. The pattern included:

• Partner-directed insults: Higher-scoring men reported insulting their partners less frequently.
• Sexual coercion: Higher scores were associated with lower self-reported use of coercive behavior.
• Cost-inflicting mate retention: Controlling tactics that can make it harder for a partner to leave were reported less often.
• Psychopathic traits: Higher intelligence scores were associated with lower levels of traits such as callousness and impulsivity.
• Sociosexual orientation: Greater openness to sex outside a committed relationship was also lower among higher scorers.

The psychopathy measure should be interpreted carefully because it referred to a trait assessment rather than a clinical diagnosis. The researchers were measuring characteristics associated with callousness, impulsivity, and limited concern for others.

Relationship Investment Moved in the Other Direction

The study also produced one clearly positive association. The authors wrote that men’s general intelligence was positively associated with their self-reported relationship investment.

In other words, men with higher scores were more likely to describe themselves as committed and invested in their relationships. Other coverage of the research reported that higher-scoring participants also placed greater importance on maintaining their partnerships.

That finding should still be treated carefully because the information came from the men themselves. Someone’s description of their own commitment does not automatically provide a complete picture of how they behave inside a relationship.

The same limitation applies to reports of harmful behavior. People may underreport actions that make them look controlling, cruel, or coercive, and no romantic partners were contacted to independently confirm the answers.

Intelligence Wasn’t Linked to Everything

One of the most interesting parts of the research is what intelligence did not appear to influence. Researchers found no significant association with jealousy, partner-directed violence, or benefit-provisioning mate retention.

Benefit-provisioning mate retention refers to positive efforts people may use to maintain a relationship. These behaviors can include affection, attention, gifts, and other forms of effort directed toward a partner.

That suggests the results were not showing that intelligence improved every part of a man’s romantic life. Instead, the association appeared narrower, involving some harmful behaviors and self-reported relationship investment.

Kindness, empathy, emotional maturity, communication, and accountability cannot be reduced to one score on a short cognitive assessment. A person can perform well on a pattern-recognition test and still struggle with relationships for countless other reasons.

A Second Sample Failed to Find the Same Pattern

The biggest reason to avoid overhyping the study comes from a second group of 64 men examined by the researchers. This analysis leaned more heavily on matrix reasoning rather than the letter and number series that produced the strongest original associations.

The results were null. Performance on those items was not associated with the relationship variables researchers examined.

That makes the viral claim considerably less certain. The strongest findings appeared to depend heavily on a particular type of cognitive test, and the research involved a modest sample.

The Study’s Major Limitations

Several limitations should remain front and center when interpreting the results:

• The study was correlational and cannot prove cause and effect.
• The main sample included only 202 men.
• Every measure relied on self-reported answers.
• No partners were interviewed or surveyed.
• The participants were men in heterosexual relationships.
• The second sample of 64 men did not reproduce the broader findings.

Vance himself warned against treating the research as definitive. “This was a correlational study, with a modest sample, so results should be interpreted with a grain of salt,” he said.

The Researcher Says the Viral Headlines Miss the Point

Perhaps the most important part of the story came after the study began circulating online. Vance pushed back against headlines claiming his research proved intelligent men make better boyfriends, describing that interpretation as “slightly misleading.”

He explained the problem in blunt terms: “We only found that men who scored higher on the ICAR less frequently used partner-directed insults, sexual coercion, etc., which I would argue is a low bar for being a ‘good boyfriend.’”

That distinction matters because avoiding harmful behavior is only the floor of a healthy relationship. A cognitive test cannot measure whether someone communicates honestly, takes responsibility after making a mistake, supports a partner during a crisis, or consistently treats another person with respect.

The study offers an intriguing link between certain cognitive abilities and some self-reported relationship behaviors. It does not provide a scientific formula for identifying the perfect boyfriend, and it certainly does not prove that less intelligent men are incapable of healthy relationships.

The viral headline may be provocative, but the research itself lands somewhere more complicated. Getting fewer answers wrong on a pattern test may be associated with doing less harm, yet building a genuinely good relationship requires qualities that no 16-question intelligence test can measure.