What makes people fall in love? Biological anthropologist Dr. Helen Fisher has spent her life studying this question. She’s the author of Why Him? Why Her?: Finding Real Love By Understanding Your Personality Type.

Despite the saying that “opposites attract,” Helen Fisher says (and we all know) that people tend to seek out mates who are similar to them in many ways:

“Psychologists have determined that men and women tend to fall in love with individuals from the same ethnic and socioeconomic background; with those of a similar level of intelligence, education and physical attractiveness; with individuals holding similar religious, political and social values; and with those who have a similar sense of humor.”

But beyond these factors, matchmaking involves a huge element of personality. Is there any rhyme or reason to what personalities we find attractive?

Geneticists have been able to map many traits to our DNA, and Helen Fisher says they’ve learned that our genes act together to create behavior syndromes.

“For example, if you have a biological appetite to seek novelty, you are also likely to be energetic, spontaneous, risk taking, curious and creative. If you are predisposed to be traditional instead, you are also likely to be loyal, cautious, respectful of authority and eager to make plans and follow schedules. We express constellations of related biological traits, creating what are commonly called personality types.

…

In fact, after doing extensive research on the biological underpinnings of personality types, I have come to believe that each of us expresses a unique mix of four broad basic personality types. Moreover, our primary personality type steers us toward specific romantic partners. Our biological nature whispers constantly within us to influence who we love.”

These four broad personality types are associated with four specific neurotransmitters and hormones: dopamine, serotonin, testosterone, and estrogen.

I haven’t read the book, and I’m not entirely clear on how this works. I know that both men and women have both testosterone and estrogen, but don’t men always have more testosterone, while women always have more estrogen? She talks about inheriting particular genes in the various hormone systems, so I guess it’s not necessarily that people have more of these neurotransmitters and hormones, just that they have genes that cause them to be more heavily influenced by them. Therefore, the personalities associated with testosterone and estrogen can be found in both men and women.

Anyway, she says we’re all a unique combination of the four types, which she calls the explorer (risk-taking, associated with dopamine), the builder (calm, traditional, associated with serotonin), the director (analytical, tough-minded and decisive, associated with testosterone) and the negotiator (emotionally expressive and empathetic, associated with estrogen).

Although she didn’t say one word about the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in the articles I read, I noticed a striking (though not perfect) correlation between these types and the MBTI temperaments. Below we see the types, the associated neurotransmitter or hormone, the associated temperament (in my opinion), and the corresponding traits.

So which types attract each other? Fisher says that explorers go for other explorers, and builders go for other builders. But directors go for negotiators, and vice versa.

For now, I’m not convinced about this. I’ve always considered the MBTI to be useless for selecting jobs or partners. It’s great for understanding people, but not for filtering them. So if these four types can be mapped to Myers-Briggs types, my instinct is that they wouldn’t be good relationship predictors.

Then again, I haven’t spent a lifetime studying it. Maybe there’s something to this.

Dr. Fisher admits that types aren’t everything. She observed a “test date” between two explorers, who should be a good match based on type. But he says he’s into sports, while she calls herself a cultural woman. Having the right type isn’t enough unless the people have common interests, or at least a willingness to learn about each other’s interests.

Enough talk. Let’s find out what you are.

WhyHimWhyHer.com redirects to the test at chemistry.com (a sister site of match.com). Allow about 15 minutes for this. It’s a bit of a pain to get started, but worth it.

You have to create a username and password, but since you don’t ever need to log in again, you can just use random letters. I was going to say you can use Mailinator to get a throwaway email address, but the test gives you the results right there in the web page, so you can just make up a fake email.

The test is pretty interesting. The very first question is the only one about physical attributes. Specifically, the relative lengths of your index and ring fingers. I guess this is influenced by the neurotransmitters and hormones in question.

There are two items about visual perception, where you have to make one thing bigger or smaller until it’s the same size as another thing. The rest of the questions are normal personality questions.

I expected that the test would find me to be a director, and I was right. But it determines both a primary and a secondary type. I was a director (testosterone) for the primary, and a negotiator (estrogen) for the secondary. I don’t know if I’m thrilled about my secondary type being associated with estrogen, but the description does match me partially.

Do you think Dr. Helen Fisher is right? Do you think explorers are best matched with explorers, builders are best matched with builders, and directors are best matched with negotiators? If you’re married and willing to share what types you think you and your spouse are, that could be interesting.

• Bomb Threats And You: Temperaments In Action
• Personality Types: Questions And Answers
• My New Year’s Wish For 2009
• Tell Me Your Myers-Briggs Type, Get A Free Link
• Myers-Briggs Trial Recap
• MBTI Trial Week 4: Judging (Recap)
• MBTI Trial Week 4: Judging
• MBTI Trial Week 3: Feeling (Recap)
• MBTI Trial Week 3: Feeling
• MBTI Trial Week 2: Sensing (Recap)