Thanks and yes! Just DM’ed you.

Both substantive and methodological techniques I have learnt along the way at UChicago have led to this paper. Special thanks to Edward O. Laumann, @gtwodtke.bsky.social, and @drschut.bsky.social for their helpful comments on earlier versions of the paper! [7/7]

Mediation analyses using regression imputation further reveal that both physical functioning and social perceptions of attractiveness partly explain these patterns, underscoring the interplay between physiological and social factors in later-life intimacy. [6/7]

Our findings show that larger body size is associated with lower likelihood of having a partner and engaging in partnered sexual activities. Notably, these associations are more pronounced for women, while solitary sexual ideation appears less affected by body size. [5/7]

We decomposed the total effects of body size into direct effects and those mediated by functional limitations (measured by ADL restrictions) and interviewer-rated attractiveness. We tried to understand if the mechanisms are different for women and men. [4/7]

We both objective measure—Body Mass Index (BMI)—and subjective measure through interviewer-rated body shape. We study how they affect access to partnership, partnered sexual behaviors and solitary sexual activities among older adults and become a gendered source of social stratification. [3/7]

Building on Mead and Goffman, we argue that the social construction of the self is strongly tied to how physical attributes are perceived. Although attractive individuals often receive social and economic advantages, less is know about how physical appearance affects the access to partnership. [2/7]