First, as others have said - there is no such thing as "typical".
For me, I'm attracted to the person (not the orientation), and my relationship dynamics work out best if we let them settle themselves. This means that I'm not "looking for" anyone in particular - and when the right person comes along, instead of defining a dynamic, it must work itself out organically.
I don't switch within a relationship, though, so a partner ends up being either dominant, submissive, or neutral to me as far as authority goes. No back-and forth.
This doesn't mean that I'm not compatible with other switches - it just means that if I *am* with a switch, *our* dynamic must be consistent.
I'm very happily a slave in my primary relationship right now, and have other play relationships only at this time (not including my leather family, who are more like...well, *family*...than intimate relationships).
Which, actually, brings up another thing. For me, there are two basic types of "switching". In no particular order, there are those who switch on a d/s axis (dominant and submissive, master and slave, etc.) and those who switch on an s/m axis (sadism and masochism, top and bottom). Some combine the two, and switch on both axes. But not everyone does.
So, someone can be a d/s switch and *only* a sadist or *only* a masochist, as well. This means that they need to find partners who not only jive with a good place on their d/s axis, but who fulfill the fixed needs on the s/m axis.