Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:45:55.432Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Female Sexual Attraction Tactics

from Part I - Precopulatory Adaptations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2022

By
Trond Viggo Grøntvedt ,
Mons Bendixen  and
Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair
Edited by
Todd K. Shackelford
Todd K. Shackelford
Affiliation:
Oakland University, Michigan
Get access

Summary

The historical, and perhaps still stereotypical, image of women as coy and passive in mate selection is not correct. While intrasexual competition among men has been studied extensively, theoretical and empirical work focusing on how women engage in intrasexual competition and intersexual mate choice has received less attention. More recently, there has been a growing literature which has shown that women’s intrasexual competition can be fierce, and that it is not limited to self-promotion in order to attract a partner. The evolutionary psychology theoretical aspects guiding this research are parental investment theory, sexual conflict theory, and sexual strategies theory, which we present briefly at the start of this chapter. Several individual differences, such as personality traits, sociosexuality, dark triad traits, age and mate value, influence what attraction tactics work for whom. Further, we present various tactics women use to show sexual interest, how tactics are linked to motivation for sexual intercourse, and how women’s attraction tactics work with new technology, such as dating apps. In addition, we have reviewed the literature on women’s intrasexual competition, with specific focus on how women derogate rivals, self-promotion their traits and how they use various tactics to disrupt rivals’ relationships through mate poaching.

Keywords

female sexual psychologyattraction tacticsmate choicesexual strategiesindividual differences
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Psychology , pp. 33 - 56
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amato, P. R., & Previti, D. (2003). People’s reasons for divorcing: Gender, social class, the life course, and adjustment. Journal of Family Issues, 24(5), 602–626. doi:10.1177/0192513x03254507Google Scholar
Apostolou, M., & Christoforou, C. (2020). The art of flirting: What are the traits that make it effective? Personality and Individual Differences, 158. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2020.109866Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., & Piché, T. (2014). Cosmetic surgery as intrasexual competition: The mediating role of social comparison. Psychology, 5, 1197–1205. doi:10.4236/psych.2014.510132Google Scholar
Arslan, R. C., Schilling, K. M., Gerlach, T. M., & Penke, L. (2018). Using 26,000 diary entries to show ovulatory changes in sexual desire and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. doi:10.1037/pspp0000208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atari, M., Barbaro, N., Sela, Y., Shackelford, T. K., & Chegeni, R. (2017). Consideration of cosmetic surgery as part of women’s benefit-provisioning mate retention strategy. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(1389). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01389Google Scholar
Atkins, D. C., Baucom, D. H., & Jacobson, N. S. (2001). Understanding infidelity: Correlates in a national random sample. Journal of Family Psychology, 15(4), 735–749. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.15.4.735Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Is there a gender difference in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 242–273. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0503_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bech-Sørensen, J., & Pollet, T. V. (2016). Sex differences in mate preferences: A replication study, 20 years later. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2(3), 171–176. doi:10.1007/s40806-016-0048-6Google Scholar
Bendixen, M., & Kennair, L. E. O. (2015). Revisiting judgment of strategic self-promotion and competitor derogation tactics. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. doi:10.1177/0265407514558959Google Scholar
Bendixen, M., & Kennair, L. E. O. (2017). Advances in the understanding of same-sex and opposite-sex sexual harassment. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38(5), 583–591. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.01.001Google Scholar
Bendixen, M., Kennair, L. E. O., Biegler, R., & Haselton, M. G. (2019). Adjusting signals of sexual interest in the most recent naturally occurring opposite-sex encounter in two different contexts. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 13, 345–365. doi:10.1037/ebs0000162Google Scholar
Bendixen, M., Kennair, L. E. O., & Grøntvedt, T. V. (2018). Casual sex. In Shackelford, T. K. & Weekes-Shackelford, V. A. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science (pp. 1–8). Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Betzig, L. (1989). Causes of conjugal dissolution: A cross-cultural study. Current Anthropology, 30(5), 654–676. doi:10.2307/2743579Google Scholar
Blake, K. R., Bastian, B., Denson, T. F., Grosjean, P., & Brooks, R. C. (2018). Income inequality not gender inequality positively covaries with female sexualization on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(35), 8722–8727. doi:10.1073/pnas.1717959115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleske, A. L., & Shackelford, T. K. (2001). Poaching, promiscuity, and deceit: Combatting mating rivalry in same-sex friendships. Personal Relationships, 8(4), 407–424. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2001.tb00048.xGoogle Scholar
Bleske-Rechek, A., & Buss, D. M. (2006). Sexual strategies pursued and mate attraction tactics deployed. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1299–1311. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.014Google Scholar
Bleske-Rechek, A., VandenHeuvel, B., & Vander Wyst, M. (2009). Age variation in mating strategies and mate preferences: Beliefs versus reality. Evolutionary Psychology, 7(2), 179–205. doi:10.1177/147470490900700204Google Scholar
Blurton Jones, N. G., Marlowe, F. W., Hawkes, K., & O’Connell, J. F. (2000). Paternal investment and hunter-gatherer divorce rates. In Cronk, L., Chagnon, N. A., & Irons, W. (Eds.), Adaptation and human behavior: An anthropological perspective (pp. 69–90). New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Botnen, E. O., Bendixen, M., Grøntvedt, T. V., & Kennair, L. E. O. (2018). Individual differences in sociosexuality predict picture-based mobile dating app use. Personality and Individual Differences, 131, 67–73. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2018.04.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broude, G. J., & Greene, S. J. (1976). Cross-cultural codes on twenty sexual attitudes and practices. Ethnology, 15(4), 409–429. doi:10.2307/3773308Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1988). The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(4), 616–628. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.616Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1–49. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00023992Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2017). Sexual conflict in human mating. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(4), 307–313. doi:10.1177/0963721417695559Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategy theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100(2), 204–232. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.204Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). From vigilance to violence: Mate retention tactics in married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 346–361. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.346Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (2008). Attractive women want it all: Good genes, economic investment, parenting proclivities, and emotional commitment. Evolutionary Psychology, 6(1), 134–146. doi:10.1177/147470490800600116Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Larsen, R. J. (2001). A half century of mate preferences: The cultural evolution of values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 491–503. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00491.xGoogle Scholar
Byers, E. S. (2005). Relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction: A longitudinal study of individuals in long-term relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 42(2), 113–118. doi:10.1080/00224490509552264Google Scholar
Campbell, A. (2004). Female competition: Causes, constraints, content, and context. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 16–26. doi:10.1080/00224490409552210Google Scholar
Campbell, A. (2013). The evolutionary psychology of women’s aggression. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368(1631), 20130078. doi:10.1098/rstb.2013.0078Google Scholar
Cohen, S. E., Todd, P. M., Kruschke, J. K., Garcia, J. R., & Fisher, H. E. (2019). Singles of both sexes expedite reproduction: Shifts in sexual-timing strategies before and after the typical age of female menopause. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40(6), 557–569. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2019.08.001Google Scholar
Conroy-Beam, D., & Buss, D. M. (2019). Why is age so important in human mating? Evolved age preferences and their influences on multiple mating behaviors. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 127–157. doi:10.1037/ebs0000127Google Scholar
Conroy-Beam, D., Buss, D. M., Asao, K., Sorokowska, A., Sorokowski, P., Aavik, T., … & Zupančič, M. (2019). Contrasting computational models of mate preference integration across 45 countries. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 16885. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-52748-8Google Scholar
Conroy-Beam, D., Goetz, C. D., & Buss, D. M. (2015). Why do humans form long-term mateships? An evolutionary game-theoretic model. In Olson, J. M. & Zanna, M. P. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 51, pp. 1–39). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Conroy-Beam, D., Roney, J. R., Lukaszewski, A. W., Buss, D. M., Asao, K., Sorokowska, A., … & Zupančič, M. (2019). Assortative mating and the evolution of desirability covariation. Evolution and Human Behavior. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2019.06.003Google Scholar
Daly, M. (2016). Killing the competition: Economic inequality and homicide. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Davies, A. P. C., Shackelford, T. K., & Hass, R. G. (2010). Sex differences in perceptions of benefits and costs of mate poaching. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(5), 441–445. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.04.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, A. P. C., Tratner, A. E., & Shackelford, T. K. (2019). Not clearly defined, not reliably measured, and not replicable: Revisiting the definition and measurement of human mate poaching. Personality and Individual Differences, 145, 103–105. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2019.03.036Google Scholar
Davis, A. C., & Arnocky, S. (2020). An evolutionary perspective on appearance enhancement behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-020-01745-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deschner, T., Heistermann, M., Hodges, K., & Boesch, C. (2004). Female sexual swelling size, timing of ovulation, and male behavior in wild West African chimpanzees. Hormones and Behavior, 46(2), 204–215. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2004.03.013Google Scholar
Dunn, P. O., Whittingham, L. A., & Pitcher, T. E. (2001). Mating systems, sperm competition, and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in birds. Evolution, 55(1), 161–175. doi:10.1111/j.0014-3820.2001.tb01281.xGoogle Scholar
Durante, K. M., Li, N. P., & Haselton, M. G. (2008). Changes in women’s choice of dress across the ovulatory cycle: Naturalistic and laboratory task-based evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(11), 1451–1460. doi:10.1177/0146167208323103CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Easton, J. A., Confer, J. C., Goetz, C. D., & Buss, D. M. (2010). Reproduction expediting: Sexual motivations, fantasies, and the ticking biological clock. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(5), 516–520. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.018Google Scholar
Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2008). Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 245–264. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.245Google Scholar
Emery Thompson, M. (2005). Reproductive endocrinology of wild female chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii): Methodological considerations and the role of hormones in sex and conception. American Journal of Primatology, 67(1), 137–158. doi:10.1002/ajp.20174Google Scholar
Erevik, E. K., Kristensen, J. H., Torsheim, T., Vedaa, Ø., & Pallesen, S. (2020). Tinder use and romantic relationship formations: A large-scale longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1757. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01757CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fales, M. R., Frederick, D. A., Garcia, J. R., Gildersleeve, K. A., Haselton, M. G., & Fisher, H. E. (2016). Mating markets and bargaining hands: Mate preferences for attractiveness and resources in two national U.S. studies. Personality and Individual Differences, 88, 78–87. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.08.041Google Scholar
Fink, B., Grammer, K., & Matts, P. J. (2006). Visible skin color distribution plays a role in the perception of age, attractiveness, and health in female faces. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27(6), 433–442. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.08.007Google Scholar
Fink, B., Klappauf, D., Brewer, G., & Shackelford, T. K. (2014). Female physical characteristics and intra-sexual competition in women. Personality and Individual Differences, 58, 138–141. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2013.10.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, M., & Cox, A. (2011). Four strategies used during intrasexual competition for mates. Personal Relationships, 18(1), 20–38. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01307.xGoogle Scholar
Fisher, M., Cox, A., & Gordon, F. (2009). Self-promotion versus competitor derogation: The influence of sex and romantic relationship status on intrasexual competition strategy selection. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 287–308. doi:10.1556/jep.7.2009.4.6Google Scholar
Fisher, M. L. (2004). Female intrasexual competition decreases female facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 271(suppl. 5), S283–S285. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2004.0160CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fowler, S. A., & Both, L. E. (2020). The role of personality and risk-taking on Tinder use. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 2(1), 100067. doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100067Google Scholar
Frederick, D. A., Lever, J., & Peplau, L. A. (2007). Interest in cosmetic surgery and body image: Views of men and women across the lifespan. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 120(5), 1407–1415. doi:10.1097/01.prs.0000279375.26157.64Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., Garver-Apgar, C. E., Simpson, J. A., & Cousins, A. J. (2007). Changes in women’s mate preferences across the ovulatory cycle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 151–163. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.151Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Garver, C. E. (2002). Changes in women’s sexual interests and their partner’s mate-retention tactics across the menstrual cycle: Evidence for shifting conflicts of interest. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 269(1494), 975–982. doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1952Google Scholar
Goetz, C. D., Easton, J. A., Lewis, D. M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2012). Sexual exploitability: Observable cues and their link to sexual attraction. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 417–426. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.12.004Google Scholar
Grøntvedt, T. V., Bendixen, M., Botnen, E. O., & Kennair, L. E. O. (2020). Hook, line and sinker: Do Tinder matches and meet ups lead to one-night stands? Evolutionary Psychological Science, 6(2), 109–118. doi:10.1007/s40806-019-00222-zGoogle Scholar
Grøntvedt, T. V., Grebe, N. M., Kennair, L. E. O., & Gangestad, S. W. (2017). Estrogenic and progestogenic effects of hormonal contraceptives in relation to sexual behavior: Insights into extended sexuality. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38(3), 283–292. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.10.006Google Scholar
Grøntvedt, T. V., & Kennair, L. E. O. (2013). Age preferences in a gender egalitarian society. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 7(3), 239–249. doi:10.1037/h0099199Google Scholar
Grøntvedt, T. V., Kennair, L. E. O., & Mehmetoglu, M. (2015). Factors predicting the probability of initiating sexual intercourse by context and sex. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 56(5), 516–526. doi:10.1111/sjop.12215CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (2006). Relationship dissolution following infidelity: The roles of attributions and forgiveness. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25(5), 508–522. doi:10.1521/jscp.2006.25.5.508Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G., & Gangestad, S. W. (2006). Conditional expression of women’s desires and men’s mate guarding across the ovulatory cycle. Hormones and Behavior, 49(4), 509–518. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.10.006Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G., Mortezaie, M., Pillsworth, E. G., Bleske-Rechek, A., & Frederick, D. A. (2007). Ovulatory shifts in human female ornamentation: Near ovulation, women dress to impress. Hormones and Behavior, 51(1), 40–45. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2006.07.007Google Scholar
Hill, S. E., Rodeheffer, C. D., Griskevicius, V., Durante, K., & White, A. E. (2012). Boosting beauty in an economic decline: Mating, spending, and the lipstick effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(2), 275–291. doi:10.1037/a0028657Google Scholar
Hrdy, S. B. (1997). Raising Darwin’s consciousness. Human Nature, 8(1), 1–49. doi:10.1007/s12110-997-1003-9Google Scholar
Hudders, L., De Backer, C., Fisher, M., & Vyncke, P. (2014). The rival wears Prada: Luxury consumption as a female competition strategy. Evolutionary Psychology, 12(3), 570–587. doi:10.1177/147470491401200306CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurtado, A. M., & Hill, K. R. (1992). Paternal effect on offspring survivorship among Ache and Hiwi hunter-gatherers: Implications for modeling pair-bond stability. In Hewlett, B. S. (Ed.), Father-child relations: Cultural and biosocial contexts (pp. 31–56). New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Jonason, P. K., & Buss, D. M. (2012). Avoiding entangling commitments: Tactics for implementing a short-term mating strategy. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(5), 606–610. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.12.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., & Buss, D. M. (2010). The costs and benefits of the Dark Triad: Implications for mate poaching and mate retention tactics. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(4), 373–378. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.11.003Google Scholar
Kennair, L. E. O., Grøntvedt, T. V., Mehmetoglu, M., Perilloux, C., & Buss, D. M. (2015). Sex and mating strategy impact the 13 basic reasons for having sex. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 1(4), 207–219. doi:10.1007/s40806-015-0024-6Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., & Keefe, R. C. (1992). Age preferences in mates reflect sex differences in human reproductive strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15(1), 75–91. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00067595Google Scholar
Kirsner, B. R., Figueredo, A. J., & Jacobs, W. J. (2003). Self, friends, and lovers: Structural relations among Beck depression inventory scores and perceived mate values. Journal of Affective Disorders, 75(2), 131–148. doi: 10.1016/s0165-0327(02)00048-4Google Scholar
Labrecque, L. T., & Whisman, M. A. (2017). Attitudes toward and prevalence of extramarital sex and descriptions of extramarital partners in the 21st century. Journal of Family Psychology, 31(7), 952–957. doi:10.1037/fam0000280Google Scholar
Larsen, C. S. (2003). Equality for the sexes in human evolution? Early hominid sexual dimorphism and implications for mating systems and social behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(16), 9103–9104. doi:10.1073/pnas.1633678100Google Scholar
Lassek, W. D., & Gaulin, S. J. C. (2019). Evidence supporting nubility and reproductive value as the key to human female physical attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40(5), 408–419. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2019.05.001Google Scholar
Li, N. P., Valentine, K. A., & Patel, L. (2011). Mate preferences in the US and Singapore: A cross-cultural test of the mate preference priority model. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(2), 291–294. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.10.005Google Scholar
Li, N. P., & Yong, J. C. (2017). Sexual conflict in mating strategies. In Shackelford, T. K. & Weekes-Shackelford, V. A. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science (pp. 1–10). Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Li, N. P., Yong, J. C., Tov, W., Sng, O., Fletcher, G. J. O., Valentine, K. A., … & Balliet, D. (2013). Mate preferences do predict attraction and choices in the early stages of mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(5), 757–776. doi:10.1037/a0033777Google Scholar
Lippa, R. A. (2007). The preferred traits of mates in a cross-national study of heterosexual and homosexual men and women: An examination of biological and cultural influences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36(2), 193–208. doi:10.1007/s10508-006-9151-2Google Scholar
Marlowe, F. (2004). Mate preferences among Hadza hunter-gatherers. Human Nature, 15(4), 365–376. doi:10.1007/s12110-004-1014-8Google Scholar
Marlowe, F. W. (2003). A critical period for provisioning by Hadza men: Implications for pair bonding. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24(3), 217–229. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(03)00014-XGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto-Oda, A. (1999). Female choice in the opportunistic mating of wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) at Mahale. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 46(4), 258–266. doi:10.1007/s002650050618Google Scholar
Meltzer, A. L., McNulty, J. K., Jackson, G. L., & Karney, B. R. (2014). Men still value physical attractiveness in a long-term mate more than women: Rejoinder to Eastwick, Neff, Finkel, Luchies, and Hunt (2014). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(3), 435–440. doi:10.1037/a0035342Google Scholar
Meston, C. M., & Buss, D. M. (2007). Why humans have sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36(4), 477–507. doi:10.1007/s10508-007-9175-2Google Scholar
Meston, C. M., & Buss, D. M. (2009). Why women have sex. New York, NY: Times Books.Google Scholar
Møller, A. P. (2000). Male parental care, female reproductive success, and extrapair paternity. Behavioral Ecology, 11(2), 161–168. doi:10.1093/beheco/11.2.161Google Scholar
Moran, J. B., Salerno, K. J., & Wade, T. J. (2018). Snapchat as a new tool for sexual access: Are there sex differences? Personality and Individual Differences, 129, 12–16. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2018.02.040Google Scholar
Nettle, D. (2005). An evolutionary approach to the extraversion continuum. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(4), 363–373. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.12.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nettle, D., & Clegg, H. (2008). Personality, mating strategies, and mating intelligence. In Geher, G. & Miller, G. (Eds.), Mating intelligence: Sex, relationships, and the mind’s reproductive system (pp. 121–134). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Olson, E. S., Doss, E. R., & Perilloux, C. (2020). Friend or foe? Mate presence and rival type influence clothing-based female intrasexual competition. Evolutionary Psychological Science. doi:10.1007/s40806-020-00260-yGoogle Scholar
The Oxford handbook of women and competition. (2017). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pedersen, F. A. (1991). Secular trends in human sex ratios. Human Nature, 2(3), 271–291. doi:10.1007/BF02692189CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pilakouta, N., Hanlon, E. J. H., & Smiseth, P. T. (2018). Biparental care is more than the sum of its parts: Experimental evidence for synergistic effects on offspring fitness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 285(1884), 20180875. doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.0875Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P. (2002). A meta-analysis of sex differences in romantic attraction: Do rating contexts moderate tactic effectiveness judgments? British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 387–402. doi:10.1348/014466602760344278Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P. (2004). Patterns and universals of mate poaching across 53 nations: The effects of sex, culture, and personality on romantically attracting another person’s partner. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(4), 560–584. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.4.560CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(2), 247–311. doi:10.1017/s0140525x05000051Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., Alcalay, L., Allik, J., Alves, I. C. B., Anderson, C. A., Angelini, A. L., … & Kökény, T. (2017). Narcissism and the strategic pursuit of short-term mating: Universal links across 11 world regions of the International Sexuality Description Project-2. Psihologijske Teme, 26(1), 89–137. doi:10.31820/pt.26.1.5Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (1996). Strategic self-promotion and competitor derogation: Sex and context effects on the perceived effectiveness of mate attraction tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1185–1204. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.6.1185CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2001). Human mate poaching: Tactics and temptations for infiltrating existing mateships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 894–917. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.894Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., & Shackelford, T. K. (2008). Big Five traits related to short-term mating: From personality to promiscuity across 46 nations. Evolutionary Psychology, 6(2), 246–282. doi:10.1177/147470490800600204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sevi, B., Aral, T., & Eskenazi, T. (2018). Exploring the hook-up app: Low sexual disgust and high sociosexuality predict motivation to use Tinder for casual sex. Personality and Individual Differences, 133, 17–20. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.053Google Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2005). Universal dimensions of human mate preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(2), 447–458. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.01.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stumpf, R. M., & Boesch, C. (2005). Does promiscuous mating preclude female choice? Female sexual strategies in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) of the Taï National Park, Côte d’Ivoire. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 57(5), 511–524. doi:10.1007/s00265-004-0868-4Google Scholar
Thomas, A. G., Jonason, P. K., Blackburn, J. D., Kennair, L. E. O., Lowe, R., Malouff, J., … & Li, N. P. (2020). Mate preference priorities in the East and West: A cross-cultural test of the mate preference priority model. Journal of Personality, 88(3), 606–620. doi:10.1111/jopy.12514Google Scholar
Thompson, A. P. (1983). Extramarital sex: A review of the research literature. Journal of Sex Research, 19(1), 1–22. doi:10.1080/00224498309551166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmermans, E., & De Caluwé, E. (2017a). Development and validation of the Tinder Motives Scale (TMS). Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 341–350. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmermans, E., & De Caluwé, E. (2017b). To Tinder or not to Tinder, that’s the question: An individual differences perspective to Tinder use and motives. Personality and Individual Differences, 110, 74–79. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.01.026Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Cambell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man: 1871–1971 (pp. 139–179). Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Vaillancourt, T., & Sharma, A. (2011). Intolerance of sexy peers: Intrasexual competition among women. Aggressive Behavior, 37(6), 569–577. doi:10.1002/ab.20413Google Scholar
Wade, T. J., & Slemp, J. (2015). How to flirt best: The perceived effectiveness of flirtation techniques. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 9(1), 32–43. doi:10.5964/ijpr.v9i1.178Google Scholar
Walter, K. V., Conroy-Beam, D., Buss, D. M., Asao, K., Sorokowska, A., Sorokowski, P., … & Zupančič, M. (2020). Sex differences in mate preferences across 45 countries: A large-scale replication. Psychological Science. doi:10.1177/0956797620904154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weckerly, F. W. (1998). Sexual-size dimorphism: Influence of mass and mating systems in the most dimorphic mammals. Journal of Mammalogy, 79(1), 33–52. doi:10.2307/1382840Google Scholar
White, J., Lorenz, H., Perilloux, C., & Lee, A. (2018). Creative Casanovas: Mating strategy predicts using – but not preferring – atypical flirting tactics. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 4(4), 443–455. doi:10.1007/s40806-018-0155-7Google Scholar
Wiederman, M. W. (1997). Extramarital sex: Prevalence and correlates in a national survey. Journal of Sex Research, 34(2), 167–174. doi:10.1080/00224499709551881Google Scholar
Wood, J. R., Milhausen, R. R., & Jeffrey, N. K. (2014). Why have sex? Reasons for having sex among lesbian, bisexual, queer, and questioning women in romantic relationships. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 23(2), 75–88. doi:10.3138/cjhs.2592Google Scholar
Wyckoff, J. P., Asao, K., & Buss, D. M. (2019). Gossip as an intrasexual competition strategy: Predicting information sharing from potential mate versus competitor mating strategies. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40(1), 96–104. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.08.006Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×