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-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:14:42.022Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part I - Precopulatory Adaptations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2022

Edited by
Todd K. Shackelford
Todd K. Shackelford
Affiliation:
Oakland University, Michigan
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Psychology , pp. 1 - 194
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

References

Bailey, J. M., Vasey, P. L., Diamond, L. M., Breedlove, S. M., Vilain, E., & Epprecht, M. (2016). Sexual orientation, controversy, and science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17(2), 45–101.Google Scholar
Barber, N. (1995). The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16(5), 395–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, P. W., & Bennett, N. C. (2006). The biology of human sexuality: Evolution, ecology and physiology. Verbum et Ecclesia, 27(1), 245–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binter, J., Leongómez, J. D., Moyano, N., Valentová, J., Jouza, L., & Klapilová, K. (2012). Sex differences in the incidence of sexual fantasies focused on evolutionary relevant objects. Anthropologie, 50(1), 83–94.Google Scholar
Björkelund, C., Lissner, L., Andersson, S., Lapidus, L., & Bengtsson, C. (1996). Reproductive history in relation to relative weight and fat distribution. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders, 20(3), 213–219. PMID: 8653141.Google ScholarPubMed
Braun, M. F., & Bryan, A. (2006). Female waist-to-hip and male waist-to-shoulder ratios as determinants of romantic partner desirability. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23(5), 805–819.Google Scholar
Brosius, H. B., WeaverIII, J. B., & Staab, J. F. (1993). Exploring the social and sexual “reality” of contemporary pornography. Journal of Sex Research, 30(2), 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(3), 559–570.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100(2), 204–232.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2016). Sexual strategies theory. In Shackelford, T. K. & Weekes-Shackelford, V. A. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science (pp. 1–5). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 77–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carael, M., Slaymaker, E., Lyerla, R., & Sarkar, S. (2006). Clients of sex workers in different regions of the world: Hard to count. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 82(Suppl. 3), iii26–iii33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carroll, J. S., Busby, D. M., Willoughby, B. J., & Brown, C. C. (2017). The porn gap: Differences in men’s and women’s pornography patterns in couple relationships. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 16(2), 146–163.Google Scholar
Chandra, A., Mosher, W.D., Copen, C., & Sionean, C. (2011). Sexual behavior, sexual attraction, and sexual identity in the United States: Data from the 2006–2008 National Survey of Family Growth. National Health Statistics Reports, 36, 1–36.Google Scholar
Clark, R. D., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 2(1), 39–55.Google Scholar
Clifton, S., Fuller, E., & Philo, D. (n.d.). National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3): Reference tables. Retrieved from www.natsal.ac.uk/natsal-survey/natsal-3Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dagnino, B., Navajas, J., & Sigman, M. (2012). Eye fixations indicate men’s preference for female breasts or buttocks. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(4), 929–937.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
DeKay, W. T., & Buss, D. M. (1992). Human nature, individual differences, and the importance of context: Perspectives from evolutionary psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(6), 184–189.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., Duncan, M., & Dixson, A. F. (2015). The role of breast size and areolar pigmentation in perceptions of women’s sexual attractiveness, reproductive health, sexual maturity, maternal nurturing abilities, and age. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(6), 1685–1695.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., Grimshaw, G. M., Linklater, W. L., & Dixson, A. F. (2011). Eye-tracking of men’s preferences for waist-to-hip ratio and breast size of women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(1), 43–50.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., Vasey, P. L., Sagata, K., Sibanda, N., Linklater, W. L., & Dixson, A. F. (2011). Men’s preferences for women’s breast morphology in New Zealand, Samoa, and Papua New Guinea. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(6), 1271–1279.Google 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, B. J., & Symons, D. (1990). Sex differences in sexual fantasy: An evolutionary psychological approach. Journal of Sex Research, 27(4), 527–555.Google Scholar
Fink, B., & Penton-Voak, I. (2002). Evolutionary psychology of facial attractiveness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 154–158.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. T., Shackelford, T. K., Weekes-Shackelford, V. A., Euler, H. A., Hoier, S., Schmitt, D. P., & LaMunyon, C. W. (2005). Mate retention, semen displacement, and human sperm competition: A preliminary investigation of tactics to prevent and correct female infidelity. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(4), 749–763.Google Scholar
Grulich, A. E., de Visser, R. O., Badcock, P. B., Smith, A. M., Heywood, W., Richters, J., … & Simpson, J. M. (2014). Homosexual experience and recent homosexual encounters: The Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships. Sexual Health, 11(5), 439–450.Google Scholar
Guéguen, N. (2011). Effects of solicitor sex and attractiveness on receptivity to sexual offers: A field study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(5), 915–919.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hald, G. M. (2006). Gender differences in pornography consumption among young heterosexual Danish adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35(5), 577–585.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hald, G. M., & Høgh-Olesen, H. (2010). Receptivity to sexual invitations from strangers of the opposite gender. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(6), 453–458.Google Scholar
Hald, G. M., & Štulhofer, A. (2016). What types of pornography do people find arousing and do they cluster? Assessing types and categories of pornography in a large-scale online sample. Journal of Sex Research, 53(7), 849–859.Google Scholar
Havlíček, J., Třebický, V., Valentova, J. V., Kleisner, K., Akoko, R. M., Fialová, J., … & Roberts, S. C. (2017). Men’s preferences for women’s breast size and shape in four cultures. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38(2), 217–226.Google Scholar
Henss, R. (2000). Waist-to-hip ratio and female attractiveness. Evidence from photographic stimuli and methodological considerations. Personality and Individual Differences, 28(3), 501–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbenick, D., Reece, M., Schick, V., Sanders, S. A., Dodge, B., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2010). An event‐level analysis of the sexual characteristics and composition among adults ages 18 to 59: Results from a national probability sample in the United States. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7, 346–361.Google Scholar
Hicks, T. V., & Leitenberg, H. (2001). Sexual fantasies about one’s partner versus someone else: Gender differences in incidence and frequency. Journal of Sex Research, 38(1), 43–50.Google Scholar
Hughes, S. M., Aung, T., Harrison, M. A., LaFayette, J. N., & Gallup, G. G. (2021). Experimental evidence for sex differences in sexual variety preferences: Support for the Coolidge effect in humans. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 50, 495–509.Google Scholar
Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60(6), 581–592.Google Scholar
Hyde, J. S. (2014). Gender similarities and differences. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 373–398.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jasieńska, G., Ziomkiewicz, A., Ellison, P. T., Lipson, S. F., & Thune, I. (2004). Large breasts and narrow waists indicate high reproductive potential in women. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 271(1545), 1213–1217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaighobadi, F., Shackelford, T. K., & Goetz, A. T. (2009). From mate retention to murder: Evolutionary psychological perspectives on men’s partner-directed violence. Review of General Psychology, 13(4), 327–334.Google Scholar
Lehmiller, J. J. (2020). Fantasies about consensual nonmonogamy among persons in monogamous romantic relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 49(8), 2799–2812.Google Scholar
Lehmiller, J. J., VanderDrift, L. E., & Kelly, J. R. (2011). Sex differences in approaching friends with benefits relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 48(2–3), 275–284.Google Scholar
Malamuth, N. M. (1996). Sexually explicit media, gender differences and evolutionary theory. Journal of Communication, 46(3), 8–31.Google Scholar
Marlowe, F., & Wetsman, A. (2001). Preferred waist-to-hip ratio and ecology. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(3), 481–489.Google Scholar
McKee, A., Albury, K., & Lumby, C. (2008). The porn report. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Mercer, C. H., Tanton, C., Prah, P., Erens, B., Sonnenberg, P., Clifton, S., … & Johnson, A. M. (2013). Changes in sexual attitudes and lifestyles in Britain through the life course and over time: Findings from the National Surveys of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal). The Lancet, 382(9907), 1781–1794.Google Scholar
Miller, D. J., & McBain, K. A. (2021). The content of contemporary, mainstream pornography: A literature review of content analytic studies. American Journal of Sexuality Education. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/15546128.2021.2019648Google Scholar
Miller, D. J., McBain, K. A., Li, W. W., & Raggatt, P. T. F. (2019). Pornography, desire for porn-like sex, masturbation, and men’s sexual and relationship satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 26(1), 93–113.Google Scholar
Miller, D. J., Raggatt, P. T., & McBain, K. (2020). A literature review of studies into the prevalence and frequency of men’s pornography use. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 15(4), 502–529.Google Scholar
Millward, J. (2013, February 14). Deep inside: A study of 10,000 porn stars and their careers [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://jonmillward.com/blog/studies/deep-inside-a-study-of-10000-porn-starsGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, K. R., Mercer, C. H., Prah, P., Clifton, S., Tanton, C., Wellings, K., & Copas, A. (2019). Why do men report more opposite-sex sexual partners than women? Analysis of the gender discrepancy in a British national probability survey. The Journal of Sex Research, 56(1), 1–8.Google Scholar
Mongeau, P. A., Serewicz, M. C. M., & Therrien, L. F. (2004). Goals for cross‐sex first dates: Identification, measurement, and the influence of contextual factors. Communication Monographs, 71(2), 121–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Connor, K. A., Holman, D. J., & Wood, J. W. (1998). Declining fecundity and ovarian ageing in natural fertility populations. Maturitas, 30(2), 127–136.Google Scholar
Pazhoohi, F., Doyle, J. F., Macedo, A. F., & Arantes, J. (2018). Arching the back (lumbar curvature) as a female sexual proceptivity signal: An eye-tracking study. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 4(2), 158–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, W., Miller, L. C., Putcha-Bhagavatula, A. D., & Yang, Y. (2002). Evolved sex differences in the number of partners desired? The long and the short of it. Psychological Science, 13, 157–161.Google Scholar
Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993–2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136(1), 21–38.Google Scholar
Pham, M. N., & Shackelford, T. K. (2014). Human sperm competition: A comparative evolutionary analysis. Animal Behavior and Cognition, 1(3), 410–422.Google Scholar
Prah, P., Hickson, F., Bonell, C., McDaid, L. M., Johnson, A. M., Wayal, S., … & Mercer, C. H. (2016). Men who have sex with men in Great Britain: Comparing methods and estimates from probability and convenience sample surveys. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 92(6), 455–463.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rasmussen, K. R., Millar, D., & Trenchuk, J. (2019). Relationships and infidelity in pornography: An analysis of pornography streaming websites. Sexuality & Culture, 23(2), 571–584.Google Scholar
Regnerus, M., Gordon, D., & Price, J. (2016). Documenting pornography use in America: A comparative analysis of methodological approaches. Journal of Sex Research, 53(7), 873–881.Google Scholar
Richters, J., Altman, D., Badcock, P. B., Smith, A. M., De Visser, R. O., Grulich, A. E., ... & Simpson, J. M. (2014). Sexual identity, sexual attraction and sexual experience: The Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships. Sexual Health, 11, 451–460.Google Scholar
Rissel, C., Badcock, P. B., Smith, A. M., Richters, J., de Visser, R. O., Grulich, A. E., & Simpson, J. M. (2014). Heterosexual experience and recent heterosexual encounters among Australian adults: The Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships. Sexual Health, 11(5), 416–426.Google Scholar
Rupp, H. A., & Wallen, K. (2008). Sex differences in response to visual sexual stimuli: A review. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37(2), 206–218.Google Scholar
Salmon, C., & Fisher, M. L. (2018). Putting the “sex” into “sexuality”: Understanding online pornography using an evolutionary framework. EvoS: The Journal of the Evolutionary Studies Consortium, 9, 1–15.Google Scholar
Salmon, C., Fisher, M. L., & Burch, R. L. (2019). Evolutionary approaches: Integrating pornography preferences, short-term mating, and infidelity. Personality and Individual Differences, 148, 45–49.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P. (2003). Universal sex differences in the desire for sexual variety: Tests from 52 nations, 6 continents, and 13 islands. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(1), 85–104.Google Scholar
Schützwohl, A., Fuchs, A., McKibbin, W. F., & Shackelford, T. K. (2009). How willing are you to accept sexual requests from slightly unattractive to exceptionally attractive imagined requestors? Human Nature, 20(3), 282–293.Google 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., Goetz, A. T., LaMunyon, C. W., Quintus, B. J., & Weekes-Shackelford, V. A. (2004). Sex differences in sexual psychology produce sex-similar preferences for a short-term mate. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33(4), 405–412.Google Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., LeBlanc, G. J., Weekes-Shackelford, V. A., Bleske-Rechek, A. L., Euler, H. A., & Hoier, S. (2002). Psychological adaptation to human sperm competition. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 123–138.Google Scholar
Singh, D. (1993). Adaptive significance of waist-to-hip ratio and female physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(2), 293–307.Google Scholar
Singh, D. (1994). Ideal female body shape: Role of body weight and waist‐to‐hip ratio. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 16(3), 283–288.Google Scholar
Singh, D., Dixson, B. J., Jessop, T. S., Morgan, B., & Dixson, A. F. (2010). Cross-cultural consensus for waist–hip ratio and women’s attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(3), 176–181.Google Scholar
Singh, D., & Young, R. K. (1995). Body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, breasts, and hips: Role in judgments of female attractiveness and desirability for relationships. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16(6), 483–507.Google Scholar
Stein, J. B., Mongeau, P., Posteher, K., & Veluscek, A. (2019). Netflix and chill? Exploring and refining differing motivations in friends with benefits relationships. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 28(3), 317–327.Google Scholar
Sumter, S. R., Vandenbosch, L., & Ligtenberg, L. (2017). Love me Tinder: Untangling emerging adults’ motivations for using the dating application Tinder. Telematics and Informatics, 34(1), 67–78.Google Scholar
Sun, C., Bridges, A., Wosnitzer, R., Scharrer, E., & Liberman, R. (2008). A comparison of male and female directors in popular pornography: What happens when women are at the helm? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 312–325.Google Scholar
Tappé, M., Bensman, L., Hayashi, K., & Hatfield, E. (2013). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers: A new research prototype. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 7(2), 323–344.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Grammer, K. (1999). The body and face of woman: One ornament that signals quality? Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(2), 105–120.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971 (pp. 136–207). Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Valentova, J. V., Bártová, K., Štěrbová, Z., & Varella, M. A. C. (2017). Influence of sexual orientation, population, homogamy, and imprinting-like effect on preferences and choices for female buttock size, breast size and shape, and WHR. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 313–319.Google Scholar
Vannier, S. A., Currie, A. B., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2014). Schoolgirls and soccer moms: A content analysis of free “Teen” and “MILF” online pornography. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 253–264.Google Scholar
Wiederman, M. W. (1997). The truth must be in here somewhere: Examining the gender discrepancy in self‐reported lifetime number of sex partners. Journal of Sex Research, 34(4), 375–386.Google Scholar
Wilson, G. D. (1997). Gender differences in sexual fantasy: An evolutionary analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(1), 27–31.Google Scholar
Zurbriggen, E. L., & Yost, M. R. (2004). Power, desire, and pleasure in sexual fantasies. Journal of Sex Research, 41(3), 288–300.Google Scholar

References

Alavi, M., Mei, T. K., & Mehrinezhad, S. A. (2018). The dark triad of personality and infidelity intentions: The moderating role of relationship experience. Personality and Individual Differences, 128, 49–54.Google Scholar
Albert, G., & Arnocky, S. (2016). Use of mate retention strategies. In Shackelford, T. K & Weekes-Shackelford, V. A. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Albert, G., Pearson, M., Arnocky, S., Wachowiak, M., Nicol, J., & Murphy, D. R (2018). Effects of masculinized and feminized male voices on men and women’s distractibility and implicit memory. Journal of Individual Differences, 39(3), 151–165.Google Scholar
Allen, E. S., & Atkins, D. C. (2012). The association of divorce and extramarital sex in a representative US sample. Journal of Family Issues, 33(11), 1477–1493.Google Scholar
Allen, E. S., & Baucom, D. H. (2006). Dating, marital, and hypothetical extradyadic involvements: How do they compare? The Journal of Sex Research, 43, 307–317.Google Scholar
Allen, E. S., Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., Markman, H. J., Williams, T., Melton, J., & Clements, M. L. (2008). Premarital precursors of marital infidelity. Family Process, 47(2), 243–259.Google Scholar
Allen, M. S., & Walter, E. E. (2018). Linking big five personality traits to sexuality and sexual health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 1081–1110.Google Scholar
Andrews, P. W., Gangestad, S. W., Miller, G. F., Haselton, M. G., Thornhill, R., & Neale, M. C. (2008). Sex differences in detecting sexual infidelity. Human Nature, 19(4), 347–373.Google Scholar
Apostolou, M., & Panayiotou, R. (2019). The reasons that prevent people from cheating on their partners: An evolutionary account of the propensity not to cheat. Personality and Individual Differences, 146, 34–40.Google Scholar
Arantes, J., Barros, F., & Oliveira, H. (2020). Extradyadic behaviours and gender: How do they relate with sexual desire, relationship quality, and attractiveness? Frontiers in Psychology, 10(2554), 1–12.Google Scholar
Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(3), 319–345.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., Albert, G., Carré, J. M., & Ortiz, T. (2018). Intrasexual competition mediates the relationship between men’s testosterone and mate retention behavior. Physiology & Behavior, 186, 73–78.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., & Carré, J. M. (2016). Intrasexual rivalry among men. In Shackelford, T. K & Weekes-Shackelford, V. A (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., Davis, A. C., Locke, A., McKelvie, L., & Vaillancourt, T. (in press). Violence and homicide following partner infidelity. In DeLecce, T & Shackelford, T. K (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of infidelity. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., Proietti, V., Ruddick, E. L., Côté, T. R., Ortiz, T. L., Hodson, G., & Carré, J. M. (2019). Aggression toward sexualized women is mediated by decreased perceptions of humanness. Psychological Science, 30(5), 748–756.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., Woodruff, N., & Schmitt, D. P. (2016). Men’s sociosexuality is sensitive to changes in mate availability. Personal Relationships, 23, 172–181.Google Scholar
Atkins, D., Baucom, D., & Jacobson, N. (2001). Understanding infidelity: Correlates in a national random sample. Journal of Family Psychology, 15(4), 735–749.Google Scholar
Atkins, D. C., Marín, R. A., Lo, T. T. Y., Klann, N., & Hahlweg, K. (2010). Outcomes of couples with infidelity in a community-based sample of couple therapy. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(2), 212–216.Google Scholar
Bailey, J. M., Gaulin, S., Agyei, Y., & Gladue, B. A. (1994). Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionary relevant aspects of human mating psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1081–1093.Google Scholar
Barta, W. D., & Kiene, S. M. (2005). Motivations for infidelity in heterosexual dating couples: The roles of gender, personality differences, and sociosexual orientation. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(3), 339–360.Google Scholar
Bashirpour, M., Shafi’abadi, A., & Doukaneifard, F. (2020). Factors affecting the tendency to marital infidelity: A grounded theory study. Journal of Qualitative Research in Health Sciences, 8(4), 16–27.Google Scholar
Bertocchi, G., & Dimico, A. (2019). The long-term determinants of female HIV infection in Africa: The slave trade, polygyny, and sexual behaviour. Journal of Development Economics, 140, 90–105.Google Scholar
Betzig, L. (1989). Causes of conjugal dissolution: A cross-cultural study. Current Anthropology, 30(5), 654–676.Google Scholar
Blake, K. R., Fourati, M., & Brooks, R. C. (2018). Who suppresses female sexuality? An examination of support for Islamic veiling in a secular Muslim democracy as a function of sex and offspring sex. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(6), 632–638.Google Scholar
Blow, A. J., & Hartnett, K. (2005). Infidelity in committed relationships I: A methodological review. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31(2), 183–216.Google Scholar
Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1983). American couples. New York, NY: William Morrow.Google Scholar
Booth, A., & Dabbs, J. M., Jr. (1993). Testosterone and men’s marriages. Social Forces, 72(2), 463–477.Google Scholar
Bowelo, M., Rakgoasi, S., & Keetile, M. (2020). Partner faithfulness and sexual reproductive health practices in Botswana: Does perception of partner infidelity influence sexual risk behaviours of people aged 10-34 years? Journal of Biosocial Science, 52(4), 547–559.Google Scholar
Brand, R. J., Markey, C. M., Mills, A., & Hodges, S. D. (2007). Sex differences in self-reported infidelity and its correlates. Sex Roles, 57(1–2), 101–109.Google Scholar
Brewer, G., Hunt, D., James, G., & Abell, L. (2015). Dark triad traits, infidelity and romantic revenge. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 122–127.Google Scholar
Brooks, K. (2017, September 21). Why so many women cheat on their husbands. The Cut. Retrieved from www.thecut.com/2017/09/why-women-cheat-esther-perel-state-of-affairs.htmlGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2017). Sexual conflict in human mating. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(4), 307–313.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2018). Sexual and emotional infidelity: Evolved gender differences in jealousy prove robust and replicable. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 155–160.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., Goetz, C., Duntley, J. D., Asao, K., & Conroy-Beam, D. (2017). The mate switching hypothesis. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 143–149.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., Haselton, M. G., Shackelford, T. K., Bleske, A. L., & Wakefield, J. C. (1999). Interactionism, flexibility, and inferences about the past. American Psychologist, 54(6), 443–445.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 77–110.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997a). From vigilance to violence: Mate retention tactics in married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(2), 346–361.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997b). Susceptibility to infidelity in the first year of marriage. Journal of Research in Personality, 31(2), 193–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., Choe, J. C., Lim, H. K., Hasegawa, M., … & Bennett, K. (1999). Jealousy and the nature of beliefs about infidelity: Tests of competing hypotheses about sex differences in the United States, Korea, and Japan. Personal Relationships, 6(1), 125–150.Google Scholar
Buunk, B. (1980). Extramarital sex in the Netherlands. Alternative Lifestyles, 3, 11–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buunk, B. P., & Dijkstra, P. (2003). Men, women and infidelity: Sex differences in extradyadiac sex and jealousy. In Duncombe, J., Harrison, K., Allan, G., & Marsden, D. (Eds.), The state of affairs: Explorations in infidelity and commitment (pp. 103–120). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Buunk, B. P., & Dijkstra, P. (2006a). The ultimate betrayal? Infidelity and solidarity in close relationships. In Fetchenhauer, D., Flache, A., Buunk, B., & Lindenberg, S. (Eds.), Solidarity and prosocial behavior (pp. 111–124). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Buunk, A. P., & Dijkstra, P. (2006b). Temptation and threat: Extradyadic relations and jealousy. In Vangelisti, A. L. & Perlman, D. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 533–555). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Careal, M., Cleland, J., Deheneffe, J. C., Ferry, B., & Ingham, R. (1995). Sexual behavior in developing countries: Implication for HIV control. AIDS, 9, 1171–1175.Google Scholar
Christensen, H. (1962). A cross-cultural comparison of attitudes toward marital infidelity. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 3(1), 124–137.Google Scholar
Christensen, H. (1973). Attitudes toward marital infidelity: A nine-culture sampling of university student opinion. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 4(2), 197–214.Google Scholar
Clark, R. D. (1990). The impact of AIDS on gender differences in willingness to engage in casual sex. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20(9), 771–782.Google Scholar
Clark, R. D., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 2(1), 39–55.Google Scholar
Clutton-Brock, T. H., & Vincent, A. C. J. (1991). Sexual selection and the potential reproductive rates of males and females. Nature, 351, 58–60.Google Scholar
Conley, T. D., Matsick, J. L., Moors, A. C., Ziegler, A., & Rubin, J. D. (2015). Re-examining the effectiveness of monogamy as an STI-preventive strategy. Preventive Medicine, 78, 23–28.Google Scholar
Cupach, W. R., & Metts, S. (1995). The role of sexual attitude similarity in romantic heterosexual relationships. Personal Relationships, 2(4), 287–300.Google Scholar
Davis, A. C., & Arnocky, S. (2020). An evolutionary perspective on appearance enhancement behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508–020-01745-4Google Scholar
Davis, A. C., Arnocky, S., & Vaillancourt, T. (2020). The Dark Tetrad and male clients of female sex work. Frontiers in Psychology. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.577171Google Scholar
Davis, A. C., Desrochers, J., DiFilippo, A., Vaillancourt, T., & Arnocky, S. (2018). Type of jealousy differentially predicts cost‐inflicting and benefit‐provisioning mate retention. Personal Relationships, 25(4), 596–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, A. C., Vaillancourt, T., & Arnocky, S. (2016). Sexual jealousy. In Shackelford, T. K & Weekes-Shackelford, V. A (Eds.), The encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
DeMaris, A. (2009). Distal and proximal influences on the risk of extramarital sex: A prospective study of longer duration marriages. Journal of Sex Research, 46(6), 597–607.Google Scholar
Drigotas, S. M., & Barta, W. (2001). The cheating heart: Scientific explorations of infidelity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(5), 177–180.Google Scholar
Drigotas, S. M., Safstrom, C. A., & Gentilia, T. (1999). An investment model prediction of dating infidelity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 509–524.Google Scholar
Ellis, B. J., & Symons, D. (1990). Sex differences in sexual fantasy: An evolutionary psychological approach. Journal of Sex Research, 27(4), 527–555.Google Scholar
Ellison, C. R. (2002). A research inquiry into some American women’s sexual concerns and problems. Women & Therapy, 24(1–2), 147–159.Google Scholar
Evans, S., Neave, N., Wakelin, D., & Hamilton, C. (2008). The relationship between testosterone and vocal frequencies in human males. Physiology & Behavior, 93, 783–788.Google Scholar
Feldman, S. S., & Cauffman, E. (1999). Sexual betrayal among late adolescents: Perspectives of the perpetrator and the aggrieved. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28(2), 235–258.Google Scholar
Fife, S. T., Weeks, G. R., & Gambescia, N. (2008). Treating infidelity: An integrative approach. The Family Journal, 16(4), 316–323.Google Scholar
Fincham, F., & May, R. (2017). Infidelity in romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 70–74.Google Scholar
Fisher, H. E. (1992). Anatomy of love: A natural history of monogamy, adultery, and divorce. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Fisher, M., Cox, A., Bennett, S., & Gavric, D. (2008). Components of self-perceived mate value. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2, 156–168.Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. J., Simpson, J. A., Campbell, L., & Overall, N. C. (2015). Pair-bonding, romantic love, and evolution: The curious case of Homo sapiens. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(1), 20–36.Google Scholar
Frederick, D. A., & Fales, M. R. (2016). Upset over sexual versus emotional infidelity among gay, lesbian, bisexual, and heterosexual adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(1), 175–191.Google Scholar
Galperin, A., & Haselton, M. (2010). Predictors of how often and when people fall in love. Evolutionary Psychology, 8(1), 5–28.Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(4), 573–587.Google Scholar
Geary, D. C. (2010). Male, female: The evolution of human sex differences (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gettler, L. T., McDade, T. W., Agustin, S. S., Feranil, A. B., & Kuzawa, C. W. (2013). Do testosterone declines during the transition to marriage and fatherhood relate to men’s sexual behavior? Evidence from the Philippines. Hormones and Behavior, 64(5), 755–763.Google Scholar
Girndt, A., Chng, C. W. T., Burke, T., & Schroeder, J. (2018). Male age is associated with extra-pair paternity, but not with extra-pair mating behaviour. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. T., & Causey, K. (2009). Sex differences in perceptions of infidelity: Men often assume the worst. Evolutionary Psychology, 7(2), 253–263.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. T., & Shackelford, T. K. (2009). Sexual coercion in intimate relationships: A comparative analysis of the effects of women’s infidelity and men’s dominance and control. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38(2), 226–234.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1216–1229.Google Scholar
Goossens, B., Graziani, L., Waits, L. P., Farand, E., Magnolon, S., Coulon, J., … & Allainé, D. (1998). Extra-pair paternity in the monogamous Alpine marmot revealed by nuclear DNA microsatellite analysis. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 43(4–5), 281–288.Google Scholar
Gray, P. B., Garcia, J. R., & Gesselman, A. N. (2019). Age-related patterns in sexual behaviors and attitudes among single U.S. adults: An evolutionary approach. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 111–126.Google Scholar
Greenberg, D. F. (1995). The pleasures of homosexuality. In Abramson, P. R. & Pinkerton, S. D. (Eds.), Sexual nature/sexual nurture (pp. 223–256). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hall, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (2009). Psychological distress: Precursor or consequence of dating infidelity? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(2), 143–159.Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G. (2003). The sexual overperception bias: Evidence of a systematic bias in men from a survey of naturally occurring events. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(1), 34–47.Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1), 81–91.Google Scholar
Hayward, A., & Gillooly, J. F. (2011). The cost of sex: Quantifying energetic investment in gamete production by males and females. PLoS One, 6(1), e16557. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0016557Google Scholar
Heath, D. H. (1978). Personality correlates of the marital sexual compatibility of professional men. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 4(2), 67–82.Google Scholar
Hill, K., & Hurtado, A. M. (1996/2017). Ache life history: The ecology and demography of a foraging people. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hooper, A. E. C., Gangestad, S. W., Thompson, M. E., & Bryan, A. D. (2011). Testosterone and romance: The association of testosterone with relationship commitment and satisfaction in heterosexual men and women. American Journal of Human Biology, 23(4), 553–555.Google Scholar
Huber, B. R., Linhartova, V., & Cope, D. (2004). Measuring paternal certainty using cross-cultural data. World Cultures, 15(1), 48–59.Google Scholar
Hughes, S. M., & Harrison, M. A. (2019). Women reveal, men conceal: Current relationship disclosure when seeking an extrapair partner. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 13(3), 272–277.Google Scholar
Hurlbert, D. F., Apt, C., Hurlbert, M. K., & Pierce, A. P. (2000). Sexual compatibility and the sexual desire-motivation relation in females with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. Behavior Modification, 24(3), 325–347.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. J., & Kirkpatrick, L. A. (2007). The structure and measurement of human mating strategies: Toward a multidimensional model of sociosexuality. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(6), 382–391.Google Scholar
Jankowiak, W., Nell, M. D., & Buckmaster, A. (2002). Managing infidelity: A cross-cultural perspective. Ethnology, 41(1), 85–101.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. J., & Rusbult, C. E. (1989). Resisting temptation: Devaluation of alternative partners as a means of maintaining commitment in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 967–980.Google Scholar
Jonason, P. K., Luevano, V. X., & Adams, H. M. (2012). How the Dark Triad traits predict relationship choices. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(3), 180–184.Google Scholar
Jones, B. C., Hahn, A. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2019). Ovulation, sex hormones, and women’s mating psychology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(1), 51–62.Google Scholar
Jones, D. N., & Weiser, D. A. (2014). Differential infidelity patterns among the Dark Triad. Personality and Individual Differences, 57, 20–24.Google Scholar
Karakurt, G. (2012). Relationship stability through lenses of complexity. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 40(2), 126–140.Google Scholar
Kato, T. (2019). Gender differences in response to infidelity types and rival attractiveness. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 36(4), 1–17.Google Scholar
Kleiman, D. G. (1977). Monogamy in mammals. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 52(1), 39–69.Google Scholar
Klimas, C., Ehlert, U., Lacker, T. J., Waldvogel, P., & Walther, A. (2019). Higher testosterone levels are associated with unfaithful behavior in men. Biological Psychology, 146, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klug, H. (2018). Why monogamy? A review of potential ultimate drivers. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 6, 30.Google Scholar
Knopp, K., Scott, S., Ritchie, L., Rhoades, G., Markman, H., & Stanley, S. (2017). Once a cheater, always a cheater? Serial infidelity across subsequent relationships. Archives of Sexual Behaviours, 46(8), 2301–2311.Google Scholar
Kokko, H., & Jennions, M. D. (2008). Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 21, 919–948.Google Scholar
Kruger, D. J., Fisher, M. L., Edelstein, R. S., Chopik, W. J., Fitzgerald, C. J., & Strout, S. L. (2013). Was that cheating? Perceptions vary by sex, attachment anxiety, and behavior. Evolutionary Psychology, 11(1), 159–171.Google Scholar
Kruger, D. J., & Nesse, R. M. (2004). Sexual selection and the male: Female mortality ratio. Evolutionary Psychology, 2(1), 66–85.Google Scholar
La France, B. (2019). The impact of sexual self-disclosure, sexual compatibility, and sexual conflict on predicted outcome values in sexual relationships. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 28(1), 57–67.Google Scholar
Lammers, J., Stocker, J., Jordan, J., Pollmann, M., & Stapel, D. (2011). Power increases infidelity among men and women. Psychological Science, 22(9), 1191–1197.Google Scholar
Larmuseau, M., Vanoverbeke, J., Van Geystelen, A., Defraene, G., Vanderheyden, N., Mattys, K., … & Decorte, R. (2013). Low historical rates of cuckoldry in a western European human population traced by Y-chromosome and genealogical data. Proceedings of the Royal Society, 280(1772), 1–8.Google Scholar
Laumann, E., Ellingson, S., Mahay, J., Paik, A., & Youm, Y. (2004). The sexual organization of the city. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Laumann, E., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lee, A. J., Sidari, M. J., Murphy, S. C., Sherlock, J. M., & Zietsch, B. P. (2020). Sex differences in misperceptions of sexual interest can be explained by sociosexual orientation and men projecting their own interest onto women. Psychological Science, 31(2), 184–192.Google Scholar
Lee, B. H., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2019). Walk the line: How successful are efforts to maintain monogamy in intimate relationships? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48(6), 1735–1748.Google Scholar
Leeker, O., & Carlozzi, A. (2014). Effects of sex, sexual orientation, infidelity expectations, and love on distress related to emotional and sexual infidelity. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 40(1), 68–91.Google Scholar
Lemay, E. P., & Wolf, N. R. (2016). Projection of romantic and sexual desire in opposite-sex friendships: How wishful thinking creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(7), 864–878.Google Scholar
Levine, E. C., Herbenick, D., Martinez, O., Fu, T. C., & Dodge, B. (2018). Open relationships, nonconsensual nonmonogamy, and monogamy among US adults: Findings from the 2012 National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47(5), 1439–1450.Google Scholar
Li, N. P., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Sex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: What, whether, and why. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 468–489.Google Scholar
Lukas, D., & Clutton-Brock, T. H. (2013). The evolution of social monogamy in mammals. Science, 341(6145), 526–530.Google Scholar
Macauda, M., Erickson, P., Singer, M., & Santelices, C. (2011). A cultural model of infidelity among African American and Puerto Rican young adults. Anthropology & Medicine, 18(3), 351–364.Google Scholar
Macintyre, S., & Sooman, A. (1991). Non-paternity and prenatal genetic screening. The Lancet, 8771(5), 869–871.Google Scholar
Maddox Shaw, A. M., Rhoades, G. K., Allen, E. S., Stanley, S. M., & Markman, H. J. (2013). Predictors of extradyadic sexual involvement in unmarried opposite-sex relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 50(6), 598–610.Google Scholar
Malamuth, N. M. (1996). Sexually explicit media, gender differences and evolutionary theory. Journal of Communication, 46(3), 8–31.Google Scholar
Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., & Miller, S. L. (2009). The implicit cognition of relationship maintenance: Inattention to attractive alternatives. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 174–179.Google Scholar
Maner, J. K., Rouby, D. A., & Gonzaga, G. C. (2008). Automatic inattention to attractive alternatives: The evolved psychology of relationship maintenance. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 343–349.Google Scholar
Mapfumo, J. (2016). Unfaithfulness among married couples. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 21(5), 110–122.Google Scholar
Mark, K. P., Janssen, E., & Milhausen, R. R. (2011). Infidelity in heterosexual couples: Demographic, interpersonal, and personality-related predictors of extradyadic sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(5), 971–982.Google Scholar
Mark, K. P., Milhausen, R. R., & Maitland, S. B. (2013). The impact of sexual compatibility on sexual and relationship satisfaction in a sample of young adult heterosexual couples. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 28(3), 201–214.Google Scholar
Marlowe, F. (2000). Paternal investment and the human mating system. Behavioural Processes, 51, 45–61.Google Scholar
Martins, A., Pereira, M., Andrade, R., Dattilio, F. M., Narciso, I., & Canavarro, M. C. (2016). Infidelity in dating relationships: Gender-specific correlates of face-to-face and online extradyadic involvement. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(1), 193–205.Google Scholar
Mattingly, B. A., Clark, E. M., Weidler, D. J., Bullock, M., Hackathorn, J., & Blankmeyer, K. (2011). Sociosexual orientation, commitment, and infidelity: A mediation analysis. The Journal of Social Psychology, 151, 222–226.Google Scholar
McAnulty, R., & Brineman, J. (2007). Infidelity in dating relationships. Annual Review of Sex Research, 18(1), 94–114.Google Scholar
McDaniel, B. T., Drouin, M., & Cravens, J. D. (2017). Do you have anything to hide? Infidelity-related behaviors on social media sites and marital satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 88–95.Google Scholar
McNulty, J. K., Meltzer, A. L., Makhanova, A., & Maner, J. K. (2018). Attentional and evaluative biases help people maintain relationships by avoiding infidelity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(1), 76–95.Google Scholar
Miller, R. S. (1997). Inattentive and contented: Relationship commitment and attention to alternatives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 758–766.Google Scholar
Mogilski, J. K., Memering, S. L., Welling, L. L., & Shackelford, T. K. (2017). Monogamy versus consensual non-monogamy: Alternative approaches to pursuing a strategically pluralistic mating strategy. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(2), 407–417.Google Scholar
Nascimento, B. S., & Little, A. C. (2019). Mate retention strategies, self-esteem, mate value and facial attractiveness disparity in Brazil and in the UK. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 45(6), 461–472.Google Scholar
Negy, C., Plaza, D., Reig-Ferrer, A., & Fernandez-Pascual, M. D. (2018). Is viewing sexually explicit material cheating on your partner? A comparison between the United States and Spain. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47(3), 737–745.Google Scholar
Nettle, D. (2005). An evolutionary approach to the extraversion continuum. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 26, 363–373.Google Scholar
Nicolosi, A., Laumann, E. O., Glasser, D. B., Paik, A., Gingell, C., Moreira, E., & Wang, T. (2005). Sexual problems among women and men aged 40–80 y: Prevalence and correlates identified in the Global Study of Sexual Attitudes and Behaviors. International Journal of Impotence Research, 17(1), 39–57.Google Scholar
Nowak, N. T., Weisfeld, G. E., Imamoğlu, O., Weisfeld, C. C., Butovskaya, M., & Shen, J. (2014). Attractiveness and spousal infidelity as predictors of sexual fulfillment without the marriage partner in couples from five cultures. Human Ethology Bulletin, 29(1), 18–38.Google Scholar
Oberzaucher, E. (2020). Antoinette Brown Blackwell—The mother of asymmetric parental investment theory. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 14(1), 92–99.Google Scholar
O’Connor, J. J., Pisanski, K., Tigue, C. C., Fraccaro, P. J., & Feinberg, D. R. (2014). Perceptions of infidelity risk predict women’s preferences for low male voice pitch in short-term over long-term relationship contexts. Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 73–77.Google Scholar
O’Connor, J. J., Re, D. E., & Feinberg, D. R. (2011). Voice pitch influences perceptions of sexual infidelity. Evolutionary Psychology, 9(1), 64–78.Google Scholar
Offman, A., & Matheson, K. (2005). Sexual compatibility and sexual functioning in intimate relationships. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 14(1–2), 31–39.Google Scholar
Park, Y., & Park, S. W. (2021). Partner commitment moderates the association between commitment and interest in romantic alternatives. Current Psychology, 40(3), 1439–1447.Google Scholar
Pereira, M. G., Taysi, E., Orcan, F., & Fincham, F. (2014). Attachment, infidelity, and loneliness in college students involved in a romantic relationship: The role of relationship satisfaction, morbidity, and prayer for partner. Contemporary Family Therapy, 36(3), 333–350.Google Scholar
Perilloux, C., Easton, J. A., & Buss, D. M. (2012). The misperception of sexual interest. Psychological Science, 23(2), 146–151.Google Scholar
Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993–2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136(1), 21–38.Google Scholar
Phillips, A. (2010). Indignation or insecurity: The influence of mate value on distress in response to infidelity. Evolutionary Psychology, 8(4), 736–750.Google Scholar
Prins, K. S., Buunk, B. P., & VanYperen, N. W. (1993). Equity, normative disapproval, and extramarital relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 39–53.Google Scholar
Provost, M. P., Kormos, C., Kosakowski, G., & Quinsey, V. L. (2006). Sociosexuality in women and preference for facial masculinization and somatotype in men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 305–312.Google Scholar
Provost, M. P., Troje, N. F., & Quinsey, V. L. (2008). Short-term mating strategies and attraction to masculinity in point-light walkers. Evolution & Human Behavior, 29, 65–69.Google Scholar
Rabby, M. K. (2007). Relational maintenance and the influence of commitment in online and offline relationships. Communication Studies, 58(3), 315–337.Google Scholar
Rafatmah, A., Nazari, M. A., & Nasrollahi, B. (2011). The relationship between sexual variety-seeking and marital satisfaction among available couples. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 1381–1384.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, D., Lopes, D., & Pereira, M. (2017). Sociosexuality, commitment, sexual infidelity, and perceptions of infidelity: Data from the second love web site. The Journal of Sex Research, 54(2), 241–253.Google Scholar
Roney, J. R., & Gettler, L. T. (2015). The role of testosterone in human romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 1, 81–86.Google Scholar
Roscoe, B., Cavanaugh, L. E., & Kennedy, D. R. (1988). Dating infidelity: Behaviors, reasons and consequences. Adolescence, 23(89), 35–43.Google Scholar
Sacher, J. A., & Fine, M. A. (1996). Predicting relationship status and satisfaction after six months among dating couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 58(1), 21–32.Google Scholar
Scelza, B. A., Prall, S. P., Swinford, N., Gopalan, S., Atkinson, E. G., McElreath, R., … & Henn, B. M. (2020). High rate of extrapair paternity in a human population demonstrates diversity in human reproductive strategies. Science Advances, 6(8), eaay6195. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aay6195Google Scholar
Schacht, R., & Kramer, K. L. (2019). Are we monogamous? A review of the evolution of pair-bonding in humans and its contemporary variation cross-culturally. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 7, 1–10.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. (2003). Universal sex differences in the desire for sexual variety: Tests from 52 nations, 6 continents and 13 islands. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 85–104.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P. (2004). The Big Five related to risky sexual behaviour across 10 world regions: Differential personality associations of sexual promiscuity and relationship infidelity. European Journal of Personality, 18(4), 301–319.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 247–311.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P. (2007). Sexual strategies across sexual orientations: How personality traits and culture relate to sociosexuality among gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and heterosexuals. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 18(2–3), 183–214.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., & 118 members of the International Sexuality Description Project (2003). Universal sex differences in the desire for sexual variety: Tests from 52 nations, 6 continents, and 13 islands. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 85–104.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., Shackelford, T. K., & Buss, D. M. (2001). Are men really more “oriented” toward short-term mating than women? A critical review of theory and research. Psychology, Evolution & Gender, 3(3), 211–239.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., Shackelford, T. K., Duntley, J., Tooke, W., & Buss, D. M. (2001). The desire for sexual variety as a key to understanding basic human mating strategies. Personal Relationships, 8(4), 425–455.Google Scholar
Schülke, O., Kappeler, P. M., & Zischler, H. (2004). Small testes size despite high extra-pair paternity in the pair-living nocturnal primate Phaner furcifer. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 55(3), 293–301.Google Scholar
Seal, D. W., Agostinelli, G., & Hannett, C. A. (1994). Extradyadic romantic involvement: Moderating effects of sociosexuality and gender. Sex Roles, 31, 1–22.Google Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., Besser, A., & Goetz, A. T. (2008). Personality, marital satisfaction, and probability of marital infidelity. Individual Differences Research, 6(1), 13–25.Google Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Marital satisfaction and spousal cost-infliction. Personality and Individual Differences, 28(5), 917–928.Google Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., Buss, D. M., & Bennett, K. (2002). Forgiveness or breakup: Sex differences in responses to a partner’s infidelity. Cognition & Emotion, 16(2), 299–307.Google Scholar
Shrout, M. R., & Weigel, D. J. (2018). Infidelity’s aftermath: Appraisals, mental health, and health-compromising behaviors following a partner’s infidelity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35(8), 1067–1091.Google Scholar
Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–883.Google Scholar
Smith, E. R., Becker, M. A., Byrne, D., & Przybyla, D. P. J. (1993). Sexual attitudes of males and females as predictors of interpersonal attraction and marital compatibility. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23(13), 1011–1034.Google Scholar
Sorokowski, P., Sorokowska, A., Karwowski, M., Groyecka, A., Aavik, T., Akello, G., … & Sternberg, R. (2021). Universality of the Triangular Theory of Love: Adaptation and psychometric properties of the Triangular Love Scale in 25 countries. The Journal of Sex Research, 58(1), 106–115.Google Scholar
Sprecher, S. (2002). Sexual satisfaction in premarital relationships: Associations with satisfaction, love, commitment, and stability. Journal of Sex Research, 39(3), 190–196.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M., & Markman, H. J. (1992). Assessing commitment in personal relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 54(3), 595–608.Google Scholar
Starratt, V. G., McKibbin, W., & Shackelford, T. K. (2013). Experimental activation of anti-cuckoldry mechanisms responsive to female sexual infidelity. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(1), 59–62.Google Scholar
Starratt, V. G., Weekes-Shackelford, V., & Shackelford, T. K. (2017). Mate value both positively and negatively predicts intentions to commit an infidelity. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 18–22.Google Scholar
Stone, E. A., Goetz, A. T., & Shackelford, T. K. (2005). Sex differences and similarities in preferred mating arrangements. Sexualities, Evolution & Gender, 7(3), 269–276.Google Scholar
Sugiyama, L. S. (2005). Physical attractiveness in adaptationist perspective. In Buss, D. M. (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 292–343). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tafoya, M. A. & Spitzberg, B. H. (2007). The dark side of infidelity: Its nature, prevalence, and communicative functions. In Spitzberg, B. H. & Cupach, W. R (Eds.), The dark side of interpersonal communication (2nd ed., pp. 201–242). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Thompson, A. E. (1983). Extramarital sex: A review of the research literature. The Journal of Sex Research, 19(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
Thompson, A. E., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2017). Understanding variations in judgments of infidelity: An application of attribution theory. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 39(5), 262–276.Google Scholar
Timmermans, E., De Caluwé, E., & Alexopoulos, C. (2018). Why are you cheating on Tinder? Exploring users’ motives and (dark) personality traits. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 129–139.Google Scholar
Toplu-Demirtaş, E., & Fincham, F. D. (2018). Dating infidelity in Turkish couples: The role of attitudes and intentions. The Journal of Sex Research, 55(2), 252–262.Google Scholar
Træen, B., Kvalem, I. L., Hald, G. M., & Graham, C. (2019). Extradyadic activity in European older adults. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 1–14.Google Scholar
Treas, J., & Giesen, D. (2000). Sexual infidelity among married and cohabiting Americans. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(1), 48–60.Google Scholar
Treger, S., & Sprecher, S. (2010). The influences of sociosexuality and attachment style on reactions to emotional versus sexual infidelity. Journal of Sex Research, 48(5), 413–422.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Vail-Smith, K., Whetstone, L. M., & Knox, D. (2010). The illusion of safety in monogamous undergraduate relationships. American Journal of Health Behavior, 34(1), 12–20.Google Scholar
van Anders, S. M., Hamilton, L. D., & Watson, N. V. (2007). Multiple partners are associated with higher testosterone in North American men and women. Hormones and Behavior, 51(3), 454–459.Google Scholar
Voracek, M., Hofhansl, A., & Fisher, M. L. (2005). Clark and Hatfield’s evidence of women’s low receptivity to male strangers’ sexual offers revisited. Psychological Reports, 97(1), 11–20.Google Scholar
Waite, L. J., & Joyner, K. (2001). Emotional satisfaction and physical pleasure in sexual unions: Time horizon, sexual behavior, and sexual exclusivity. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(1), 247–264.Google Scholar
Watkins, C. D., Bovet, J., Fernandez, A. M., Leongómez, J. D., Żelaźniewicz, A., Varella, M. A. C., & Wagstaff, D. (2022). Men say “I love you” before women do: Robust across several countries. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. doi: 10.1177/02654075221075264Google Scholar
Waynforth, D., Delwadia, S., & Camm, M. (2005). The influence of women’s mating strategies on preference for masculine facial architecture. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 26, 409–416.Google Scholar
Weiser, D. A., Niehuis, S., Flora, J., Punyanunt-Carter, N. M., Arias, V. S., & Baird, R. H. (2018). Swiping right: Sociosexuality, intentions to engage in infidelity, and infidelity experiences on Tinder. Personality and Individual Differences, 133(15), 29–33.Google Scholar
Weiss, R. (2017, April 13). 13 reasons why men cheat: Hey guys! Cheating is not the only option. Psychology Today. Retrieved from www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/love-and-sex-in-the-digital-age/201704/13-reasons-why-men-cheatGoogle Scholar
Whisman, M., Gordon, K., & Chatav, Y. (2007). Predicting sexual infidelity in a population-based sample of married individuals. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(2), 320–324.Google Scholar
Widmer, E. D., Treas, J., & Newcomb, R. (1998). Attitudes toward nonmarital sex in 24 countries. Journal of Sex Research, 35(4), 349–358.Google Scholar
Wiederman, M. (1997). Extramarital sex: Prevalence and correlates in a national survey. The Journal of Sex Research, 34(2), 167–174.Google Scholar
Wiederman, M. W., & Hurd, C. (1999). Extradyadic involvement during dating. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16(2), 265–274.Google Scholar
Wilson, K., Mattingly, B. A., Clark, E. M., Weidler, D. J., & Bequette, A. W. (2011). The gray area: Exploring attitudes toward infidelity and the development of the Perceptions of Dating Infidelity Scale. The Journal of Social Psychology, 151(1), 63–86.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. I., & Daly, M. (1996). Male sexual proprietariness and violence against wives. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5, 2–7.Google Scholar
Wood, J. W. (1992). Dynamics of human reproduction: Biology, biometry, demography. Chicago, IL: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Zhang, N., Parish, W., Huang, Y., & Pan, S. (2012). Sexual infidelity in China: Prevalence and gender-specific correlates. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 41, 861–873.Google Scholar

References

Addison, W. E. (1989). Beardedness as a factor in perceived masculinity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 68, 921–922.Google Scholar
Ainsworth, S. E., & Maner, J. K. (2012). Sex begets violence: Mating motives, social dominance, and physical aggression in men. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 819–829.Google Scholar
Ainsworth, S. E., & Maner, J. K. (2014). Assailing the competition: Sexual selection, proximate mating motives, and aggressive behavior in men. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 1648–1658.Google Scholar
Archer, J. (2009). Does sexual selection explain human sex differences in aggression? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 249–266.Google Scholar
Ariely, D., Huber, J., & Wertenbroch, K. (2005). When do losses loom larger than gains? Journal of Marketing Research, 42, 134–138.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., Piché, T., Albert, G., Ouellette, D., & Barclay, P. (2016). Altruism predicts mating success in humans. British Journal of Psychology, 108, 416–435.Google Scholar
Asendorpf, J. B., Penke, L., & Back, M. D. (2011). From dating to mating and relating: Predictors of initial and long-term outcomes of speed-dating in a community sample. European Journal of Personality, 25, 16–30.Google Scholar
Back, M. D., Schmukle, S. C., & Egloff, B. (2010). Why are narcissists so charming at first sight? Decoding the narcissism–popularity link at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 132–145.Google Scholar
Barclay, P. (2010). Altruism as a courtship display: Some effects of third-party generosity on audience perceptions. British Journal of Psychology, 101, 123–135.Google Scholar
Barclay, P., & Barker, J. L. (2020). Greener than thou: People who protect the environment are more cooperative, compete to be environmental, and benefit from reputation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 72, 101441. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101441Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2004). Sexual economics: Sex as female resource for social exchange in heterosexual interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 339–363.Google Scholar
Beaussart, M. L., Kaufman, S. B., & Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Creative activity, personality, mental illness, and short‐term mating success. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 151–167.Google Scholar
Bereczkei, T., Voros, S., Gal, A., & Bernath, L. (1997). Resources, attractiveness, family commitment: Reproductive decisions in human mate choice. Ethology, 103, 681–699.Google Scholar
Bhasin, S., Storer, T. W., Berman, N., Callegari, C., Clevenger, B., Phillips, J., … & Casaburi, R. (1996). The effects of supraphysiologic doses of testosterone on muscle size and strength in normal men. New England Journal of Medicine, 335, 1–7.Google Scholar
Bleske-Rechek, A., Remiker, M. W., Swanson, M. R., & Zeug, N. M. (2006). Women more than men attend to indicators of good character: Two experimental demonstrations. Evolutionary Psychology, 4, 248–261.Google Scholar
Booth, A., & Dabbs, J. M. (1993). Testosterone and men’s marriages. Social Forces, 72, 463–477.Google Scholar
Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1995). Observable attributes as manifestations and cues of personality and intelligence. Journal of Personality, 63, 1–25.Google Scholar
Brady, W. J., & Crockett, M. J. (2019). How effective is online outrage? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23, 79–80.Google Scholar
Bressler, E. R., Martin, R. A., & Balshine, S. (2006). Production and appreciation of humor as sexually selected traits. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 121–130.Google Scholar
Brown, M., Keefer, L. A., & Sacco, D. F. (2020). Relational insecurity heightens sensitivity to limbal rings in partnered women. Personal Relationships, 27, 61–75.Google Scholar
Brown, M., Keefer, L. A., Sacco, D., & Brown, F. L. (in press). Demonstrate values: Behavioral displays of moral outrage as a cue to long-term mate potential. Emotion.Google Scholar
Brown, M., & Sacco, D. F. (2017). Unrestricted sociosexuality predicts preferences for extraverted male faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 108, 123–127.Google Scholar
Brown, M., & Sacco, D. F. (2018). Put a (limbal) ring on it: Women perceive men’s limbal rings as a health cue in short-term mating domains. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44, 80–91.Google Scholar
Brown, M., & Sacco, D. F. (2019). Is pulling the lever sexy? Deontology as a downstream cue to long-term mate quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36, 957–976.Google Scholar
Brown, M., Sacco, D. F., & Medlin, M. M. (2019). Women’s short-term mating goals elicit avoidance of faces whose eyes lack limbal rings. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 13, 278–285.Google Scholar
Brown, M., Westrich, B., Bates, F., Twibell, A., & McGrath, R. E. (2020). Preliminary evidence for virtue as a cue to long-term mate value. Personality and Individual Differences, 167, 110249.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1988). The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 616–628.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–14.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2003). Sexual strategies: A journey into controversy. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 219–226.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2007). The evolution of human mating strategies. In Gangestad, S. W. & Simpson, J. A. (Eds.), The evolution of mind: Fundamental questions and controversies (pp. 375–382). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., Abbott, M., Angleitner, A., Asherian, A., Biaggio, A., Blanco-Villasenor, A., … & Yang, K.-S. (1990). International preferences in selecting mates. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21, 5–47.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Greiling, H. (1999). Adaptive individual differences. Journal of Personality, 67, 209–243.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.Google Scholar
Campbell, W. K., & Foster, J. D. (2007). The narcissistic self: Background, an extended agency model, and ongoing controversies. In Sedikides, C & Spencer, S. J (Eds.), Frontiers of social psychology: The self (pp. 115–138). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Chapman, T., Arnqvist, G., Bangham, J., & Rowe, L. (2003). Sexual conflict. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 18, 41–47.Google Scholar
Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride, personality, and the evolutionary foundations of human social status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 334–347.Google Scholar
Ciarocco, N. J., Echevarria, J., & Lewandowski, G. W., Jr. (2012). Hungry for love: The influence of self-regulation on infidelity. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152, 61–74.Google Scholar
Clegg, H., Nettle, D., & Miell, D. (2011). Status and mating success amongst visual artists. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 310.Google Scholar
Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self-construals and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5–37.Google Scholar
DiDonato, T. E., Bedminster, M. C., & Machel, J. J. (2013). My funny valentine: How humor styles affect romantic interest. Personal Relationships, 20, 374–390.Google Scholar
DiDonato, T. E., & Jakubiak, B. (2016). Strategically funny: Romantic motives affect humor style in relationship initiation. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 12, 390–405.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., & Brooks, R. C. (2013). The role of facial hair in women’s perceptions of men’s attractiveness, health, masculinity and parenting abilities. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34, 236–241.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., Kennedy-Costantini, S., Lee, A. J., & Nelson, N. L. (2019). Mothers are sensitive to men’s beards as a potential cue of paternal investment. Hormones and Behavior, 113, 55–66.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J. W., Lee, A. J., Sherlock, J. M., & Talamas, S. N. (2017). Beneath the beard: Do facial morphometrics influence the strength of judgments of men’s beardedness? Evolution and Human Behavior, 38, 164–174.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J. W., Sulikowski, D., Gouda‐Vossos, A., Rantala, M. J., & Brooks, R. C. (2016). The masculinity paradox: Facial masculinity and beardedness interact to determine women’s ratings of men’s facial attractiveness. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 29, 2311–2320.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., & Vasey, P. L. (2012). Beards augment perceptions of men’s age, social status, and aggressiveness, but not attractiveness. Behavioral Ecology, 23, 481–490.Google Scholar
Dufner, M., Rauthmann, J. F., Czarna, A. Z., & Denissen, J. J. (2013). Are narcissists sexy? Zeroing in on the effect of narcissism on short-term mate appeal. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 870–882.Google Scholar
Egan, V., & McCorkindale, C. (2007). Narcissism, vanity, personality and mating effort. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 2105–2115.Google Scholar
Einhorn, R. (2009). The D.E.N.N.I.S System. Episode of It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Etcoff, N. L., Stock, S., Haley, L. E., Vickery, S. A., & House, D. M. (2011). Cosmetics as a feature of the extended human phenotype: Modulation of the perception of biologically important facial signals. PLoS One, 6, e25656.Google Scholar
Everett, J. A. C., Pizarro, D. A., & Crockett, M. J. (2016). Inference of trustworthiness from intuitive moral judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145, 772–787.Google Scholar
Farrelly, D. (2013). Altruism as an indicator of good parenting quality in long-term relationships: Further investigations using the mate preferences towards altruistic traits scale. The Journal of Social Psychology, 153, 395–398.Google Scholar
Farrelly, D., Lazarus, J., & Roberts, G. (2007). Altruists attract. Evolutionary Psychology, 5, 313–329.Google Scholar
Feingold, A. (1988). Matching for attractiveness in romantic partners and same-sex friends: A meta-analysis and theoretical critique. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 226–235.Google Scholar
Folstad, I., & Karter, A. (1992). Parasites, bright males, and the immunocompetence handicap. American Naturalist, 139, 603–622.Google Scholar
Frederick, D. A., & Haselton, M. G. (2007). Why is muscularity sexy? Tests of the fitness indicator hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1167–1183.Google Scholar
Freeman, S. (2015). Could a pair of contacts make you look younger? Lenses that define border of iris take years off your face, makers claim. Daily Mail. Retrieved from www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2971960/Could-pair-contacts-make-look-YOUNGER-Lenses-define-border-iris-years-face-makers-claim.htmlGoogle Scholar
Gale, A., & Lewis, M. B. (2020). When the camera does lie: Selfies are dishonest indicators of dominance. Psychology of Popular Media, 9, 447–455.Google Scholar
Gallup, A. C., White, D. D., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2007). Handgrip strength predicts sexual behavior, body morphology, and aggression in male college students. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 423–429.Google 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, 151–163.Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–587.Google Scholar
Geary, D. C. (1998). Male, female: The evolution of human sex differences. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Goldberg, T. L. (1995). Altruism towards panhandlers: Who gives? Human Nature, 6, 79–89.Google Scholar
Greengross, G. (2014). Male production of humor produced by sexually selected psychological adaptations. In Weekes-Shackelford, V. A. & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.), Evolutionary perspectives on human sexual psychology and behavior (pp. 173–196). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Greengross, G., & Miller, G. F. (2011). Humor ability reveals intelligence, predicts mating success, and is higher in males. Intelligence, 39, 188–192.Google Scholar
Greengross, G., Silvia, P. J., & Nusbaum, E. C. (2020). Sex differences in humor production ability: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 84, 103886. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2019.103886Google Scholar
Griskevicius, V., Cialdini, R. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Peacocks, Picasso, and parental investment: The effects of romantic motives on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 63–76.Google Scholar
Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N. J., Mortensen, C. R., Cialdini, R. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 281–294.Google Scholar
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Ackerman, J. M., Delton, A. W., Robertson, T. E., & White, A. E. (2012). The financial consequences of too many men: Sex ratio effects on saving, borrowing, and spending. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 69–80.Google Scholar
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Gangestad, S. W., Perea, E. F., Shapiro, J. R., & Kenrick, D. T. (2009). Aggress to impress: Hostility as an evolved context-dependent strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 980–994.Google Scholar
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Sundie, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Miller, G. F., & Kenrick, D. T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 85–102.Google Scholar
Guzman, A., & Perry, C. (2019). Here’s how much to spend on an engagement ring. The Knot. Retrieved from www.theknot.com/content/how-much-to-spend-on-engagement-ringGoogle Scholar
Hall, J. A., Park, N., Song, H., & Cody, M. J. (2010). Strategic misrepresentation in online dating: The effects of gender, self-monitoring, and personality traits. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 117–135.Google Scholar
Hancock, J. T., & Toma, C. L. (2009). Putting your best face forward: The accuracy of online dating photographs. Journal of Communication, 59, 367–386.Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 81–91.Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G., & Miller, G. F. (2006). Women’s fertility across the life cycle increases the short-term attractiveness of creative intelligence. Human Nature, 17, 50–73.Google Scholar
Hogg, J. T. (1987). Intrasexual competition and mate choice in Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. Ethology, 75, 119–144.Google Scholar
Holtzman, N. S., & Strube, M. J. (2011). The intertwined evolution of narcissism and short-term mating: An emerging hypothesis. In Campbell, W. K. & Miller, J. D. (Eds.), The handbook of narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder: Theoretical approaches, empirical findings, and treatments (pp. 210–220). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Iredale, W., Jenner, K., Van Vugt, M., & Dempster, T. (2020). Giving guys get the girls: Men appear more desirable to the opposite sex when displaying costly donations to the homeless. Social Sciences, 9, 141.Google Scholar
Iredale, W., Van Vugt, M., & Dunbar, R. (2008). Showing off in humans: Male generosity as a mating signal. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 386–392.Google Scholar
Janif, Z. J., Brooks, R. C., & Dixson, B. J. (2015). Are preferences for women’s hair color frequency-dependent? Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, 1, 54–71.Google Scholar
Jauk, E., Freudenthaler, H. H., & Neubauer, A. C. (2016). The dark triad and trait versus ability emotional intelligence. Journal of Individual Differences, 37 , 112–118.Google Scholar
Jonason, P. K. (2007). An evolutionary psychology perspective on sex differences in exercise behaviors and motivations. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147, 5–14.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, 606–610.Google Scholar
Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., Webster, G. D., & Schmitt, D. P. (2009). The dark triad: Facilitating a short-term mating strategy in men. European Journal of Personality, 23, 5–18.Google Scholar
Jonason, P. K., Lyons, M., & Blanchard, A. (2015). Birds of a “bad” feather flock together: The Dark Triad and mate choice. Personality and Individual Differences, 78, 34–38.Google Scholar
Jones, B. C., Hahn, A. C., Fisher, C. I., Wang, H., Kandrik, M., Han, C., … & O’Shea, K. J. (2018). No compelling evidence that preferences for facial masculinity track changes in women’s hormonal status. Psychological Science, 29, 996–1005.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., Groth, G. E., Trost, M. R., & Sadalla, E. K. (1993). Integrating evolutionary and social exchange perspectives on relationships: Effects of gender, self-appraisal, and involvement level on mate selection criteria. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 951–969.Google Scholar
Kleiman, D. G., & Malcolm, J. R. (1981). The evolution of male parental investment in mammals. In Gubernick, D. J. & Klopfer, P. H. (Eds.), Parental care in mammals (pp. 347–387). Boston, MA: Springer.Google Scholar
Kokko, H., Jennions, M. D., & Houde, A. (2007). Evolution of frequency-dependent mate choice: Keeping up with fashion trends. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274, 1317–1324.Google Scholar
Lassek, W. D., & Gaulin, S. J. (2009). Costs and benefits of fat-free muscle mass in men: Relationship to mating success, dietary requirements, and native immunity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 322–328.Google Scholar
Latané, B. (1970). Field studies of altruistic compliance. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 1, 49–61.Google Scholar
Li, N. P., Bailey, J. M., Kenrick, D. T., & Linsenmeier, J. A. W. (2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 947–955.Google Scholar
Li, N. P., Griskevicius, V., Durante, K. M., Jonason, P. K., Pasisz, D. J., & Aumer, K. (2009). An evolutionary perspective on humor: Sexual selection or interest indication? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 923–936.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, 757–776.Google Scholar
Li, Y. J., Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., & Neuberg, S. L. (2012). Economic decision biases and fundamental motivations: How mating and self-protection alter loss aversion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 550–561.Google Scholar
Lovejoy, C. O. (1981). The origin of man. Science, 211, 341–350.Google Scholar
Lukaszewski, A. W. (2013). Testing an adaptationist theory of trait covariation: Relative bargaining power as a common calibrator of an interpersonal syndrome. European Journal of Personality, 27, 328–345.Google Scholar
Lukaszewski, A. W., & Roney, J. R. (2011). The origins of extraversion: Joint effects of facultative calibration and genetic polymorphism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 409–421.Google Scholar
Lyons, M., & Blanchard, A. (2016). “I could see, in the depth of his eyes, my own beauty reflected”: Women’s assortative preference for narcissistic, but not for Machiavellian or psychopathic male faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 97, 40–44.Google Scholar
Makhanova, A., McNulty, J. K., & Maner, J. K. (2017). Relative physical position as an impression-management strategy: Sex differences in its use and implications. Psychological Science, 28, 567–577.Google Scholar
McGrath, R. E., Greenberg, M. J., & Hall-Simmonds, A. (2018). Scarecrow, Tin Woodsman, and Cowardly Lion: The three-factor model of virtue. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13, 373–392.Google Scholar
McGrath, R. E. (2021). Darwin meets Aristotle: Evolutionary evidence for three fundamental virtues. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 16, 431–445.Google Scholar
Mealey, L. (1997). Bulking up: The roles of sex and sexual orientation on attempts to manipulate physical attractiveness. Journal of Sex Research, 34, 223–228.Google Scholar
Medlin, M. M., Brown, M., & Sacco, D. F. (2018). That’s what she said! Perceived mate value of clean and dirty humor displays. Personality and Individual Differences, 135, 192–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, G. F. (2000). The mating mind: How sexual choice shaped the evolution of human nature. London: Heinemann/Doubleday.Google Scholar
Miller, G. F. (2007). Sexual selection for moral virtues. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 82, 97–125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, G. F. (2009). Spent: Sex, evolution and consumer behavior. New York, NY: Penguin/Putnam.Google Scholar
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2006). Reactive and proactive aggression: Similarities and differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 1469–1480.Google Scholar
Neave, N., & Shields, K. (2008). The effects of facial hair manipulation on female perceptions of attractiveness, masculinity, and dominance in male faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 373–377.Google Scholar
Nettle, D. (2005). An evolutionary approach to the extraversion continuum. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 363–373.Google Scholar
Nettle, D., & Clegg, H. (2006). Schizotypy, creativity and mating success in humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273, 611–615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oswald, F., Hughes, S., Champion, A., & Pedersen, C. L. (2020). In search of the appeal of the “DILF.” Psychology & Sexuality. doi: 10.1080/19419899.2020.1769164Google Scholar
Parent, M. C., & Moradi, B. (2011). His biceps become him: A test of objectification theory’s application to drive for muscularity and propensity for steroid use in college men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 246–256.Google Scholar
Parsa, K. M., Gao, W., Lally, J., Davison, S. P., & Reilly, M. J. (2019). Evaluation of personality perception in men before and after facial cosmetic surgery. JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, 21, 369–374.Google Scholar
Penton-Voak, I. S., & Chen, J. Y. (2004). High salivary testosterone is linked to masculine male facial appearance in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 229–241.Google Scholar
Phillips, T., Barnard, C., Ferguson, E., & Reader, T. (2008). Do humans prefer altruistic mates? Testing a link between sexual selection and altruism towards non-relatives. British Journal of Psychology, 99, 555–572.Google Scholar
Platek, S. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.). (2006). Female infidelity and paternal uncertainty: Evolutionary perspectives on male anti-cuckoldry tactics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Puts, D. A. (2010). Beauty and the beast: Mechanisms of sexual selection in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 157–175.Google Scholar
Reiter, J., Panken, K. J., & Le Boeuf, B. J. (1981). Female competition and reproductive success in northern elephant seals. Animal Behaviour, 29, 670–687.Google Scholar
Ronay, R., & von Hippel, W. (2010). The presence of an attractive woman elevates testosterone and physical risk taking in young men. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 57–64.Google Scholar
Roney, J. R., Mahler, S. V., & Maestripieri, D. (2003). Behavioral and hormonal responses of men to brief interactions with women. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 365–375.Google Scholar
Saad, G. (2007). The evolutionary bases of consumption. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Sacco, D. F., Brown, M., Lustgraaf, C. J., & Hugenberg, K. (2017). The adaptive utility of deontology: Deontological moral decision-making fosters perceptions of trust and likeability. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 3, 125–132.Google Scholar
Sacco, D. F., Brown, M., Lustgraaf, C. J. N., & Young, S. G. (2017). Women’s dangerous world beliefs predict more accurate discrimination of affiliative cues in faces. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 11, 309–315.Google Scholar
Sacco, D. F., Brown, M., & Medlin, M. M. (2019). Perfectionism and relationship status influence health evaluations of faces with limbal rings. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 5, 447–453.Google Scholar
Sacco, D. F., Holifield, K., Drea, K., Brown, M., & Macchione, A. (2020). Dad and mom bods? Inferences of parenting ability from bodily cues. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 6, 207–214.Google Scholar
Salska, I., Frederick, D. A., Pawlowski, B., Reilly, A. H., Laird, K. T., & Rudd, N. A. (2008). Conditional mate preferences: Factors influencing preferences for height. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 203–215.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P. (2003). Universal sex differences in the desire for sexual variety: Tests from 52 nations, 6 continents, and 13 islands. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 85–104.Google 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, 246–282.Google Scholar
Shoup, M. L., & Gallup, G. G. (2008). Men’s faces convey information about their bodies and their behavior: What you see is what you get. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 469–479.Google Scholar
Shyu, B. P., & Wyatt, H. J. (2009). Appearance of the human eye: Optical contributions to the “limbal ring.” Optometry and Vision Science, 86, E1069–E1077.Google Scholar
Stirrat, M., Gumert, M., & Perrett, D. (2011). The effect of attractiveness on food sharing preferences in human mating markets. Evolutionary Psychology, 9, 79–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sundie, J. M., Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Vohs, K. D., & Beal, D. J. (2011). Peacocks, Porsches, and Thorstein Veblen: Conspicuous consumption as a sexual signaling system. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 664–680.Google Scholar
Swami, V., Diwell, R., & McCreary, D. R. (2014). Sexuality and the drive for muscularity: Evidence of associations among British men. Body Image, 11, 543–546.Google Scholar
Sylwester, K., & Pawłowski, B. (2011). Daring to be darling: Attractiveness of risk takers as partners in long- and short-term sexual relationships. Sex Roles, 64, 695–706.Google Scholar
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Takahashi, C., Yamagishi, T., Tanida, S., Kiyonari, T., & Kanazawa, S. (2006). Attractiveness and cooperation in social exchange. Evolutionary Psychology, 4, 315–329.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (2006). Facial sexual dimorphism, developmental stability, and susceptibility to disease in men and women. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 131–144.Google Scholar
Tognetti, A., Berticat, C., Raymond, M., & Faurie, C. (2012). Sexual selection of human cooperative behaviour: An experimental study in rural Senegal. PLoS One, 7, e44403.Google Scholar
Toma, C. L., Hancock, J. T., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating fact from fiction: An examination of deceptive self-presentation in online dating profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1023–1036.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35–57.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Valentine, K. A., Li, N. P., Penke, L., & Perrett, D. I. (2014). Judging a man by the width of his face: The role of facial ratios and dominance in mate choice at speed-dating events. Psychological Science, 25, 806–811.Google Scholar
Van Vugt, M., & Iredale, W. (2012). Men behaving nicely: Public goods as peacock tails. British Journal of Psychology, 104, 3–13.Google Scholar
von Borell, C. J., Kordsmeyer, T. L., Gerlach, T. M., & Penke, L. (2019). An integrative study of facultative personality calibration. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40, 235–248.Google Scholar
Whitty, M. T. (2008). Revealing the “real” me, searching for the “actual” you: Presentations of self on an internet dating site. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1707–1723.Google Scholar
Wilbur, C. J., & Campbell, L. (2011). Humor in romantic contexts: Do men participate and women evaluate? Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 918–929.Google Scholar
Wurst, S. N., Gerlach, T. M., Dufner, M., Rauthmann, J. F., Grosz, M. P., Küfner, A. C. P., … & Back, M. D. (2017). Narcissism and romantic relationships: The differential impact of narcissistic admiration and rivalry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 280–306.Google Scholar
Zahavi, A., & Zahavi, A. (1997). The handicap principle. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

References

Abbink, J. G. (1999). Violence, ritual and reproduction: Culture and context in Surma dueling. Ethnology, 38, 227–242.Google Scholar
Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. (2015). Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 574–601.Google Scholar
Apostolou, M. (2015). The athlete and the spectator inside the man: A cross-cultural investigation of the evolutionary origins of athletic behavior. Cross-Cultural Research, 49, 151–173.Google Scholar
Archer, J. (1988). The behavioral biology of aggression. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Archer, J. (2004). Sex differences in aggression in real-world settings: A meta-analytic review. Review of General Psychology, 8(4), 291–322.Google Scholar
Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30, 319–345.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., Albert, G., Carré, J. M., & Ortiz, T. L. (2018). Intrasexual competition mediates the relationship between men’s testosterone and mate retention behavior. Physiology & Behavior, 186, 73–78.Google Scholar
Arruda, A. F., Aoki, M. S., Freitas, C. G., Drago, G., Oliveira, R., Crewther, B. T., & Moreira, A. (2014). Influence of competition playing venue on the hormonal responses, state anxiety and perception of effort in elite basketball athletes. Physiology & Behavior, 130, 1–5.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., & Carré, J. M. (2016). Intrasexual rivalry among men. In Shackelford, T. & Weekes-Shackelford, V. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., & Vaillancourt, T. (2012). A multi-informant longitudinal study on the relationship between aggression, peer victimization, and dating status in adolescence. Evolutionary Psychology, 10. doi: 10.1177/147470491201000207Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., Ribout, A., Mirza, R. S., & Knack, J. M. (2014). Perceived mate availability influences intrasexual competition, jealousy and mate-guarding behavior. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 12(1), 45–64.Google Scholar
Aung, T., & Puts, D. (2020). Voice pitch: A window into the communication of social power. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 154–161.Google Scholar
Aung, T., Rosenfield, K. A., & Puts, D. (2020). Male voice pitch mediates the relationship between objective and perceived formidability. Evolution and Human Behavior, 42(2), 121–129.Google Scholar
Baird, A. (2018). Becoming the “baddest”: Masculine trajectories of gang violence in Medellín. Journal of Latin American Studies, 50, 183–210.Google Scholar
Bar, M., Neta, M., & Linz, H. (2006). Very first impressions. Emotion, 6(2), 269–278.Google Scholar
Barber, N. (2000). The sex ratio as a predictor of cross-national variation in violent crime. Cross-Cultural Research, 34, 264–282.Google Scholar
Barber, N. (2003). The sex ratio and female marital opportunity as historical predictors of violent crime in England, Scotland, and the United States. Cross-Cultural Research, 37, 373–392.Google Scholar
Barclay, P. (2010). Altruism as a courtship display: Some effects of third-party generosity on audience perceptions. British Journal of Psychology, 101(1), 123–135.Google Scholar
Bendixen, M., Kennair, L. E. O., & Buss, D. M. (2015). Jealousy: Evidence of strong sex differences using both forced choice and continuous measure paradigms. Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 212–216.Google Scholar
Benenson, J. F. (2009). Dominating versus eliminating the competition: Sex differences in human intrasexual aggression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(3–4), 268–269.Google Scholar
Benenson, J. F., & Abadzi, H. (2020). Contest versus scramble competition: Sex differences in the quest for status. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 62–68.Google Scholar
Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S. J., & Zelditch, M. (1980). Status organizing processes. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 479–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, R. B., & Smith, E. A. (2005). Signaling theory, strategic interaction, and symbolic capital. Current Anthropology, 46, 221–248.Google Scholar
Book, A. S., Starzyk, K. B., & Quinsey, V. L. (2001). The relationship between testosterone and aggression: A meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6(6), 579–599.Google Scholar
Borráz-León, J. I., Cerda-Molina, A. L., Choi, D., & Mayagoitia-Novales, L. (2018). Testosterone and intrasexual competition in men: Is there any relation with digit ratio (2D:4D)? Acta Ethologica, 21, 137–140.Google Scholar
Brewer, G., & Howarth, S. (2012). Sport, attractiveness and aggression. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 640–643.CrossRefGoogle 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.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–14.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1991). Do women have evolved mate preferences for men with resources? A reply to Smuts. Ethology and Sociobiology, 12, 401–408.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Dedden, L. A. (1990). Derogation of competitors. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7(3), 395–422.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Duntley, J. D. (2006). The evolution of aggression. In Schaller, M., Kenrick, D. T., & Simpson, J. A. (Eds.), Evolution and social psychology (pp. 263–286). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Human aggression in evolutionary psychological perspective. Clinical Psychology Review, 17, 605–619.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buunk, A. P., & Fisher, M. (2009). Individual differences in intrasexual competition. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 7(1), 37–48.Google Scholar
Buunk, A. P., & Massar, K. (2012). Intrasexual competition among males: Competitive towards men, prosocial towards women. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 818–821.Google Scholar
Carré, J. M., & McCormick, C. M. (2008). Aggressive behavior and change in salivary testosterone concentrations predict willingness to engage in a competitive task. Hormones and Behavior, 54(3), 403–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavigelli, S. A., & Pereira, M. E. (2000). Mating season aggression and fecal testosterone levels in male ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta). Hormones and Behavior, 37, 246–255.Google Scholar
Chagnon, N. A. (1988). Life histories, blood revenge, and warfare in a tribal population. Science, 239, 985–992.Google Scholar
Chagnon, N. A. (1997). Yanomamö (5th ed.). New York, NY: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.Google Scholar
Chaudhary, N., Al-Shawaf, L., & Buss, D. M. (2018). Mate competition in Pakistan: Mate value, mate retention, and competitor derogation. Personality and Individual Differences, 130, 141–146.Google Scholar
Cheng, J. T., & Tracy, J. L. (2014). Toward a unified science of hierarchy: Dominance and prestige are two fundamental pathways to human social rank. In Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Anderson, C. (Eds.), The psychology of social status (pp. 3–27). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Chick, G., Loy, J. W., & Miracle, A. W. (1997). Combative sport and warfare: A reappraisal of the spillover and catharsis hypotheses. Cross-Cultural Research, 31, 249–267.Google Scholar
Clutton-Brock, T. H. (1985). Size, sexual dimorphism, and polygyny in primates. In Jungers, W. L. (Ed.), Size and scaling in primate biology (pp. 51–60). Boston, MA: Springer.Google Scholar
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1983). Sex, evolution, and behavior. Boston, MA: Willard Grant Press.Google Scholar
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. R. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Davis, A. C., Dufort, C., Desrochers, J., Vaillancourt, T., & Arnocky, S. (2018). Gossip as an intrasexual competition strategy: Sex differences in gossip frequency, content, and attitudes. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 4, 141–153.Google Scholar
Deaner, R. O., & Smith, B. A. (2013). Sex differences in sports across 50 societies. Cross-Cultural Research, 47, 268–309.Google Scholar
De Backer, C. J., Nelissen, M., & Fisher, M. L. (2007). Let’s talk about sex: A study on the recall of gossip about potential mates and sexual rivals. Sex Roles, 56, 781–791.Google Scholar
De Block, A., & Dewitte, S. (2009). Darwinism and the cultural evolution of sports. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 52, 1–16.Google Scholar
Doll, L. M., Cárdenas, R. A., Burriss, R. P., & Puts, D. A. (2016). Sexual selection and life history: Earlier recalled puberty predicts men’s phenotypic masculinization. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, 2, 134–149.Google Scholar
Dunbar, R. I. M. (2004). Gossip in evolutionary perspective. Review of General Psychology, 8, 100–110.Google Scholar
Durkee, P. K., Goetz, A. T., & Lukaszewski, A. W. (2018). Formidability assessment mechanisms: Examining their speed and automaticity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(2), 170–178.Google Scholar
Eisenegger, C., Haushofer, J., & Fehr, E. (2011). The role of testosterone in social interaction. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 263–271.Google Scholar
Ember, M., Ember, C. R., & Low, B. S. (2007). Comparing explanations of polygyny. Cross-Cultural Research, 41, 428–440.Google Scholar
Emlen, S. T., & Oring, L. W. (1977). Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science, 197, 215–223.Google Scholar
Emler, N. (1994). Gossip, reputation, and social adaptation. In Goodman, R. F. & Ben-Ze'ev, A. (Eds.), Good gossip (pp. 117–138). Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Fales, M. R., Gildersleeve, K. A., & Haselton, M. G. (2014). Exposure to perceived male rivals raises men’s testosterone on fertile relative to nonfertile days of their partner’s ovulatory cycle. Hormones and Behavior, 65(5), 454–460.Google Scholar
Farmer, T. W., & Cadwallader, T. W. (2000). Social interactions and peer support for problem behavior. Preventing School Failure, 44, 105–117.Google Scholar
Faurie, C., Pontier, D., & Raymond, M. (2004). Student athletes claim to have more sexual partners than other students. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 1–8.Google Scholar
Fink, B., Neave, N., & Seydel, H. (2007). Male facial appearance signals physical strength to women. American Journal of Human Biology, 19, 82–87.Google Scholar
Fisher, M., & Cox, A. (2011). Four strategies used during intrasexual competition for mates. Personal Relationships, 18(1), 20–38.Google 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(4), 287–308.Google Scholar
Frederick, D. A., Buchanan, G. M., Sadeghi-Azar, L., Peplau, L. A., Haselton, M. G., Berezovskaya, A., & Lipinski, R. E. (2007). Desiring the muscular ideal: Men’s body satisfaction in the United States, Ukraine, and Ghana. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 8, 103–117.Google Scholar
Frederick, D. A., & Haselton, M. G. (2007). Why is muscularity sexy? Tests of the fitness indicator hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1167–1183.Google Scholar
Geary, D. C. (2000). Evolution and proximate expression of human paternal investment. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 55–77.Google Scholar
Geniole, S. N., Bird, B. M., Ruddick, E. L., & Carré, J. M. (2017). Effects of competition outcome on testosterone concentrations in humans: An updated meta-analysis. Hormones and Behavior, 92, 37–50.Google Scholar
Geniole, S. N., Denson, T. F., Dixson, B. J., Carré, J. M., & McCormick, C. M. (2015). Evidence from meta-analyses of the facial width-to-height ratio as an evolved cue of threat. PLoS One, 10(7), e0132726. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132726Google Scholar
Gettler, L. T., McDade, T. W., Feranil, A. B., & Kuzawa, C. W. (2011). Longitudinal evidence that fatherhood decreases testosterone in human males. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 16194–16199.Google Scholar
Gibbons, J. L., Lynn, M., & Stiles, D. A. (1997). Cross-national gender differences in adolescents’ preferences for free-time activities. Cross-Cultural Research, 31, 55–69.Google Scholar
Gilbert, P., & Basran, J. (2019). The evolution of prosocial and antisocial competitive behavior and the emergence of prosocial and antisocial leadership styles. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 610. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00610Google Scholar
Godoy, R., Reyes-Garcia, V., Huanca, T., Leonard, W. R., McDade, T., Tanner, S., … & Seyfried, C. (2007). Signaling by consumption in a native Amazonian society. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 124–134.Google Scholar
Gray, J. P., & Wolfe, L. D. (1980). Height and sexual dimorphism of stature among human societies. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 53, 441–456.Google Scholar
Gray, P. B., Straftis, A. A., Bird, B. M., McHale, T., & Zilioli, S. (2019). Human reproductive behavior, life history, and the challenge hypothesis: A 30-year review, retrospective, and future directions. Hormones and Behavior, 123, 104530. doi: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2019.04.017Google Scholar
Grebe, N. M., Sarafin, R. E., Strenth, C. R., & Zilioli, S. (2019). Pair-bonding, fatherhood, and the role of testosterone: A meta-analytic review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 98, 221–233.Google Scholar
Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N. J., Mortensen, C. R., Cialdini, R. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 281–294.Google Scholar
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Gangestad, S. W., Perea, E. F., Shapiro, J. R., & Kenrick, D. T. (2009). Aggress to impress: Hostility as an evolved context-dependent strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 980–994.Google Scholar
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Sundie, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Miller, G. F., & Kenrick, D. T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 85–102.Google Scholar
Grosser, T. J., Lopez-Kidwell, V., & Labianca, G. (2010). A social network analysis of positive and negative gossip in organizational life. Group & Organization Management, 35, 177–212.Google Scholar
Gurven, M., & Von Rueden, C. (2006). Hunting, social status and biological fitness. Social Biology, 53, 81–99.Google Scholar
Guttmann, A. (2004). From ritual to record: The nature of modern sports. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Hardy, C. L., & Van Vugt, M. (2006). Nice guys finish first: The competitive altruism hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1402–1413.Google Scholar
Hennighausen, C., Hudders, L., Lange, B. P., & Fink, H. (2016). What if the rival drives a Porsche? Luxury car spending as a costly signal in male intrasexual competition. Evolutionary Psychology, 14. doi: 10.1177/1474704916678217Google Scholar
Herrmann, E., Engelmann, J. M., & Tomasello, M. (2019). Children engage in competitive altruism. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 179, 176–189.Google Scholar
Hill, S. E., & Buss, D. M. (2006). Envy and positional bias in the evolutionary psychology of management. Managerial and Decision Economics, 27(2–3), 131–143.Google Scholar
Hilton, N. Z., Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (2000). The functions of aggression by male teenagers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 988–994.Google Scholar
Hopcroft, R. L. (2006). Sex, status and reproductive success in the contemporary United States. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 104–120.Google Scholar
Hudson, V., & Den Boer, A. (2002). A surplus of men, a deficit of peace: Security and sex ratios in Asia’s largest states. International Security, 26, 5–38.Google Scholar
Hughes, S. M., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2003). Sex differences in morphological predictors of sexual behavior: Shoulder to hip and waist to hip ratios. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 173–178.Google Scholar
Iredale, W., Van Vugt, M., & Dunbar, R. (2008). Showing off in humans: Male generosity as a mating signal. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, doi: 10.1177/147470490800600302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, D. D., McDermott, R., Barrett, E. S., Cowden, J., Wrangham, R., McIntyre, M. H., & Peter Rosen, S. (2006). Overconfidence in wargames: Experimental evidence on expectations, aggression, gender and testosterone. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273(1600), 2513–2520.Google Scholar
Karimi-Malekabadi, F., Ghanbarian, E., Afhami, R., & Chegeni, R. (2019). Theory-driven assessment of intrasexual rivalry. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 5(3), 286–293.Google Scholar
Keeley, L. (1996). War before civilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kelly, S., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2001). Who dares, wins. Human Nature, 12, 89–105.Google Scholar
Kodric-Brown, A., & Brown, J. H. (1984). Truth in advertising: The kinds of traits favored by sexual selection. The American Naturalist, 124, 309–323.Google Scholar
Kruger, D. J. (2014). Social and environmental conditions intensifying male competition for resources, status, and mates lead to increased male mortality. In Weekes-Shackelford, V. & Shackelford, T. (Eds.), Evolutionary perspectives on human sexual psychology and behavior. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Kvarnemo, C., & Forsgren, E. (2000). The influence of potential reproductive rate and variation in mate quality on male and female choosiness in the sand goby, Pomatoschistus minutus. Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology, 48, 378–384.Google Scholar
Lassek, W., & Gaulin, S. (2009). Costs and benefits of fat-free muscle mass in men: Relationship to mating success, dietary requirements and natural immunity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 322–328.Google Scholar
Little, A. C., Třebický, V., Havlíček, J., Roberts, S. C., & Kleisner, K. (2015). Human perception of fighting ability: Facial cues predict winners and losers in mixed martial arts fights. Behavioral Ecology, 26, 1470–1475.Google Scholar
Llaurens, V., Raymond, M., & Faurie, C. (2009). Ritual fights and male reproductive success in a human population. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 22, 1854–1859.Google Scholar
Lombardo, M. P. (2012). On the evolution of sport. Evolutionary Psychology, 10. doi: 10.1177/147470491201000101Google Scholar
Loomba-Albrecht, L. A., & Styne, D. M. (2009). Effect of puberty on body composition. Current Opinion in Endocrinology, Diabetes and Obesity, 16, 10–15.Google Scholar
Lycett, J. E., & Dunbar, R. I. (2000). Mobile phones as lekking devices among human males. Human Nature, 11(1), 93–104.Google Scholar
McAndrew, F. T., Bell, E. K., & Garcia, C. M. (2007). Who do we tell and whom do we tell on? Gossip as a strategy for status enhancement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(7), 1562–1577.Google Scholar
McAndrew, F. T., & Milenkovic, M. A. (2002). Of tabloids and family secrets: The evolutionary psychology of gossip. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 1064–1082.Google Scholar
McDonald, M. M., Navarrete, C. D., & Van Vugt, M. (2012). Evolution and the psychology of intergroup conflict: The male warrior hypothesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1589), 670–679.Google Scholar
McIntyre, M., Gangestad, S. W., Gray, P. B., Chapman, J. F., Burnham, T. C., O'Rourke, M. T., & Thornhill, R. (2006). Romantic involvement often reduces men's testosterone levels – but not always: The moderating role of extrapair sexual interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 642–651.Google Scholar
Meeker, J. D., Godfrey-Bailey, L., & Hauser, R. (2007). Relationships between serum hormone levels and semen quality among men from an infertility clinic. Journal of Andrology, 28, 397–406.Google Scholar
Miller, G. F. (2009). Spent: Sex, evolution and consumer behavior. New York, NY: Penguin/Putnam.Google Scholar
Miller, S. L., Maner, J. K., & McNulty, J. K. (2012). Adaptive attunement to the sex of individuals at a competition: The ratio of opposite-to same-sex individuals correlates with changes in competitors’ testosterone levels. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 57–63.Google Scholar
Muller, M. N., Marlowe, F. W., Bugumba, R., & Ellison, P. T. (2009). Testosterone and paternal care in East African foragers and pastoralists. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276, 347–354.Google Scholar
Muller, M. N., & Wrangham, R. W. (2004). Dominance, aggression and testosterone in wild chimpanzees: A test of the “challenge hypothesis.” Animal Behaviour, 67(1), 113–123.Google Scholar
Nave, G., Nadler, A., Dubois, D., Zava, D., Camerer, C., & Plassmann, H. (2018). Single-dose testosterone administration increases men’s preference for status goods. Nature Communications, 9(1), 1–8.Google Scholar
Nedelec, J. L., & Beaver, K. M. (2014). Physical attractiveness as a phenotypic marker of health: An assessment using a nationally representative sample of American adults. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35, 456–463.Google Scholar
Nettle, D., & Pollet, T. V. (2008). Natural selection on male wealth in humans. American Naturalist, 172, 658–666.Google Scholar
Ordabayeva, N., & Chandon, P. (2011). Getting ahead of the Joneses: When equality increases conspicuous consumption among bottom-tier consumers. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(1), 27–41.Google Scholar
Palmer, C. T., & Tilly, C. F. (1995). Sexual access to females as a motivation for joining gangs: An evolutionary approach. Journal of Sex Research, 32, 213–217.Google Scholar
Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). A longitudinal study of boys’ rough-and-tumble play and dominance during early adolescence. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 16, 77–93.Google Scholar
Pisanski, K., Fraccaro, P. J., Tigue, C. C., O’Connor, J. J., Röder, S., Andrews, P. W., … & Feinberg, D. R. (2014). Vocal indicators of body size in men and women: a meta-analysis. Animal Behaviour, 95, 89–99.Google Scholar
Plavcan, J. M. (2000). Inferring social behavior from sexual dimorphism in the fossil record. Journal of Human Evolution, 39, 327–344.Google Scholar
Plavcan, J. M., van Schaik, C. P., and Kappeler, P. M. (1995). Competition, coalitions, and canine size in primates. Journal of Human Evolution, 28, 245–276.Google Scholar
Promislow, D. E., Montgomerie, R., & Martin, T. E. (1992). Mortality costs of sexual dimorphism in birds. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 250(1328), 143–150.Google Scholar
Puts, D. A. (2010). Beauty and the beast: Mechanisms of sexual selection in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 157–175.Google Scholar
Puts, D. A., Gaulin, S. J., & Verdolini, K. (2006). Dominance and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in human voice pitch. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27(4), 283–296.Google Scholar
Raihani, N. J., & Smith, S. (2015). Competitive helping in online giving. Current Biology, 25, 1183–1186.Google Scholar
Rapp, D. J., Engelmann, J. M., Herrmann, E., & Tomasello, M. (2019). Young children’s reputational strategies in a peer group context. Developmental Psychology, 55(2), 329–336.Google Scholar
Rendell, L., Boyd, R., Cownden, D., Enquist, M., Eriksson, K., Feldman, M. W., … & Laland, K. N. (2010). Why copy others? Insights from the social learning strategies tournament. Science, 328, 208–213.Google Scholar
Roberts, G. (1998). Competitive altruism: From reciprocity to the handicap principle. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 265(1394), 427–431.Google Scholar
Roberts, M. L., Buchanan, K. L., & Evans, M. R. (2004). Testing the immunocompetence handicap hypothesis: A review of the evidence. Animal Behaviour, 68(2), 227–239.Google Scholar
Ronay, R., Greenaway, K., Anicich, E. M., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). The path to glory is paved with hierarchy: When hierarchical differentiation increases group effectiveness. Psychological Science, 23, 669–677.Google Scholar
Ronay, R., & Von Hippel, W. (2010). The presence of an attractive woman elevates testosterone and physical risk taking in young men. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1(1), 57–64.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, G. G. (2017). Mate choice: The evolution of sexual decision making from microbes to humans. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Saad, G., & Gill, T. (2001). Sex differences in the ultimatum game: An evolutionary psychology perspective. Journal of Bioeconomics, 3, 171–193.Google Scholar
Saad, G., & Vongas, J. G. (2009). The effect of conspicuous consumption on men’s testosterone levels. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110, 80–92.Google Scholar
Salvador, A., & Costa, R. (2009). Coping with competition: Neuroendocrine responses and cognitive variables. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 160–170.Google Scholar
Schacht, R., Rauch, K. L., & Mulder, M. B. (2014). Too many men: The violence problem? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 29, 214–222.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D., & Buss, D. (1996). Strategic self-promotion and competitor derogation: Sex and content effects on the perceived effectiveness of mate attraction tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1185–1204.Google Scholar
Sell, A., Hone, L. S., & Pound, N. (2012). The importance of physical strength to human males. Human Nature, 23(1), 30–44.Google Scholar
Stillman, T. F., Maner, J. K., & Baumeister, R. F. (2010). A thin slice of violence: Distinguishing violent from nonviolent sex offenders at a glance. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(4), 298–303.Google Scholar
Sundie, J. M., Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Vohs, K. D., & Beal, D. J. (2011). Peacocks, Porsches, and Thorstein Veblen: Conspicuous consumption as a sexual signaling system. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(4), 664–680.Google Scholar
Swencionis, J. K., & Fiske, S. T. (2014). How social neuroscience can inform theories of social comparison. Neuropsychologia, 56, 140–146.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Alcock, J. (1983). The evolution of insect mating systems. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tognetti, A., Dubois, D., Faurie, C., & Willinger, M. (2016). Men increase contributions to a public good when under sexual competition. Scientific Reports, 6, 29819.Google Scholar
Torrance, J. S., Hahn, A. C., Kandrik, M., DeBruine, L. M., & Jones, B. C. (2018). No evidence for associations between men’s salivary testosterone and responses on the Intrasexual Competitiveness Scale. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, 4, 321–327.Google Scholar
Trivers, R.L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Vandello, J. A., Bosson, J. K., Cohen, D., Burnaford, R. M., & Weaver, J. R. (2008). Precarious manhood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1325–1339.Google Scholar
Van der Meij, L., Almela, M., Hidalgo, V., Villada, C., IJzerman, H., van Lange, P. A., & Salvador, A. (2012). Testosterone and cortisol release among Spanish soccer fans watching the 2010 World Cup final. PLoS One, 7(4), e34814. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034814Google Scholar
Van der Meij, L., Buunk, A. P., van de Sande, J. P., & Salvador, A. (2008). The presence of a woman increases testosterone in aggressive dominant men. Hormones and Behavior, 54(5), 640–644.Google Scholar
Van Vugt, M., Cremer, D. D., & Janssen, D. P. (2007). Gender differences in cooperation and competition: The male-warrior hypothesis. Psychological Science, 18, 19–23.Google Scholar
Van Vugt, M., & Iredale, W. (2013). Men behaving nicely: Public goods as peacock tails. British Journal of Psychology, 104, 3–13.Google Scholar
Van Vugt, M., Roberts, G., & Hardy, C. (2007). Competitive altruism: development of reputation-based cooperation in groups. In Dunbar, R. I. M. & Barrett, L. (Eds.), Handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 531–540). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class. New York, NY: Penguin.Google Scholar
Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Munniksma, A., & Dijkstra, J. K. (2010). The complex relation between bullying, victimization, acceptance, and rejection: Giving special attention to status, affection, and sex differences. Child Development, 81, 480-486.Google Scholar
Voisin, D. R., Salazar, L. F., Crosby, R., DiClemente, R. J., Yarber, W. L., & Staples-Horne, M. (2004). The association between gang involvement and sexual behaviours among detained adolescent males. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 80, 440–442.Google Scholar
Von Rueden, C. R., & Jaeggi, A. V. (2016). Men’s status and reproductive success in 33 nonindustrial societies: Effects of subsistence, marriage system, and reproductive strategy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(39), 10824–10829.Google Scholar
Walker, P. L. (2001). A bioarchaeological perspective on the history of violence. Annual Review of Anthropology, 30, 573–596.Google Scholar
Weir, L. K., Grant, J. W., & Hutchings, J. A. (2011). The influence of operational sex ratio on the intensity of competition for mates. The American Naturalist, 177(2), 167–176.Google Scholar
Wetherill, R. R., & Fromme, K. (2007). Alcohol use, sexual activity, and perceived risk in high school athletes and non-athletes. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(3), 294–301.Google Scholar
Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1985). Competitiveness, risk taking, and violence: The young male syndrome. Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 59–73.Google Scholar
Wilson, M., Daly, M., & Pound, N. (2009). Sex differences and intrasexual variation in competitive confrontation and risk taking: An evolutionary psychological perspective. In Pfaff, D. W., Arnold, A. P., Etgen, A. M., Fahrbach, S. E., & Rubin, R. T. (Eds.), Hormones, brain and behavior (2nd ed., Vol. 5, pp. 2825–2852). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Winegard, B., & Deaner, R. O. (2010). The evolutionary significance of Red Sox nation: Sport fandom as a by-product of coalitional psychology. Evolutionary Psychology, 8, 432–446.Google Scholar
Wingfield, J. C., Hegner, R. E., Dufty, A. M., Jr., & Ball, G. F. (1990). The “challenge hypothesis”: Theoretical implications for patterns of testosterone secretion, mating systems, and breeding strategies. The American Naturalist, 136, 829–846.Google 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, 96–104.Google Scholar
Yaple, Z. A., & Yu, R. (2020). Upward and downward comparisons across monetary and status domains. Human Brain Mapping, 41, 4662–4675.Google Scholar
Zahavi, A. (1975). Mate selection—A selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53, 205–214.Google Scholar
Zilioli, S., & Watson, N. V. (2014). Testosterone across successive competitions: Evidence for a “winner effect” in humans? Psychoneuroendocrinology, 47, 1–9.Google Scholar
Zitek, E. M., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2012). The fluency of social hierarchy: The ease with which hierarchical relationships are seen, remembered, learned, and liked. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 98–115.Google Scholar

References

Alio, A. P., Mbah, A. K., Kornosky, J. L., Wathington, D., Marty, P. J., & Salihu, H. M. (2011). Assessing the impact of paternal involvement on racial/ethnic disparities in infant mortality rates. Journal of Community Health, 36(1), 63–68.Google Scholar
Apostolou, M. (2007). Sexual selection under parental choice: The role of parents in the evolution of human mating. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(6), 403–409.Google Scholar
Apostolou, M. (2008). Bridewealth and brideservice as instruments of parental choice. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2(3), 89–102.Google Scholar
Apostolou, M. (2010). Sexual selection under parental choice in agropastoral societies. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(1), 39–47.Google Scholar
Apostolou, M. (2015). Parent-offspring conflict over mating: Domains of agreement and disagreement. Evolutionary Psychology, 13(3), 1–12.Google Scholar
Apostolou, M. (2017). Individual mate choice in an arranged marriage context: Evidence from the standard cross-cultural sample. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 3(3), 193–200.Google Scholar
Balish, S. M., Deaner, R. O., Rainham, D., & Blanchard, C. (2016). Sex differences in sport remain when accounting for countries’ gender inequality. Cross-Cultural Research, 50(5), 395–414.Google Scholar
Barrett, H. C., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review, 113(3), 628–647.Google Scholar
Berglund, A., Bisazza, A., & Pilastro, A. (1996). Armaments and ornaments: An evolutionary explanation of traits of dual utility. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 58, 385–399.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, P. C., Dabbs, J. M., Fielden, J. A., & Lutter, C. D. (1998). Testosterone changes during vicarious experiences of winning and losing among fans at sporting events. Physiology & Behavior, 65(1), 59–62.Google Scholar
Bjorklund, D. F., & Shackelford, T. K. (1999). Differences in parental investment contribute to important differences between men and women. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(3), 86–89.Google Scholar
Blake, K. R., Fourati, M., & Brooks, R. C. (2018). Who suppresses female sexuality? An examination of support for Islamic veiling in a secular Muslim democracy as a function of sex and offspring sex. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(6), 632–638.Google Scholar
Booth, A., Shelley, G., Mazur, A., Tharp, G., & Kittok, R. (1989). Testosterone, and winning and losing in human competition. Hormones and Behavior, 23(4), 556–571.Google Scholar
Brase, G. L. (2006). Cues of parental investment as a factor in attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27(2), 145–157.Google Scholar
Burk, C. L., Mayer, A., & Wiese, B. S. (2019). Nail-biters and thrashing wins: Testosterone responses of football fans during World Cup matches. Physiology & Behavior, 209. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2019.112596Google Scholar
Buser, T., Niederle, M., & Oosterbeek, H. (2014). Gender, competitiveness, and career choices. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(3), 1409–1447.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2018). Sexual and emotional infidelity: Evolved gender differences in jealousy prove robust and replicable. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 155–160.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., Abbott, M., Angleitner, A., Asherian, A., Biaggio, A., Blanco-Villasenor, A., … & Yang, K. S. (1990). International preferences in selecting mates: A study of 37 cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21(1), 5–47.Google 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.Google Scholar
Caillaud, D., Levréro, F., Gatti, S., Menard, N., & Raymond, M. (2008). Influence of male morphology on male mating status and behavior during interunit encounters in western lowland gorillas. American Journal of Physical Anthropology: The Official Publication of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, 135(4), 379–388.Google Scholar
Candolin, U. (2000). Increased signalling effort when survival prospects decrease: Male-male competition ensures honesty. Animal Behaviour, 60(4), 417–422.Google Scholar
Cannon, A., & Yang, D. Y. (2006). Early storage and sedentism on the Pacific Northwest Coast: Ancient DNA analysis of salmon remains from Namu, British Columbia. American Antiquity, 71(1), 123–140.Google Scholar
Carré, J. M., Campbell, J. A., Lozoya, E., Goetz, S. M., & Welker, K. M. (2013). Changes in testosterone mediate the effect of winning on subsequent aggressive behaviour. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 38(10), 2034–2041.Google Scholar
Chagnon, N. A. (2013). Noble savages: My life among two dangerous tribes – the Yanomamö and the anthropologists. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Chang, L., Lu, H. J., & Zhu, X. Q. (2017). Good genes, good providers, and good fathers and mothers: The withholding of parental investment by married couples. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 11(2), 199–211.Google Scholar
Chawla, D. S. (2017, May 12). No, wearing red doesn’t make you hotter. Slate. Retrieved from https://slate.com/technology/2017/05/dont-wear-red-in-your-online-dating-profile.htmlGoogle Scholar
Chick, G., Yarnal, C., & Purrington, A. (2012). Play and mate preference: Testing the signal theory of adult playfulness. American Journal of Play, 4(4), 407–440.Google Scholar
Corona, G., Wu, F. C., Rastrelli, G., Lee, D. M., Forti, G., O’Connor, D. B., … & EMAS Study Group (2014). Low prolactin is associated with sexual dysfunction and psychological or metabolic disturbances in middle-aged and elderly men: The European Male Aging Study (EMAS). The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 11(1), 240–253.Google Scholar
Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1997). Evolutionary psychology: A primer. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.615.8167&rep=rep1&type=pdfGoogle Scholar
Costa, R. M., Miller, G. F., & Brody, S. (2012). Women who prefer longer penises are more likely to have vaginal orgasms (but not clitoral orgasms): Implications for an evolutionary theory of vaginal orgasm. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 9(12), 3079–3088.Google Scholar
Cox, C. R., & Le Boeuf, B. J. (1977). Female incitation of male competition: A mechanism in sexual selection. The American Naturalist, 111(978), 317–335.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (2006/1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. In Wilson, E. O. (Ed.), From so simple a beginning: The four great books of Charles Darwin (pp. 767–1248). New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
De Waal, F. B., & Hoekstra, J. A. (1980). Contexts and predictability of aggression in chimpanzees. Animal Behaviour, 28(3), 929–937.Google Scholar
Derenko, M. V., Malyarchuk, B. A., Wozniak, M., Denisova, G. A., Dambueva, I. K., Dorzhu, C. M., … & Zakharov, I. A. (2007). Distribution of the male lineages of Genghis Khan’s descendants in northern Eurasian populations. Russian Journal of Genetics, 43(3), 334–337.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, P. D., Schaafsma, S. M., Hofmann, H. A., & Groothuis, T. G. (2012). “Winner effect” without winning: Unresolved social conflicts increase the probability of winning a subsequent contest in a cichlid fish. Physiology & Behavior, 105(2), 489–492.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., Kennedy-Costantini, S., Lee, A. J., & Nelson, N. L. (2019). Mothers are sensitive to men’s beards as a potential cue of paternal investment. Hormones and Behavior, 113, 55–66.Google Scholar
Dixson, B. J., Lee, A. J., Blake, K. R., Jasienska, G., & Marcinkowska, U. M. (2018). Women’s preferences for men’s beards show no relation to their ovarian cycle phase and sex hormone levels. Hormones and Behavior, 97, 137–144.Google Scholar
Edlund, J. E., Heider, J. D., Nichols, A. L., McCarthy, R. J., Wood, S. E., Scherer, C. R., … & Walker, R. (2018). Sex differences in jealousy: The (lack of) influence of researcher theoretical perspective. The Journal of Social Psychology, 158(5), 515–520.Google Scholar
Fortune, R. F. (1939). Arapesh warfare. American Anthropologist, 41(1), 22–41.Google Scholar
Fox, E. A. (2002). Female tactics to reduce sexual harassment in the Sumatran orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus abelii). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 52(2), 93–101.Google Scholar
Fuxjager, M. J., Oyegbile, T. O., & Marler, C. A. (2011). Independent and additive contributions of postvictory testosterone and social experience to the development of the winner effect. Endocrinology, 152(9), 3422–3429.Google Scholar
Gallup, A. C., & Fink, B. (2018). Handgrip strength as a Darwinian fitness indicator in men. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(439). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00439Google Scholar
Gardner, E. J., Neville, M. D., Samocha, K. E., Barclay, K., Kolk, M., Niemi, M. E., … & Hurles, M. E. (2020). Sex-biased reduction in reproductive success drives selective constraint on human genes. BioRxiv. doi: 10.1101/2020.05.26.116111Google Scholar
Geary, D. C. (2000). Evolution and proximate expression of human paternal investment. Psychological Bulletin, 126(1), 55–77.Google Scholar
Geniole, S. N., Bird, B. M., Ruddick, E. L., & Carré, J. M. (2017). Effects of competition outcome on testosterone concentrations in humans: An updated meta-analysis. Hormones and Behavior, 92, 37–50.Google Scholar
Gerloff, U., Harung, B., Fruth, B., Hohmann, G., & Tautz, D. (1999). Intracommunity relationships, dispersal pattern and paternity success in a wild living community of Bonobos (Pan paniscus) determined from DNA analysis of faecal samples. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 266(1424), 1189–1195.Google Scholar
Gettler, L. T. (2010). Direct male care and hominin evolution: Why male–child interaction is more than a nice social idea. American Anthropologist, 112(1), 7–21.Google Scholar
Gettler, L. T., McDade, T. W., Feranil, A. B., & Kuzawa, C. W. (2011). Longitudinal evidence that fatherhood decreases testosterone in human males. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(3), 16194–16199.Google Scholar
Gettler, L. T., McDade, T. W., Feranil, A. B., & Kuzawa, C. W. (2012). Prolactin, fatherhood, and reproductive behavior in human males. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 148(3), 362–370.Google Scholar
Gildersleeve, K., Haselton, M. G., & Fales, M. R. (2014). Do women’s mate preferences change across the ovulatory cycle? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140(5), 1205–1259.Google Scholar
Gladue, B. A., Boechler, M., & McCaul, K. D. (1989). Hormonal response to competition in human males. Aggressive Behavior, 15(6), 409–422.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Bono, E., Salvador, A., Serrano, M. A., & Ricarte, J. (1999). Testosterone, cortisol, and mood in a sports team competition. Hormones and Behavior, 35(1), 55–62.Google Scholar
Gorelik, G., & Bjorklund, D. F. (2015). The effect of competition on men’s self-reported sexual interest. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 1(3), 141–149.Google Scholar
Gray, P. B., Jeffrey Yang, C. F., & Pope, H. G., Jr. (2006). Fathers have lower salivary testosterone levels than unmarried men and married non-fathers in Beijing, China. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 273(1584), 333–339.Google Scholar
Gray, P. B., Kahlenberg, S. M., Barrett, E. S., Lipson, S. F., & Ellison, P. T. (2002). Marriage and fatherhood are associated with lower testosterone in males. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23(3), 193–201.Google Scholar
Grebe, N. M., Sarafin, R. E., Strenth, C. R., & Zilioli, S. (2019). Pair-bonding, fatherhood, and the role of testosterone: A meta-analytic review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 98, 221–233.Google Scholar
Grossmann, K., Grossmann, K. E., Fremmer‐Bombik, E., Kindler, H., Scheuerer‐Englisch, H., & Zimmermann, A. P. (2002). The uniqueness of the child–father attachment relationship: Fathers’ sensitive and challenging play as a pivotal variable in a 16‐year longitudinal study. Social Development, 11(3), 301–337.Google Scholar
Gusmão, L., Brión, M., & Gomes, I. (2008). The human Y chromosome male-specific polymorphisms and forensic genetics. In Bogusz, M. J. (Ed.), Handbook of analytical separations (Vol. 6, pp. 969–1000). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science BV.Google Scholar
Hattori, T., & Wilczynski, W. (2014). Differences in forebrain androgen receptor expression in winners and losers of male anole aggressive interactions. Brain Research, 1582, 45–54.Google Scholar
Henrich, J. (2020). The WEIRDest people in the world. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Hill, A. K., Hunt, J., Welling, L. L., Cárdenas, R. A., Rotella, M. A., Wheatley, J. R., … & Puts, D. A. (2013). Quantifying the strength and form of sexual selection on men’s traits. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34(5), 334–341.Google Scholar
Hill, K., & Hurtado, A. M. (2017). Ache life history: The ecology and demography of a foraging people. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hodges-Simeon, C. R., Gurven, M., & Gaulin, S. J. (2015). The low male voice is a costly signal of phenotypic quality among Bolivian adolescents. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36(4), 294–302.Google Scholar
Hrdy, S. (2009). Mothers and others: The evolutionary origins of mutual understanding. Cambridge, MA: Belknap, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, D. L., Norr, L., Schober, T., Marquardt, W. H., Walker, K. J., Newsom, L. A., & Scarry, C. M. (2016). The Calusa and prehistoric subsistence in central and south Gulf Coast Florida. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 41, 55–73.Google Scholar
Jasienska, G. (2020). Costs of reproduction and ageing in the human female. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375(1811). doi: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0615Google Scholar
Jeffery, K. J., Abernethy, K. A., Tutin, C. E., Anthony, N. A., & Bruford, M. W. (2007). Who killed Porthos? Genetic tracking of a gorilla death. Integrative Zoology, 2(2), 111–119.Google Scholar
Jokiniemi, A., Magris, M., Ritari, J., Kuusipalo, L., Lundgren, T., Partanen, J., & Kekäläinen, J. (2020). Post-copulatory genetic matchmaking: HLA-dependent effects of cervical mucus on human sperm function. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 287(1933). doi: 10.1098/rspb.2020.1682Google Scholar
Jones, B. C., Hahn, A. C., Fisher, C. I., Wang, H., Kandrik, M., & DeBruine, L. M. (2018). General sexual desire, but not desire for uncommitted sexual relationships, tracks changes in women’s hormonal status. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 88, 153–157.Google Scholar
Jünger, J., Kordsmeyer, T. L., Gerlach, T. M., & Penke, L. (2018). Fertile women evaluate male bodies as more attractive, regardless of masculinity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(4), 412–423.Google Scholar
Kaplan, H. S. (1997). The evolution of the human life course. In Finch, K. W. (Ed.), Between Zeus and the salmon: The biodemography of aging (pp. 175–211). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Kayser, M., Brauer, S., Weiss, G., Schiefenhövel, W., Underhill, P., Shen, P., … & Stoneking, M. (2003). Reduced Y-chromosome, but not mitochondrial DNA, diversity in human populations from West New Guinea. American Journal of Human Genetics, 72(2), 281–302.Google Scholar
Kočnar, T., Saribay, S. A., & Kleisner, K. (2019). Perceived attractiveness of Czech faces across 10 cultures: Associations with sexual shape dimorphism, averageness, fluctuating asymmetry, and eye color. PLoS One, 14(11), e0225549. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225549Google Scholar
Kordsmeyer, T. L., Hunt, J., Puts, D. A., Ostner, J., & Penke, L. (2018). The relative importance of intra- and intersexual selection on human male sexually dimorphic traits. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(4), 424–436.Google Scholar
Krems, J. A., Claessens, S., Fales, M. R., Campenni, M., Haselton, M. G., & Aktipis, A. (2021). An agent-based model of female rivalry hypothesis for concealed ovulation in humans. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 1–10.Google Scholar
LaFreniere, P. (2011). Evolutionary functions of social play: Life histories, sex differences, and emotion regulation. American Journal of Play, 3(4), 464–488.Google Scholar
Lehmann, G. K., & Calin-Jageman, R. J. (2017). Is red really romantic? Two pre-registered replications of the red-romance hypothesis. Social Psychology, 48(3), 1–10.Google Scholar
Leonard, W. R., & Robertson, M. L. (1992). Nutritional requirements and human evolution: A bioenergetics model. American Journal of Human Biology, 4, 179–195.Google Scholar
Lippa, R. A. (2009). Sex differences in sex drive, sociosexuality, and height across 53 nations: Testing evolutionary and social structural theories. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38(5), 631–651.Google Scholar
Lu, H. J., Zhu, X. Q., & Chang, L. (2015). Good genes, good providers, and good fathers: Economic development involved in how women select a mate. Evolutionary Behavioural Sciences, 9(4), 215–228.Google Scholar
Marcinkowska, U. M., Rantala, M. J., Lee, A. J., Kozlov, M. V., Aavik, T., Cai, H., … & Dixson, B. J. (2019). Women’s preferences for men’s facial masculinity are strongest under favorable ecological conditions. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
Markey, P. M., & Markey, C. N. (2010). Changes in pornography-seeking behaviors following political elections: An examination of the challenge hypothesis. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(6), 442–446.Google Scholar
Markey, P., & Markey, C. (2011). Pornography-seeking behaviors following midterm political elections in the United States: A replication of the challenge hypothesis. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1262–1264.Google Scholar
Mattison, S. M., Scelza, B., & Blumenfield, T. (2014). Paternal investment and the positive effects of fathers among the matrilineal Mosuo of Southwest China. American Anthropologist, 116(3), 591–610.Google Scholar
Mautz, B. S., Wong, B. B., Peters, R. A., & Jennions, M. D. (2013). Penis size interacts with body shape and height to influence male attractiveness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(17), 6925–6930.Google Scholar
Mazur, A., Booth, A., & Dabbs, J. M., Jr. (1992). Testosterone and chess competition. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55(1), 70–77.Google Scholar
Međedović, J. (2021). Reproductive ecology of short and long-term mating: Implications for sexual selection and life history theory. PsyArXiv. Retrieved from https://psyarxiv.com/6zcnm/download?format=pdfGoogle Scholar
Mesterson-Gibbons, M. (1999). On the evolution of pure winner and loser effects: A game-theoretic model. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 61(6), 1151–1186.Google Scholar
Miller, G. (2000). Sexual selection for indicators of intelligence. In Bock, G., Goode, J., & Webb, K. (Eds.), The nature of intelligence (Novartis Foundation Symposium 233) (pp. 260–275). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Mitani, J. C., Gros-Louis, J., & Richards, A. F. (1996). Sexual dimorphism, the operational sex ratio, and the intensity of male competition in polygynous primates. The American Naturalism, 147(6), 966–980.Google Scholar
Moore, L. T., McEvoy, B., Cape, E., Simms, K., & Bradley, D. G. (2006). A Y-chromosome signature of hegemony in Gaelic Ireland. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 78(2), 334–338.Google Scholar
Muller, M. N. (2002). Agonistic relations among Kanyawara chimpanzee. In Boesch, C., Hohmann, G., & Merchant, L. (Eds.), Behavioural diversity in chimpanzees and bonobos (pp. 112–124). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Page, A. E., Thomas, M. G., Smith, D., Dyble, M., Viguier, S., Chaudhary, N., … & Migliano, A. B. (2019). Why care for someone else’s child? Testing adaptive hypotheses in Agta foragers. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(11), 1154–1163.Google Scholar
Parikh, V. N., Clement, T. S., & Fernald, R. D. (2006). Androgen level and male social status in the African cichlid, Astatotilapia burtoni. Behavioural Brain Research, 166(2), 291–295.Google Scholar
Penton-Voak, I. S., Jacobson, A., & Trivers, R. (2004). Populational differences in attractiveness judgments of male and female faces: Comparing British and Jamaican samples. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25(6), 355–370.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: Why violence has declined. New York, NY: Viking.Google Scholar
Prause, N., Park, J., Leung, S., & Miller, G. (2015). Women’s preferences for penis size: A new research method using selection among 3D models. PLoS One, 10(9), e0133079. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133079Google Scholar
Prokop, Z. M., Michalczyk, Ł., Drobniak, S. M., Herdegen, M., & Radwan, J. (2012). Meta‐analysis suggests choosy females get sexy sons more than “good genes.” Evolution: International Journal of Organic Evolution, 66(9), 2665–2673.Google Scholar
Puts, D. A. (2010). Beauty and the beast: Mechanisms of sexual selection in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(3), 157–175.Google Scholar
Puts, D. A., Welling, L. L., Burriss, R. P., & Dawood, K. (2012). Men’s masculinity and attractiveness predict their female partners’ reported orgasm frequency and timing. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(1), 1–9.Google Scholar
Renoult, J. P., Bovet, J., & Raymond, M. (2016). Beauty is in the efficient coding of the beholder. Royal Society Open Science, 3(3), 160027. doi: 10.1098/rsos.160027Google Scholar
Roney, J. R., Hanson, K. N., Durante, K. M., & Maestripieri, D. (2006). Reading men’s faces: Women’s mate attractiveness judgments track men’s testosterone and interest in infants. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273, 2169–2175.Google Scholar
Roser, M., Appel, C., & Ritchie, H. (2013). Human height. OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from https://ourworldindata.org/human-heightGoogle Scholar
Ryan, M. J. (2021). Darwin, sexual selection, and the brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(8), e2008194118. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2008194118Google Scholar
Saxton, T. K., Mackey, L. L., McCarty, K., & Neave, N. (2016). A lover or a fighter? Opposing sexual selection pressures on men’s vocal pitch and facial hair. Behavioral Ecology, 27(2), 512–519.Google Scholar
Sayres, M. A., Lohmueller, K. E., & Nielsen, R. (2014). Natural selection reduced diversity on human Y chromosomes. PLoS Genetics, 10(1), e1004064. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1004064Google Scholar
Scalise Sugiyama, M. (2011). The forager oral tradition and the evolution of prolonged juvenility. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(133). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00133Google Scholar
Scelza, B. A. (2011). Female choice and extra-pair paternity in a traditional human population. Biology Letters, 7(6), 889–891.Google Scholar
Schaefer, K., Mitteroecker, P., Gunz, P., Bernhard, M., & Bookstein, F. L. (2004). Craniofacial sexual dimorphism patterns and allometry among extant hominids. Annals of Anatomy–Anatomischer Anzeiger, 186(5–6), 471–478.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(2), 247–311.Google Scholar
Seffrin, P., & Ingulli, P. (2021). Brains, brawn, and beauty: The complementary roles of intelligence and physical aggression in attracting sexual partners. Aggressive Behavior, 47(1), 38–49.Google Scholar
Sell, A., Lukazsweski, A. W., & Townsley, M. (2017). Cues of upper body strength account for most of the variance in men’s bodily attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 284(1869). doi: 10.1098/rspb.2017.1819Google 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.Google Scholar
Stanton, S. J., Beehner, J. C., Saini, E. K., Kuhn, C. M., & LaBar, K. S. (2009). Dominance, politics, and physiology: Voters’ testosterone changes on the night of the 2008 United States presidential election. PLoS One, 4(10), e7543. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007543Google Scholar
Stoffel, M. A., Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., Morales-Durán, N., Grosser, S., Chakarov, N., Krüger, O., … & Hoffman, J. I. (2020). Early sexual dimorphism in the developing gut microbiome of northern elephant seals. Molecular Ecology, 29(11), 2109–2122.Google Scholar
Strassmann, B. I. (1981). Sexual selection, paternal care, and concealed ovulation in humans. Ethology and Sociobiology, 2(1), 31–40.Google Scholar
Surbeck, M., Langergraber, K. E., Fruth, B., Vigilant, L., & Hohmann, G. (2017). Male reproductive skew is higher in bonobos than chimpanzees. Current Biology, 27(13), R640–R641.Google Scholar
Symons, D. (1979/1981). The evolution of human sexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. B. (1997). Relative growth, ontogeny, and sexual dimorphism in Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla and G. g. beringei): Evolutionary and ecological considerations. American Journal of Primatology, 43(1), 1–31.Google Scholar
Thompson, M. E., Machanda, Z. P., Fox, S. A., Sabbi, K. H., Otali, E., González, N. T., … & Wrangham, R. W. (2020). Evaluating the impact of physical frailty during ageing in wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii). Philosophical Transactions B, 375(1811). doi: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0607Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Chicago, IL: Aldine-Atherton.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1974). Parent-offspring conflict. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 14(1), 249–264.Google Scholar
UNODC. (2019). Global study on homicide. Vienna: Author.Google Scholar
von Rueden, C., Alami, S., Kaplan, H., & Gurven, M. (2018). Sex differences in political leadership in an egalitarian society. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(4), 402–411.Google Scholar
Wadley, L., Esteban, I., de la Peña, P., Wojcieszak, M., Stratford, D., Lennox, S., … & Sievers, C. (2020). Fire and grass-bedding construction 200 thousand years ago at Border Cave. Science, 369(6505), 863–866.Google 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, 31(4), 408–423.Google Scholar
Watts, D. P., Muller, M., Amsler, S. J., Mbabazi, G., & Mitani, J. C. (2006). Lethal intergroup aggression by chimpanzees in Kibale National Park, Uganda. American Journal of Primatology, 68(2), 161–180.Google Scholar
Wells, J. C. (2007). Sexual dimorphism of body composition. Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 21(3), 415–430.Google Scholar
West-Eberhard, M. J. (2003). Developmental plasticity and evolution. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
White, S. A., Nguyen, T., & Fernald, R. D. (2002). Social regulation of gonadotropin-releasing hormone. Journal of Experimental Biology, 205(17), 2567–2581.Google Scholar
Williams, G. C. (1966). Adaptation and natural selection: A critique of some current evolutionary thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wingfield, J. C., Hegner, R. E., Dufty, A. M., Jr., & Ball, G. F. (1990). The “challenge hypothesis”: Theoretical implications for patterns of testosterone secretion, mating systems, and breeding strategies. The American Naturalist, 136(6), 829–846.Google Scholar
Wood, W., Kressel, L., Joshi, P. D., & Louie, B. (2014). Meta-analysis of menstrual cycle effects on women’s mate preferences. Emotion Review, 6(3), 229–249.Google Scholar
Wrangham, R. W., & Peterson, D. (1996). Demonic males: Apes and the origins of human violence. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Zihlman, A. L., Stahl, D., & Boesch, C. (2008). Morphological variation in adult chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) of the Taï National Park, Côte d’Ivoire. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 135(1), 34–41.Google Scholar

References

Adler, M. (2009). Sexual conflict in waterfowl: Why do females resist extrapair copulations? Behavioral Ecology, 21, 182–192.Google Scholar
Allen, G. R., & Simmons, L. W. (1996). Coercive mating, fluctuating asymmetry and male mating success in the dung fly Sepsis cynipsea. Animal Behaviour, 52, 737–741.Google Scholar
Amowitz, L. L., Reis, C., Lyons, K. H., Vann, B., Mansaray, B., Akinsulure-Smith, A. M., … & Iacopino, V. (2002). Prevalence of war-related sexual violence and other human rights abuses among internally displaced persons in Sierra Leone. Jama, 287, 513–521.Google Scholar
Apostolou, M. (2013). The evolution of rape: The fitness benefits and costs of a forced-sex mating strategy in an evolutionary context. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18(5), 484–490.Google Scholar
Arnqvist, G., & Rowe, L. (2013). Sexual conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barash, D. P. (1977). Sociobiology of rape in mallards (Anas platyrhynchos): Response of the mated male. Science, 197, 788–789.Google Scholar
Barbaree, H. E., Marshall, W. L., & Lanthier, R. D. (1979). Deviant sexual arousal in rapists. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 17, 215–222.Google Scholar
Barbaro, N., & Shackelford, T. K. (2016). Female-directed violence as a form of sexual coercion in humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 130(4), 321–327.Google Scholar
Basile, K. C. (2002). Prevalence of wife rape and other intimate partner sexual coercion in a nationally representative sample of women. Violence and Victims, 17, 511–524.Google Scholar
Basow, S. A., & Minieri, A. (2011). “You owe me”: Effects of date cost, who pays, participant gender, and rape myth beliefs on perceptions of rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 479–497.Google Scholar
Bateman, A. J. (1948). Intrasexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity, 2, 349–368.Google Scholar
Breuer, T., Robbins, A. M., & Robbins, M. M. (2016). Sexual coercion and courtship by male western gorillas. Primates, 57, 29–38.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–14.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2019). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., Haselton, M. G., Shackelford, T. K., Bleske, A. L., & Wakefield, J. C. (1998). Adaptation, exaptations, and spandrels. American Psychologist, 53, 533–548.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.Google Scholar
Byers, E. S., & Eno, R. J. (1992). Predicting men’s sexual coercion and aggression from attitudes, dating history, and sexual response. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 4, 55–70.Google Scholar
Cassini, M. H. (2021). Sexual aggression in mammals. Mammal Review, 51, 247–255.Google Scholar
Chagnon, N. A. (1988). Life histories, blood revenge, and warfare in a tribal population. Science, 239, 985–992.Google Scholar
Chen, C. Y., Raine, A., Chou, K. H., Chen, I. Y., Hung, D., & Lin, C. P. (2016). Abnormal white matter integrity in rapists as indicated by diffusion tensor imaging. BMC Neuroscience, 17, 1–8.Google Scholar
Clutton-Brock, T. H., & Parker, G. A. (1995). Sexual coercion in animal societies. Animal Behaviour, 49, 1345–1365.Google Scholar
Coleman, G. D. (2015). Pregnancy after rape. International Journal of Women’s Health and Wellness, 1, 1–4.Google Scholar
Conley, A. H., Overstreet, C. M., Hawn, S. E., Kendler, K. S., Dick, D. M., & Amstadter, A. B. (2017). Prevalence and predictors of sexual assault among a college sample. Journal of American College Health, 65, 41–49.Google Scholar
Crawford, C., & Galdikas, B. M. (1986). Rape in non-human animals: An evolutionary perspective. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 27, 215–230.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection: Or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Eberhard, W. G. (1996). Female control: Sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Eberhard, W. G. (2002). The function of female resistance behavior: Intromission by male coercion vs. female cooperation in sepsis flies (Diptera: Sepsidae). Revista de Biología Tropical, 50, 485–505.Google Scholar
Eberhard, W. G. (2006). Sexually antagonistic coevolution in insects is associated with only limited morphological diversity. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 19, 657–281.Google Scholar
Elliott, D. M., Mok, D. S., & Briere, J. (2004). Adult sexual assault: Prevalence, symptomatology, and sex differences in the general population. Journal of Traumatic Stress: Official Publication of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, 17(3), 203–211.Google Scholar
Ellis, L., Widmayer, A., & Palmer, C. T. (2009). Perpetrators of sexual assault continuing to have sex with their victims following the initial assault: Evidence for evolved reproductive strategies. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 53, 454–463.Google Scholar
Emlen, S. T., & Wrege, P. H. (1986). Forced copulations, and intraspecific parasitism: Two costs of social living in the white-fronted bee-eater. Ethology, 71, 2–29.Google Scholar
Fairbairn, D. J., Vermette, R., Kapoor, N. N., & Zahiri, N. (2003). Functional morphology of sexually selected genitalia in the water strider Aquarius remigis. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 81, 400–413.Google Scholar
Farr, J. A., Travis, J., & Trexler, J. C. (1986). Behavioural allometry and interdemic variation in sexual behaviour of the sailfin molly, Poecilia latipinna (Pisces: Poeciliidae). Animal Behaviour, 34, 497–509.Google Scholar
Flatt, J.-P. (1995). Use and storage of carbohydrate and fat. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 61, 952S–959S.Google Scholar
Frieze, I. H. (1983). Investigating the causes and consequences of marital rape. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 8, 532–553.Google Scholar
Gage, M. J. G., Parker, G. A., Nylin, S., & Wiklund, C. (2002). Sexual selection and speciation in mammals, butterflies and spiders. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 269, 2309–2316.Google Scholar
Gibson, K. N., Vick, L. G., Palma, A. C., Carrasco, F. M., Taub, D., & Ramos-Fernandez, G. (2008). Intra-community infanticide and forced copulation in spider monkeys: A multi-site comparison between Cocha Cashu, Peru and Punta Laguna, Mexico. American Journal of Primatology, 70, 485–489.Google Scholar
Glowacki, L., & Wrangham, R. (2015). Warfare and reproductive success in a tribal population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112, 348–353.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. T., & Shackelford, T. K. (2006). Sexual coercion and forced in-pair copulation as sperm competition tactics in humans. Human Nature, 17, 265–282.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. T., & Shackelford, T. K. (2009). Sexual coercion in intimate relationships: A comparative analysis of the effects of women’s infidelity and men’s dominance and control. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 226–234.Google Scholar
Gogliath, M., Ribeiro, L. B., & Freire, E. M. X. (2010). Forced copulation attempt in the blue-tailed lizard, Micrablepharus maximiliani (Reinhardt & Luetken, 1862) (Squamata, Gymnophthalmidae) in the Caatinga of Northeastern Brazil. Biota Neotropica, 10, 347–350.Google Scholar
Gottschall, J. (2004). Explaining wartime rape. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 129–136.Google Scholar
Gottschall, J. A., & Gottschall, T. A. (2003). Are per-incident rape pregnancy rates higher than per-incident consensual pregnancy rates? Human Nature, 14, 1–20.Google Scholar
Hagen, R. (1979). The bio-sexual factor. New York, NY: Doubleday & Co.Google Scholar
Hamilton, R. (2008). The Darwinian cage: Evolutionary psychology as moral science. Theory, Culture & Society, 25, 105–125.Google Scholar
Hamilton, W. D. (1964a). The genetical evolution of social behavior, I. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1–16.Google Scholar
Hamilton, W. D. (1964b). The genetical evolution of social behavior, II. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 17–52.Google Scholar
Harris, H. S., Oates, S. C., Staedler, M. M., Tinker, M. T., Jessup, D. A., Harvey, J. T., & Miller, M. A. (2010). Lesions and behavior associated with forced copulation of juvenile Pacific harbor seals (Phoca vitulina richardsi) by southern sea otters (Enhydra lutris nereis). Aquatic Mammals, 36, 219–229.Google Scholar
Hogg, J. T. (1988). Copulatory tactics in relation to sperm competition in Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 22, 49–59.Google Scholar
Hohoff, C., Franzen, K., & Sachser, N. (2003). Female choice in a promiscuous wild guinea pig, the yellow-toothed cavy (Galea musteloides). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 53, 341–349.Google Scholar
Holand, Ø., Weladji, R. B., Røed, K. H., Gjøstein, H., Kumpula, J., Gaillard, J.-M., … & Nieminen, M. (2006). Male age structure influences females’ mass change during rut in a polygynous ungulate: The reindeer (Rangifer tarandus). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 59, 682–688.Google Scholar
Holmes, M. M., Resnick, H. S., Kilpatrick, D. G., & Best, C. L. (1996). Rape-related pregnancy: Estimates and descriptive characteristics from a national sample of women. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 175, 320–325.Google Scholar
Hosken, D. J., & House, C. M. (2011). Sexual selection. Current Biology, 21, R62–R65.Google Scholar
Howes, R. J. (1998). Plethysmographic assessment of incarcerated nonsexual offenders: A comparison with rapists. Sexual Abuse, 10, 183–194.Google Scholar
Jewkes, R., Sikweyiya, Y., Morrell, R., & Dunkle, K. (2011). Gender inequitable masculinity and sexual entitlement in rape perpetration South Africa: Findings of a cross-sectional study. PLoS One, 6, e29590. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029590Google Scholar
Knott, C. D., Thompson, M. E., Stumpf, R. M., & McIntyre, M. H. (2010). Female reproductive strategies in orangutans, evidence for female choice and counterstrategies to infanticide in a species with frequent sexual coercion. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277, 105–113.Google Scholar
Lalumière, M. L., Chalmers, L. J., Quinsey, V. L., & Seto, M. C. (1996). A test of the mate deprivation hypothesis of sexual coercion. Ethology and Sociobiology, 17, 299–318.Google Scholar
Lalumière, M. L., Harris, G. T., Quinsey, V. L., & Rice, M. E. (2005). The causes of rape: Understanding individual differences in male propensity for sexual aggression. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Långström, N., Babchishin, K. M., Fazel, S., Lichtenstein, P., & Frisell, T. (2015). Sexual offending runs in families: A 37-year nationwide study. International Journal of Epidemiology, 44, 713–720.Google Scholar
Le Boeuf, B. J., & Mesnick, S. (1991). Sexual behavior of male northern elephant seals: I. Lethal injuries to adult females. Behaviour, 116, 143–162.Google Scholar
Magurran, A. E. (1998). Population differentiation without speciation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 353, 275–286.Google Scholar
Malamuth, N., & Thornhill, N. W. (1994). Hostile masculinity, sexual aggression, and gender-biased domineeringness in conversations. Aggressive Behavior, 20, 185–193.Google Scholar
Manson, J. H., Wrangham, R. W., Boone, J. L., Chapais, B., Dunbar, R. I. M., Ember, C. R., … & Worthman, C. M. (1991). Intergroup aggression in chimpanzees and humans [and comments and replies]. Current Anthropology, 32, 369–390.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Y., & Takegaki, T. (2016). Male coercive mating in externally fertilizing species: Male coercion, female reluctance and explanation for female acceptance. Scientific Reports, 6, 1–9.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1961). Cause and effect in biology. Science, 134, 1501–1506.Google Scholar
McKibbin, W. F., Shackelford, T. K., Goetz, A. T., & Starratt, V. G. (2008). Evolutionary psychological perspectives on rape. In Duntley, J. & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.), Evolutionary forensic psychology (pp. 101–120). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McKibbin, W. F., Starratt, V. G., Shackelford, T. K., & Goetz, A. T. (2011). Perceived risk of female infidelity moderates the relationship between objective risk of female infidelity and sexual coercion in humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 125(3), 370–373.Google Scholar
McKinney, F., & Evarts, S. (1998). Sexual coercion in waterfowl and other birds. Ornithological Monographs, 49, 163–195.Google Scholar
McLain, D. K., & Pratt, A. E. (1999). The cost of sexual coercion and heterospecific sexual harassment on the fecundity of a host-specific, seed-eating insect (Neacoryphus bicrucis). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 46, 164–170.Google Scholar
Mellins, C. A., Walsh, K., Sarvet, A. L., Wall, M., Gilbert, L., Santelli, , J. S. … & Hirsch, J. S. (2017). Sexual assault incidents among college undergraduates: Prevalence and factors associated with risk. PLoS One, 12, e0186471. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186471Google Scholar
Mineau, P., & Cooke, F. (1979). Rape in the lesser snow goose. Behaviour, 70, 280–291.Google Scholar
Mineau, P., McKinney, F., & Derrickson, S. R. (1983). Forced copulation in waterfowl. Behaviour, 86, 250–293.Google Scholar
Mitani, J. C. (1985). Mating behaviour of male orangutans in the Kutai Game Reserve, Indonesia. Animal Behaviour, 33, 392–402.Google Scholar
Olsson, M. (1995). Forced copulation and costly female resistance behavior in the Lake Eyre Dragon, Ctenophorus maculosus. Herpetologica, 51, 19–24.Google Scholar
Ouimette, P., & Riggs, D. (1998). Testing a mediational model of sexually aggressive behavior in nonincarcerated perpetrators. Violence and Victims, 13, 117–130.Google Scholar
Painter, K., & Farrington, D. P. (1998). Marital violence in Great Britain and its relationship to marital and non-marital rape. International Review of Victimology, 5, 257–276.Google Scholar
Palmer, C. T. (1989a). Is rape a cultural universal? A re-examination of the ethnographic data. Ethnology, 28, 1–16.Google Scholar
Palmer, C. T. (1989b). Rape in nonhuman animal species: Definitions, evidence, and implications. The Journal of Sex Research, 26, 355–374.Google Scholar
Pandit, S. A., Pradhan, G. R., Balashov, H., & Van Schaik, C. P. (2016). The conditions favoring between-community raiding in chimpanzees, bonobos, and human foragers. Human Nature, 27, 141–159.Google Scholar
Parker, G. A. (1979). Sexual selection and sexual conflict. In Blum, M. S. & Blum, N. A. (Eds.), Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects (pp. 123–166). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Parker, G. A. (2006). Sexual selection over mating and fertilization: An overview. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 361, 235–259.Google Scholar
Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., Knopik, V. S., & Neiderhiser, J. M. (2016). Top 10 replicated findings from behavioral genetics. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 3–23.Google Scholar
Polo, P., Hernández-Lloreda, V., & Colmenares, F. (2014). Male takeovers are reproductively costly to females in hamadryas baboons: A test of the sexual coercion hypothesis. PLoS ONE, 9, e90996. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090996Google Scholar
Quinsey, V. L., & Lalumière, M. L. (1995). Evolutionary perspectives on sexual offending. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 7, 301–315.Google Scholar
Russell, D. E. (1984). Sexual exploitation: Rape, child sexual abuse, and workplace harassment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Scott, E. M., Mann, J., Watson-Capps, J., Sargeant, B. L., & Connor, R. C. (2005). Aggression in bottlenose dolphins: Evidence for sexual coercion, male-male competition, and female tolerance through analysis of tooth-rake marks and behaviour. Behaviour, 142, 21–44.Google Scholar
Seto, M. C., & Barbaree, H. E. (1993). Victim blame and sexual arousal to rape cues in rapists and nonoffenders. Annals of Sex Research, 6, 167–183.Google Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., & Goetz, A. T. (2007). Adaptation to sperm competition in humans. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 47–50.Google Scholar
Smuts, B. B., & Smuts, R. W. (1993). Male aggression and sexual coercion of females in nonhuman primates and other mammals: Evidence and theoretical implications. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 22, 1–63.Google Scholar
Soltis, J., Mitsunaga, F., Shimizu, K., Nozaki, M., Yanagihara, Y., Domingo-Roura, X., & Takenaka, O. (1997). Sexual selection in Japanese macaques II: Female mate choice and male–male competition. Animal Behaviour, 54, 737–746.Google Scholar
Starratt, V. G., Goetz, A. T., Shackelford, T. K., & Stewart-Williams, S. (2008). Men’s partner-directed insults and sexual coercion in intimate relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 23, 315–323.Google Scholar
Starratt, V. G., Popp, D., & Shackelford, T. K. (2008). Not all men are sexually coercive: A preliminary investigation of the moderating effect of mate desirability on the relationship between female infidelity and male sexual coercion. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 10–14.Google Scholar
Stumpf, R. M., & Boesch, C. (2010). Male aggression and sexual coercion in wild West African chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes verus. Animal Behaviour, 79, 333–342.Google Scholar
Sundaresan, S. R., Fischhoff, I. R., & Rubenstein, D. I. (2007). Male harassment influences female movements and associations in Grevy’s zebra (Equus grevyi). Behavioral Ecology, 18, 860–865.Google Scholar
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Symons, D. (1992). On the use and misuse of Darwinism in the study of human behavior. In Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (Eds.), The adapted mind (pp. 137–159). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thomae, M., & Viki, G. T. (2013). Why did the woman cross the road? The effect of sexist humor on men’s rape proclivity. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 7, 250–269.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R. (1980). Rape in Panorpa scorpion flies and a general rape hypothesis. Animal Behaviour, 28, 52–59.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R. (1981). Panorpa (Mecopter: Panorpidae) scorpionflies: Systems for understanding resource-defense polygyny and alternative male reproductive efforts. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 12, 355–386.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. T. (2000). A natural history of rape: Biological bases of sexual coercion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. T. (2002). Rape and evolution: A reply to our critics. Psychology, Evolution & Gender, 4, 283–296.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Thornhill, N. W. (1983). Human rape: An evolutionary analysis. Ethology and Sociobiology, 4, 137–173.Google Scholar
Thornhill, R., & Thornhill, N. W. (1992). The evolutionary psychology of men’s coercive sexuality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15, 363–421.Google Scholar
Travis, C. B. (Ed.). (2003). Evolution, gender, and rape. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Vandermassen, G. (2011). Evolution and rape: A feminist Darwinian perspective. Sex Roles, 64, 732–747.Google Scholar
Watson-Capps, J. J. (2009). Evolution of sexual coercion with respect to sexual selection and sexual conflict theory. In Muller, M. N. & Wrangham, R. W. (Eds.), Sexual coercion in primates and humans: An evolutionary perspective on male aggression against females. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Watts, C., Keogh, E., Ndlovu, M., & Kwaramba, R. (1998). Withholding of sex and forced sex: Dimensions of violence against Zimbabwean women. Reproductive Health Matters, 6, 57–65.Google Scholar
Watts, D., & Mitani, J. (2001). Boundary patrols and intergroup encounters in wild chimpanzees. Behaviour, 138, 299–327.Google Scholar
Watts, D. P., Muller, M., Amsler, S. J., Mbabazi, G., & Mitani, J. C. (2006). Lethal intergroup aggression by chimpanzees in Kibale National Park, Uganda. American Journal of Primatology: Official Journal of the American Society of Primatologists, 68, 161–180.Google Scholar
Wegner, R., Abbey, A., Pierce, J., Pegram, S. E., & Woerner, J. (2015). Sexual assault perpetrators’ justifications for their actions: Relationships to rape supportive attitudes, incident characteristics, and future perpetration. Violence Against Women, 21, 1018–1037.Google Scholar
Werschkul, D. F. (1982). Nesting ecology of the little blue heron: Promiscuous behavior. Condor, 84, 381–384.Google Scholar
Williams, G. C. (1966). Adaptation and natural selection: A critique of some current evolutionary thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1992). The man who mistook his wife for a chattel. In Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture, (pp. 289–322). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wolitzky-Taylor, K. B., Resnick, H. S., McCauley, J. L., Amstadter, A. B., Kilpatrick, D. G., & Ruggiero, K. J. (2011). Is reporting of rape on the rise? A comparison of women with reported versus unreported rape experiences in the National Women’s Study-Replication. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 807–832.Google Scholar

References

Adair, L., Dillon, H. M., & Brase, G. L. (2017). I’ll have who she’s having: Mate copying, mate poaching, and mate retention. In Fisher, M. L. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of women and competition (pp. 319–336). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. C., & Surbey, M. K. (2020). Human mate copying as a form of nonindependent mate selection: Findings and considerations. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 14(2), 173–196.Google Scholar
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469–480.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., Sunderani, S., & Vaillancourt, T. (2013). Mate-poaching and mating success in humans. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 11, 65–83.Google Scholar
Barclay, P. (2010). Altruism as a courtship display: Some effects of third-party generosity on audience perceptions. British Journal of Psychology, 101, 123–135.Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.Google Scholar
Belu, C. F., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2018). Why find my own when I can take yours? The quality of relationships that arise from successful mate poaching. Journal of Relationships Research, 9(e6), 1–10.Google Scholar
Belu, C. F., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2020). Once a poacher always a poacher? Mate poaching history and its association with relationship quality. The Journal of Sex Research, 57(4), 508–521.Google Scholar
Betzig, L. (1989). Causes of conjugal dissolution: A cross-cultural study. Current Anthropology, 30, 654–676.Google Scholar
Bornstein, R. F., Leone, D. R., & Galley, D. J. (1987). The generalizability of subliminal mere exposure effects: Influence of stimuli perceived without awareness on social behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1070–1079.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1988). From vigilance to violence: Tactics of mate retention in American undergraduates. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 291–317.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2006). Strategies of human mating. Psihologijske Teme, 15(2), 239–260.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2007). The evolution of human mating. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 39(3), 502–512.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., Goetz, C., Duntley, J. D., Asao, K., & Conroy-Beam, D. (2017). The mate switching hypothesis. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 143–149.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100(2), 204–232.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 77–110.Google 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.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Choe, J., Buunk, B. P., & Dijkstra, P. (2000). Distress about mating rivals. Personal Relationships, 7, 235–243.Google Scholar
Buunk, B. P. (1996). Affiliation, attraction and close relationships. In Hewstone, M., Stroebe, W., & Stephenson, G. (Eds.), Introduction to social psychology (2nd ed., pp. 345–374). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cherlin, A. (2009). The marriage-go-round: The state of marriage and family in America today. New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
Christensen, A., & Schenk, J. L. (1991). Communication, conflict, and psychological distance in nondistressed, clinic, and divorcing couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 458–463.Google 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.Google Scholar
Cox, A., & Fisher, M. (2008). A framework for exploring intrasexual competition. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2 , 144–155.Google Scholar
Davies, A. P., Shackelford, T. K., & Hass, R. G. (2007). When a “poach” is not a poach: Re-defining human mate poaching and re-estimating its frequency. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 702–716.Google Scholar
Davies, A. P. C., Tranter, 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.Google Scholar
DiDonato, T. E., Bedminster, M. C., & Machel, J. J. (2013). My funny valentine: How humor styles affect romantic interest. Personal Relationships, 20, 374–390.Google Scholar
Ellis, B. J. (1992). The evolution of sexual attraction: Evaluative mechanisms in women. In Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (Eds.), The adapted mind (pp. 267–288). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellison, P. T. (2003). Energetics and reproductive effort. American Journal of Human Biology, 15, 342–351.Google Scholar
Fisher, M. L., & Fernández, A. M. (2017). The influence of women’s mate value on intrasexual competition. In The Oxford handbook of women and competition (pp. 281–299). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, M., Shaw, S., Worth, K., Smith, L., & Reeve, C. (2010). How we view those who derogate: Perceptions of female competitor derogators. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 4, 265–276.Google Scholar
Foster, J. D., Jonason, P. K., Shrira, I., Campbell, W. K., Shiverdecker, L. K., & Varner, S. C. (2014). What do you get when you make someone else’s partner your own? An analysis of relationships formed via mate poaching. Journal of Research in Personality, 52, 78–90.Google Scholar
Fugère, M. A., Cousins, A. J., & MacLaren, S. A. (2015). (Mis)matching in physical attractiveness and women’s resistance to mate guarding. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 190–195.Google Scholar
Garcia, J. R., & Reiber, C. (2008). Hook-up behavior: A biopsychosocial perspective. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2(4), 192–208.Google Scholar
Glass, S. P., & Wright, T. L. (1985). Sex differences in type of extramarital involvement and marital dissatisfaction. Sex Roles, 12, 1101–1120.Google Scholar
Gorniewicz, S. J. (2011). Do adult romantic attachment empathy and social skills influence mate poaching infidelity? Unpublished doctoral thesis, East Tennessee State University. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1311. Retrieved from https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1311Google Scholar
Graham, J. M. (2011). Measuring love in romantic relationships: A meta-analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 28, 748–771.Google Scholar
Grosskopf, D. (1983). Sex and the married woman. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Guerrero, L. K., & Mongeau, P. A. (2008). On becoming “more than friends”: The transition from friendship to romantic relationship. In Sprecher, S., Wenzel, A., & Harvey, J. (Eds.), Handbook of relationship initiation (pp. 175–194). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1), 81–91.Google Scholar
Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (2000). Romantic love. In Hendrick, C. & Hendrick, S. S. (Eds.), Close relationships: A sourcebook (pp. 203–215). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hill, S. E., & Buss, D. M. (2008). The mere presence of opposite-sex others on judgments of sexual and romantic desirability: Opposite effects for men and women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 635–647.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. J., & Kirkpatrick, L. A. (2007). The structure and measurement of human mating strategies: Toward a multidimensional model of sociosexuality. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 382–391.Google 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.Google Scholar
Kardum, I., Hudek-Knezevic, J., & Mehic, N. (2018). Personality and mate poaching. In Shackelford, T. K. & Shackelford, V. A. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science. Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6Google Scholar
Kardum, I., Hudek-Knezevic, J., Schmitt, D. P., & Grundler, P. (2015). Personality and mate poaching experiences. Personality and Individual Differences, 75, 7–12.Google Scholar
Knopp, K., Scott, S., Ritchie, L., Rhoades, G. K., Markman, H. J., & Stanley, S. M. (2017). Once a cheater, always a cheater? Serial infidelity across subsequent relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(8), 2301–2311.Google Scholar
Kohler, A. (2013). A review of literature on mate poaching. Western Undergraduate Psychology Journal, 1(1). Retrieved from https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/wupj/article/view/1662Google Scholar
Kramer, K. L., Schacht, R., & Bell, A. (2017). Adult sex ratios and partner scarcity among hunter-gatherers: Implications for dispersal patterns and the evolution of human sociality. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 372(1729). doi: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0316Google Scholar
Lemay, E. P., Jr., & Wolf, N. R. (2016). Human mate poaching tactics are effective: Evidence from a dyadic prospective study on opposite-sex “friendships.” Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(4), 374–380.Google Scholar
Leonardi, J., Fimiani, R., Faccini, F., Gorman, B. S., Bush, M., & Gazzillo, F. (2020). An empirical investigation into pathological worry and rumination: Guilt, shame, depression, and anxiety. Psychology Hub, 37(3), 31–42.Google Scholar
Loureiro, S. M. C., de Plaza, M. A. P., & Taghian, M. (2020). The effect of benign and malicious envies on desire to buy luxury fashion items. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 52, 1–14.Google Scholar
Marlowe, F. W. (2004). Mate preferences among Hadza hunter-gatherers. Human Nature, 15(4), 365–376.Google Scholar
Medlin, M. M., Brown, M., & Sacco, D. F. (2018). That’s what she said! Perceived mate value of clean and dirty humor displays. Personality and Individual Differences, 135, 192–200.Google Scholar
Mitchell, V. E., Mogilski, J. K., Zeigler-Hill, V., & Welling, L. L. M. (2019). Mate poaching strategies are differentially associated with pathological personality traits and risk-taking in men and women. Personality and Individual Differences, 142, 110–115.Google Scholar
Mogilski, J. K., & Wade, T. J. (2013). Friendship as a relationship infiltration tactic during human mate poaching. Evolutionary Psychology, 11(4). doi: 10.1177/147470491301100415Google Scholar
Moran, J. B., Kuhle, B. X., Wade, T. J., & Seid, M. A. (2017). To poach or not to poach? Men are more willing to short-term poach mated women who are more attractive than their mates. EvoS Journal: The Journal of Evolutionary Studies Consortium, 8, 58–69.Google Scholar
Moran, J., & Wade, T. J. (2017). Sex and the perceived effectiveness of short-term mate poaching acts in college students. Human Ethology Bulletin, 32(3), 109–128.Google Scholar
Moran, J. B., & Wade, T. J. (2022). Perceptions of a mismatched couple: The role of attractiveness on mate poaching and copying. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 16(1), 94–99. doi:10.1037/ebs0000187Google Scholar
Orbuch, T. L., Veroff, J., Hassan, H., & Horrocks, J. (2002). Who will divorce: A 14‐year longitudinal study of Black couples and White couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 179–202.Google Scholar
O’Sullivan, L. F., & Ronis, S. T. (2013). Virtual cheating hearts: Extradyadic and poaching interactions among adolescents with links to online sexual activities. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 45(3), 175–184.Google Scholar
Parker, H. A. (2017). Virtual mate poaching: A study of the tactics used to poach a potential mate on social networking sites. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Capella University.Google Scholar
Parker, J., & Burkley, M. (2009). Who’s chasing whom: The impact of gender and relationship status on mate poaching. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1016–1019.Google Scholar
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563.Google Scholar
Peplau, L. A., & Fingerhut, A. W. (2007). The close relationships of lesbians and gay men. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 405–424.Google Scholar
Rauer, A. J., Pettit, G. S., Lansford, J. E., Bates, J. E., & Dodge, K. A. (2013). Romantic relationship patterns in young adulthood and their developmental antecedents. Developmental Psychology, 49, 2159–2171.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, D. L., Lopes, D., & Pereira, M. (2016). Sociosexuality, commitment, sexual infidelity, and perceptions of infidelity: Data from the Second Love website. The Journal of Sex Research, 54(2), 241–253.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, M. J., & Thomas, R. J. (2012). Searching for a mate: The rise of the internet as a social intermediary. American Sociological Review, 77(4), 523–547.Google Scholar
Rowatt, W. C., & Schmitt, D. P. (2003). Associations between religious orientation and varieties of sexual experience. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42(3), 455–465.Google Scholar
Scelza, B. A., Prall, S. P., Blumenfield, T., Crittenden, A. N., Gurven, M., Kline, M., … & McElreath, R. (2020). Patterns of paternal investment predict cross-cultural variation in jealous response. Nature Human Behaviour, 4, 20–26.Google Scholar
Schachner, D. A., & Shaver, P. R. (2002). Attachment style and human mate poaching. New Review of Social Psychology, 1, 122–129.Google Scholar
Schachner, D. A., & Shaver, P. R. (2004). Attachment dimensions and sexual motives. Personal Relationships, 11(2), 179–195.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P. (2004). The big five related to risky sexual behaviour across 10 world regions: Differential personality associations of sexual promiscuity and relationship infidelity. European Journal of Personality, 18(4), 301–319.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (1996). Strategic self-promotion and competitor derogation: Sex and context effects on perceived effectiveness of mate attraction tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1185–1204.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., & International Sexuality Description Project (ISDP). (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.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., & Shackelford, T. K. (2003). Nifty ways to leave your lover: The tactics people use to entice and disguise the process of human mate poaching. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(8), 1018–1035.Google Scholar
Semenyna, S. W., Gómez Jiménez, F. R., VanderLaan, D. P., & Vasey, P. L. (2020). Inter-sexual mate competition in three cultures. PLoS One, 15(7), e0236549. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236549Google Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., Voracek, M., Schmitt, D. P., Buss, D. M., Weekes-Shackelford, V. A., & Michalski, R. L. (2004). Romantic jealousy in early adulthood and in later life. Human Nature, 15(3), 283–300.Google Scholar
Shukusky, J. A., & Wade, T. J. (2012). Sex differences in hookup behavior: A replication and examination of parent-child relationship quality. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 6(4), 494–505.Google Scholar
Slabbinck, H., De Houwer, J., & Van Kenhove, P. (2012). The pictorial attitude implicit association test for need for affiliation. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(7), 838–842.Google Scholar
Strassmann, B. I. (1997). The biology of menstruation in Homo sapiens: Total lifetime menses, fecundity, and nonsynchrony in a natural-fertility population. Current Anthropology, 38(1), 123–129.Google Scholar
Sunderani, S., Arnocky, S., & Vaillancourt, T. (2013). Individual differences in mate poaching: An examination of hormonal, dispositional, and behavioral mate-value traits. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 533–545.Google Scholar
Sutton, K. A., & Oaten, M. J. (2017). Women’s talk? Exploring the relationships between gossip, sex, mate competition, and mate poaching. In The Oxford handbook of women and competition (pp. 207–221). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tooby, J. (2017). Coalitional instincts. Edge Online Journal. Retrieved from www.edge.org/response-detail/27168Google Scholar
Tooke, W., & Camire, L. (1991). Patterns of deception in intersexual and intrasexual mating strategies. Ethology and Sociobiology, 12(5), 345–364.Google Scholar
Udry, J. R., & Billy, J. O. G. (1987). Initiation of coitus in early adolescence. American Sociological Review, 52, 841–855.Google Scholar
Ueda, R., Ashida, H., Yanagisawa, K., & Abe, N. (2017). The neural basis of individual differences in mate poaching. Social Neuroscience, 12(4), 391–399.Google Scholar
Underwood, K. (2020, September 25). Jealous husband killed man, made wife decapitate his body, NH prosecutors say. NBC Boston. Retrieved from http://nbcboston.com/news/local/couple-charged-in-death-of-missing-new-hampshire-man/2201606Google Scholar
VanderDrift, L. E., Wilson, J. E., & Agnew, C. R. (2012). On the benefits of valuing being friends for nonmarital romantic partners. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 115–131.Google Scholar
von Rueden, C. R., & Jaeggi, A. V. (2016). Men’s status and reproductive success in 33 nonindustrial societies: Effects of subsistence, marriage system, and reproductive strategy. PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(39), 10824–10829.Google Scholar
Wade, T. J. (2003). Evolutionary theory and African American self-perception: Sex differences in body-esteem predictors of self-perceived physical and sexual attractiveness, and self-esteem. Journal of Black Psychology, 29(2), 123–141.Google Scholar
Wade, T. J. (2012). Mate expulsion and sexual conflict. In Shackelford, T. K. & Goetz, A. T. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of sexual conflict in humans (pp. 315–327). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wade, T. J., & Brown, K. (2012). Recent mate expulsion research. In Shackelford, T. K. & Goetz, A. T. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of sexual conflict in humans (pp. 320–323). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2, Pt. 2), 1–27.Google Scholar
Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(6), 224–228.Google 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.

  • Precopulatory Adaptations
  • Edited by Todd K. Shackelford, Oakland University, Michigan
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Psychology
  • Online publication: 30 June 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108943543.002
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.

  • Precopulatory Adaptations
  • Edited by Todd K. Shackelford, Oakland University, Michigan
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Psychology
  • Online publication: 30 June 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108943543.002
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.

  • Precopulatory Adaptations
  • Edited by Todd K. Shackelford, Oakland University, Michigan
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Psychology
  • Online publication: 30 June 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108943543.002
Available formats
×