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-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T16:55:51.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Sex Differences and Sex Similarities

from Part II - Middle-Level Theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2022

By
Jessica L. Engelbrecht  and
John E. Edlund
Edited by
Todd K. Shackelford
Todd K. Shackelford
Affiliation:
Oakland University, Michigan
Get access

Summary

The sciences have been perennially interested in understanding similarities and differences between the sexes. Among humans, both males and females seek to secure serially monogamous partnerships with kind and intelligent mates similar to themselves. However, the sexes differ in the relative value placed on resources and physical attractiveness, their willingness to engage in short-term liaisons, and jealousy in response to emotional and sexual infidelities. Consideration of cultural factors, modern relationship innovations, and diversity in sexual orientation and gender identity provides further complexity to our understanding of similarities and differences. Recommendations are made for future research in these areas, and the societal implications of evolutionary work on the sexes is discussed.

Keywords

sex differencessex similaritiessexual psychologymate preferences
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Psychology , pp. 360 - 389
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

Abed, R. T. (1998). The sexual competition hypothesis for eating disorders. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 71(4), 525–547.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ahnesjö, I., Brealey, J. C., Günter, K. P., Martinossi-Allibert, I., Morinay, J., Siljestam, M., … & Vasconcelos, P. (2020). Considering gender-biased assumptions in evolutionary biology. Evolutionary Biology, 47(1), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anglin, S. M., Amaral, M. C., & Edlund, J. E. (2010). Keep the mate or keep the child? Examining sex differences in abortion decisions. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(5), 374–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, J. M., Kim, P. Y., Hills, A., & Linsenmeier, J. A. (1997). Butch, femme, or straight acting? Partner preferences of gay men and lesbians. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(5), 960.Google Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Balzarini, R. N., Campbell, L., Kohut, T., Holmes, B. M., Lehmiller, J. J., Harman, J. J., & Atkins, N. (2017). Perceptions of primary and secondary relationships in polyamory. PLoS One, 12(5), e0177841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baranowski, A. M., & Hecht, H. (2015). Gender differences and similarities in receptivity to sexual invitations: Effects of location and risk perception. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(8), 2257–2265.Google Scholar
Barrett, H. C., Frederick, D. A., Haselton, M. G., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Can manipulations of cognitive load be used to test evolutionary hypotheses? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(3), 513–518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baschnagel, J. S., & Edlund, J. E. (2016). Affective modification of the startle eyeblink response during sexual and emotional infidelity scripts. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2(2), 114–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassett, J., Pearcey, S., & Dabbs, J. M. Jr. (2001). Jealousy and partner preference among butch and femme lesbians. Psychology, Evolution, and Gender, 3(2), 155–165.Google Scholar
Blurton Jones, N. G., Marlowe, F. W., Hawkes, K., & O’Connell, J. F. (2000). Paternal investment and hunter-gatherer divorce rates. In Cronk, L., Chagnon, N., & Irons, W. (Eds.), Adaptation and human behavior: An anthropological perspective (pp. 69–90). New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Brown, N. R., & Sinclair, R. C. (1999). Estimating number of lifetime sexual partners: Men and women do it differently. Journal of Sex Research, 36(3), 292–297.Google Scholar
Buller, D. J. (2006). Adapting minds: Evolutionary psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Burch, K. (2020, December 14). What to know about platonic co-parenting – and how to make it work. Insider. Retrieved from www.insider.com/what-is-platonic-co-parenting-and-how-does-it-work-2020-12Google Scholar
Burch, R. L. (2020). More than just a pretty face: The overlooked contributions of women in evolutionary psychology textbooks. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 14(1), 100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burkett, B. N., & Cosmides, L. (2006). What is intolerable in a mate. In Annual Meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994). Some neo-Darwinian decision rules for altruism: Weighing cues for inclusive fitness as a function of the biological importance of the decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(5), 773–789.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1985). Human mate selection: Opposites are sometimes said to attract, but in fact we are likely to marry someone who is similar to us in almost every variable. American Scientist, 73(1), 47–51.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1988). From vigilance to violence: Tactics of mate retention in American undergraduates. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9(5), 291–317.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. (1994). The strategies of human mating. American Scientist, 82(3), 238–249.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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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., Larsen, R. J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, J. (1992). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psychology. Psychological Science, 3(4), 251–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Susceptibility to infidelity in the first year of marriage. Journal of Research in Personality, 31(2), 193–221.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.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
Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Larsen, R. J. (2001). A half century of mate preferences: The cultural evolution of values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(2), 491–503.Google Scholar
Buunk, B. P., Angleitner, A., Oubaid, V., & Buss, D. M. (1996). Sex differences in jealousy in evolutionary and cultural perspective: Tests from the Netherlands, Germany, and the United States. Psychological Science, 7(6), 359–363.Google Scholar
Castro, F. N., Hattori, W. T., & de Araújo Lopes, F. (2012). Relationship maintenance or preference satisfaction? Male and female strategies in romantic partner choice. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 6(2), 217.Google Scholar
Chan, Y.-M., Hannema, S. E., Achermann, J. C., & Hughes, I. A. (2019). Disorders of sexual development. In Melmed, S., Auchus, R., Goldfine, A. B., Koenig, R. J., & Rosen, C. J. (Eds.), Williams textbook of endocrinology. New York, NY: Elsevier.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
Conley, T. D. (2011). Perceived proposer personality characteristics and gender differences in acceptance of casual sex offers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(2), 309–329.Google Scholar
Conley, T. D., Matsick, J. L., Moors, A. C., & Ziegler, A. (2017). Investigation of consensually nonmonogamous relationships: Theories, methods, and new directions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(2), 205–232.Google Scholar
Cooper, K., Russell, A., Mandy, W., & Butler, C. (2020). The phenomenology of gender dysphoria in adults: A systematic review and meta-synthesis. Clinical Psychology Review, 80, 101875.Google Scholar
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1981). Abuse and neglect of children in evolutionary perspective. Natural Selection and Social Behavior, 405–416.Google Scholar
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Evolutionary social psychology and family homicide. Science, 242(4878), 519–524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. I. (1996). Violence against stepchildren. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5(3), 77–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (2008). Is the “Cinderella effect” controversial? A case study of evolution-minded research and critiques thereof. In Crawford, C. & Krebs, D. (Eds.), Foundations of evolutionary psychology (pp. 383–400). London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Deacon, T. (1997). The symbolic species: The coevolution of language and the human brain. Hammondsworth: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., Tybur, J. M., Lieberman, D., & Griskevicius, V. (2010). Women’s preferences for masculinity in male faces are predicted by pathogen disgust, but not by moral or sexual disgust. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(1), 69–74.Google Scholar
DeSteno, D., Bartlett, M. Y., Braverman, J., & Salovey, P. (2002). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolutionary mechanism or artifact of measurement? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1103–1116.Google Scholar
DeSteno, D. A., & Salovey, P. (1996). Evolutionary origins of sex differences in jealousy? Questioning the “fitness” of the model. Psychological Science, 7, 367–372.Google Scholar
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54(6), 408.Google Scholar
Edlund, J. E., Buller, D. J., Sagarin, B. J., Heider, J. D., Scherer, C. R., Farc, M. M., & Ojedokun, O. (2019). Male sexual jealousy: Lost paternity opportunities? Psychological Reports, 122(2), 575–592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edlund, J. E., Clark, D. Q., Kalmus, A, & Sausville, A. (2021). Receptivity to casual sexual requests. Journal of Social Psychology, 161(6), 779–784.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
Edlund, J. E., Heider, J. D., Scherer, C. R., Farc, M. M., & Sagarin, B. J. (2006). Sex differences in jealousy in response to actual infidelity. Evolutionary Psychology, 4(1), 462–470.Google Scholar
Edlund, J. E., & Sagarin, B. J. (2009). Sex differences in jealousy: Misinterpretation of nonsignificant results as refuting the theory. Personal Relationships, 16(1), 67–78.Google Scholar
Edlund, J. E., & Sagarin, B. J. (2010). Mate value and mate preferences: An investigation into decisions made with and without constraints. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(8), 835–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edlund, J. E., & Sagarin, B. J. (2014). The mate value scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 64(1), 72–77.Google Scholar
Faer, L. M., Hendriks, A., Abed, R. T., & Figueredo, A. J. (2005). The evolutionary psychology of eating disorders: Female competition for mates or for status? Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 78(3), 397–417.Google Scholar
Fisher, M. L. (2004). Female intrasexual competition decreases female facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 271(suppl. 5), S283–S285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, M. L., & Fernández, A. M. (2017). The influence of women’s mate value on intrasexual competition. In Fisher, M. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of women and competition (pp. 281–299). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.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
Gahan, L. (2019). Separation and post‐separation parenting within lesbian and gay co‐parenting (guild parented) families. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 40(1), 98–113.Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., & Scheyd, G. J. (2005). The evolution of human physical attractiveness. Annual Reviews in Anthropology, 34, 523–548.Google Scholar
Garcia, J. R., & Reiber, C. (2008). Hook-up behavior: A biopsychosocial perspective. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2(4), 192.Google Scholar
Glass, S. P., & Wright, T. L. (1992). Justifications for extramarital relationships: The association between attitudes, behaviors, and gender. Journal of Sex Research, 29(3), 361–387.Google Scholar
Golden, M., & Toohey, P. (Eds.). (2003). Sex and difference in Ancient Greece and Rome. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Gray, J. (1992). Men are from Mars, women are from Venus. New York, NY: Harper.Google Scholar
Hadley, C. (2004). The costs and benefits of kin. Human Nature, 15(4), 377–395.Google Scholar
Hagen, E. H. (1999). The functions of postpartum depression. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(5), 325–359.Google 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(1), 117–135.Google Scholar
Harris, C. R. (2003). A review of sex differences in sexual jealousy, including self-report data, psychophysiological responses, interpersonal violence, and morbid jealousy. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(2), 102–128.Google Scholar
Harvey-Jenner, C. (2016, February 22). This Reddit user thinks her fiancé might be committing incest. Cosmopolitan Magazine. Retrieved from www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/love-sex/relationships/news/a41428/reddit-user-dilemma-fiance-incestuousGoogle Scholar
Hayes, A. F. (1995). Age preferences for same- and opposite-sex partners. The Journal of Social Psychology, 135(2), 125–133.Google Scholar
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83.Google Scholar
Hewlett, B. S. (1991). Demography and childcare in preindustrial societies. Journal of Anthropological Research, 47(1), 1–37.Google Scholar
Hill, K., & Hurtado, A. M. (1996). Ache life history. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hill, S. E., Rodeheffer, C. D., Griskevicius, V., Durante, K., & White, A. E. (2012). Boosting beauty in an economic decline: Mating, spending, and the lipstick effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(2), 275.Google Scholar
Horne, R. M., Johnson, M. D., Galambos, N. L., & Krahn, H. J. (2018). Time, money, or gender? Predictors of the division of household labour across life stages. Sex Roles, 78(11–12), 731–743.Google Scholar
Hrdy, S. (2009). Mothers and others. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.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(3), 173–178.Google Scholar
Joel, S., Gordon, A. M., Impett, E. A., MacDonald, G., & Keltner, D. (2013). The things you do for me: Perceptions of a romantic partner’s investments promote gratitude and commitment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(10), 1333–1345.Google Scholar
Johnston, V. S., Hagel, R., Franklin, M., Fink, B., & Grammer, K. (2001). Male facial attractiveness: Evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(4), 251–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., Gutierrez, S. E., & Goldberg, L. L. (1989). Influence of popular erotica on judgments of strangers and mates. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 159–167.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Zierk, K. L., & Krones, J. M. (1994). Evolution and social cognition: Contrast effects as a function of sex, dominance, and physical attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(2), 210–217.Google Scholar
Kesner, J. E., & McKenry, P. C. (2001). Single parenthood and social competence in children of color. Families in Society, 82(2), 136–144.Google Scholar
Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
La Cerra, M. M. (1994). Evolved mate preferences in women: Psychological adaptations for assessing a man’s willingness to invest in offspring. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Santa Barbara, CA: Department of Psychology, University of California.Google Scholar
Lee, R. B. (1979). The !Kung San: Men, women, and working in a foraging society. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, R., & DeVore, I. (Eds.). (1968). Man the hunter. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Lieberman, D., & Lobel, T. (2012). Kinship on the Kibbutz: Coresidence duration predicts altruism, personal sexual aversions and moral attitudes among communally reared peers. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(1), 26–34.Google Scholar
Little, A. C., DeBruine, L. M., & Jones, B. C. (2014). Sex differences in attraction to familiar and unfamiliar opposite-sex faces: Men prefer novelty and women prefer familiarity. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(5), 973–981.Google Scholar
Mann, J. (1992). Nurturance or negligence: Maternal psychology and behavioral preference among preterm twins. In Barkow, J., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (Eds.), The adapted mind (pp. 367–390). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
March, E., Grieve, R., & Marx, E. (2015). Sex, sexual orientation, and the necessity of physical attractiveness and social level in long-term and short-term mates. Journal of Relationships Research, 6. doi: 10.1017/jrr.2014.12Google Scholar
Miller, G., Tybur, J. M., & Jordan, B. D. (2007). Ovulatory cycle effects on tip earnings by lap dancers: Economic evidence for human estrus? Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(6), 375–381.Google Scholar
Mishra, S., Clark, A., & Daly, M. (2007). One woman’s behavior affects the attractiveness of others. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(2), 145–149.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
Mogilski, J. K., Reeve, S. D., Nicolas, S. C., Donaldson, S. H., Mitchell, V. E., & Welling, L. L. (2019). Jealousy, consent, and compersion within monogamous and consensually non-monogamous romantic relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48(6), 1811–1828.Google Scholar
Nepomuceno, M. V., Saad, G., Stenstrom, E., Mendenhall, Z., & Iglesias, F. (2016). Testosterone & gift-giving: Mating confidence moderates the association between digit ratios (2D: 4D and rel2) and erotic gift-giving. Personality and Individual Differences, 91, 27–30.Google Scholar
Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114(1), 29–51.Google Scholar
Phelan, N., & Edlund, J. E. (2016). How disgust affects romantic attraction: The influence of moods on judgments of attractiveness. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2(1), 16–23.Google Scholar
Prokosch, M. D., Coss, R. G., Scheib, J. E., & Blozis, S. A. (2009). Intelligence and mate choice: Intelligent men are always appealing. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(1), 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puts, D. A., Pope, L. E., Hill, A. K., Cárdenas, R. A., Welling, L. L. M., Wheatley, J. R., & Breedlove, S. M. (2015). Fulfilling desire: Evidence for negative feedback between men’s testosterone, sociosexual psychology, and sexual partner number. Hormones and Behavior, 70, 14–21.Google Scholar
Reich, J. E. (2016, February 21). Redditor wants to know if we think her fiancée is doing incest. Jezebel. Retrieved from https://jezebel.com/redditor-wants-to-know-if-we-think-her-fiance-is-doing-1760444524Google Scholar
Rippon, G. (2019). The gendered brain: The new neuroscience that shatters the myth of the female brain. New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
Rossano, M. J. (2003). Evolutionary psychology. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Sagarin, B. J., Martin, A. L., Coutinho, S. A., Edlund, J. E., Patel, L., Zengel, B., & Skowronski, J. J. (2012). Sex differences in jealousy: A meta-analytic examination. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 595–614.Google Scholar
Saini, A. (2017). Inferior: How science got women wrong and the new research that’s rewriting the story. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, C., Crawford, C., Dane, L., & Zuberbier, O. (2008). Ancestral mechanisms in modern environments. Human Nature, 19(1), 103–117.Google Scholar
Salvatore, J. F., Meltzer, A. L., March, D. S., & Gaertner, L. (2017). Strangers with benefits: Attraction to outgroup men increases as fertility increases across the menstrual cycle. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(2), 204–217.Google Scholar
Scandurra, C., Mezza, F., Maldonato, N. M., Bottone, M., Bochicchio, V., Valerio, P., & Vitelli, R. (2019). Health of non-binary and genderqueer people: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01453.Google Scholar
Schaefer, K., Fink, B., Grammer, K., Mitteroecker, P., Gunz, P., & Bookstein, F. L. (2006). Female appearance: Facial and bodily attractiveness as shape. Psychology Science, 48(2), 187–204.Google Scholar
Scheib, J. E. (1994). Sperm donor selection and the psychology of female mate choice. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15(3), 113–129.Google Scholar
Scherer, C. R., Akers, E. G., & Kolbe, K. L. (2013). Bisexuals and the sex differences in jealousy hypothesis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(8), 1064–1071.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
Sear, R., & Mace, R. (2008). Who keeps children alive? A review of the effects of kin on child survival. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 1–18.Google Scholar
Sefcek, J. A., Brumbach, B. H., Vásquez, G., & Miller, G. F. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of human mate choice: How ecology, genes, fertility, and fashion influence our mating behavior. Kauth, MR. Handbook of the Evolution of Human Sexuality Part 1 [Special Issue]. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 18(2–3).Google Scholar
Sheets, V. L., Fredendall, L. L., & Claypool, H. M. (1997). Jealousy evocation, partner reassurance, and relationship stability: An exploration of the potential benefits of jealousy. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18(6), 387–402.Google Scholar
Shimoda, R., Campbell, A., & Barton, R. A. (2018). Women’s emotional and sexual attraction to men across the menstrual cycle. Behavioral Ecology, 29(1), 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shostak, M. (1981). Nisa: The life and words of a !Kung woman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Singh, D., & Randall, P. K. (2007). Beauty is in the e,ye of the plastic surgeon: Waist–hip ratio (WHR) and women’s attractiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(2), 329–340.Google Scholar
Singh, D., Vidaurri, M., Zambarano, R. J., & Dabbs, J. M. Jr. (1999). Lesbian erotic role identification: Behavioral, morphological, and hormonal correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(6), 1035.Google Scholar
Sokol-Chang, R., Burch, R. L., & Fisher, M. L. (2017). Cooperative versus competitive mothers. In Fisher, M. L. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of women and competition (pp. 505–528). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stobber, I. (2016, Feruary 22). Nightmare Reddit incest wedding thread. Ask Men. Retrieved from www.askmen.com/dating/dating_advice/nightmare-reddit-incest-wedding-thread.htmlGoogle 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
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tate, C. (2011). The “problem of number” revisited: The relative contributions of psychosocial, experiential, and evolutionary factors to the desired number of sexual partners. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 64(9–10), 644–657.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(8), 1023–1036.Google Scholar
Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In Barkow, J., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tooke, W., & Camire, L. (1991). Patterns of deception in intersexual and intrasexual mating strategies. Ethology and Sociobiology, 12(5), 345–364.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
Turner, S. L., & McAndrew, F. T. (2006). A laboratory simulation of parental investment decisions: The role of future reproductive opportunities and quality of offspring in determining levels of parental investment. Evolutionary Psychology, 4(1), 197–207.Google Scholar
US Census Bureau. (2020). Historical living arrangements of children under 18 years old: 1960 to present. Retrieved from www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/families/children.htmlGoogle Scholar
Volk, T., & Atkinson, J. (2008). Is child death the crucible of human evolution? Journal of Social, Evolutionary, & Cultural Psychology, 2, 247–260.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
Walch, S. E., Bernal, D. R., Gibson, L., Murray, L., Thien, S., & Steinnecker, K. (2020). Systematic review of the content and methods of empirical psychological research on LGBTQ and SGM populations in the new millennium. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 7(4), 433–454.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
Weatherhead, P. J., & Robertson, R. J. (1979). Offspring quality and the polygyny threshold: “The sexy son hypothesis”. The American Naturalist, 113(2), 201–208.Google Scholar
Wentland, J. J., & Reissing, E. D. (2011). Taking casual sex not too casually: Exploring definitions of casual sexual relationships. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 20(3), 75–91.Google Scholar
Whyte, S., & Torgler, B. (2015). Selection criteria in the search for a sperm donor: Behavioural traits versus physical appearance. Journal of Bioeconomics, 17(2), 151–171.Google Scholar
Whyte, S., Torgler, B., & Harrison, K. L. (2016). What women want in their sperm donor: A study of more than 1000 women’s sperm donor selections. Economics & Human Biology, 23, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, G. D., Cousins, J. M., & Fink, B. (2006). The CQ as a predictor of speed-date outcomes. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 21(2), 163–169.Google Scholar
Wincenciak, J., Fincher, C. L., Fisher, C. I., Hahn, A. C., Jones, B. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2015). Mate choice, mate preference, and biological markets: The relationship between partner choice and health preference is modulated by women’s own attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36(4), 274–278.Google Scholar
World Economic Forum. (2020). Global Gender Gap Report 2020. Retrieved from www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2020.pdfGoogle Scholar
Wood, B. M., & Marlowe, F. W. (2013). Household and kin provisioning by Hadza men. Human Nature, 24(3), 280–317.Google Scholar
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 699–727.Google Scholar
Zeifman, D. M., & Ma, J. E. (2013). Experimental examination of women’s selection criteria for sperm donors versus life partners. Personal Relationships, 20(2), 311–327.Google Scholar
Zengel, B., Edlund, J. E., & Sagarin, B. J. (2013). Sex differences in jealousy in response to infidelity: Evaluation of demographic moderators in a national random sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(1), 47–51.Google Scholar
Zentner, M., & Eagly, A. H. (2015). A sociocultural framework for understanding partner preferences of women and men: Integration of concepts and evidence. European Review of Social Psychology, 26(1), 328–373.Google Scholar
Zhang, L., Lee, A. J., DeBruine, L. M., & Jones, B. C. (2019). Are sex differences in preferences for physical attractiveness and good earning capacity in potential mates smaller in countries with greater gender equality? Evolutionary Psychology. doi:10.1177/1474704919852921Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

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

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

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

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

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

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

Available formats
×