Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T08:00:46.444Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Attachment and sexual strategies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Lane E. Volpe  and
Robert A. Barton
Lane E. Volpe
Affiliation:
Medical Anthropology and Evolutionary Anthropology Research Groups, Anthropology Department, Durham University, Durham, DH1 3HN, United Kingdom. l.e.volpe@durham.ac.ukhttp://www.dur.ac.uk/anthropology/r.a.barton@durham.ac.ukhttp://www.dur.ac.uk/anthropology/staff/profile/?id=122
Robert A. Barton
Affiliation:
Medical Anthropology and Evolutionary Anthropology Research Groups, Anthropology Department, Durham University, Durham, DH1 3HN, United Kingdom. l.e.volpe@durham.ac.ukhttp://www.dur.ac.uk/anthropology/r.a.barton@durham.ac.ukhttp://www.dur.ac.uk/anthropology/staff/profile/?id=122
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sexual behaviour and mate choice are key intervening variables between attachment and life histories. We propose a set of predictions relating attachment, reproductive strategies, and mate choice criteria.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 43 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

Boothroyd, L. G., Jones, B. C., Burt, D. M., DeBruine, L. M. & Perrett, D. I. (2008) Facial correlates of sociosexuality. Evolution and Human Behavior 29:211–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feinberg, D. R., Jones, B. C., Law-Smith, M. J., Moore, F. R., DeBruine, L. M., Cornwell, R. E., Hillier, S. G. & Perrett, D. I. (2006) Menstrual cycle, trait estrogen level, and masculinity preferences in the human voice. Hormones and Behavior 49:215–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gangestad, S. W. & Simpson, J. A. (2000) The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23:573–87; discussion 597–644.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gangestad, S. W. & Thornhill, R. (2008) Human oestrus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B (Biological Sciences) 275:991–1000.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., Penton-Voak, I. S., Burt, D. M. & Perrett, D. I. (2002) Partnership status and the temporal context of relationships influence human female preferences for sexual dimorphism in male face shape. Proceedings of the Royal Society B (Biological Sciences) 269:1095–1100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Little, A. C. & Mannion, H. (2006) Viewing attractive or unattractive same-sex individuals changes self-rated attractiveness and face preferences in women. Animal Behaviour 72:981–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penton-Voak, I. S., Jacobson, A. & Trivers, R. (2004) Populational differences in attractiveness judgements of male and female faces: Comparing British and Jamaican samples. Evolution and Human Behavior 25:355–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., Castles, D. L., Kobayashi, T., Burt, D. M., Murray, L. K. & Minamisawa, R. (1999) Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature 399:741–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Provost, M. P., Troje, N. F. & Quinsey, V. L. (2008) Short-term mating strategies and attraction to masculinity in point-light walkers. Evolution and Human Behavior 29:65–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar