RELATIONSHIPS
Evolutionary explanations for partner preferences
Sexual selection
Sexual selection: an evolutionary explanation of partner preference. Attributes or behaviours
that increase reproductive success are passed on and may become exaggerated over
succeeding generations of offspring.
-females who select males with characteristics showing genetic fitness are more likely to
produce robust offspring and therefore the preference is perpetuated in future generations.
-other characteristics such as aggression are adaptive as they provide an advantage for a
male over competitors for reproductive rights.
Anisogamy
-the basis of human reproductive behaviour is anisogamy, which refers to the differences
between male and female sex cells.
-male gametes are small, highly mobile, created continuously in vast numbers and do not
need much energy to be produced.
-female gametes are large, static, produced at intervals for a limited number of fertile years
and require a significant investment of energy.
-one consequence of anisogamy is that there is no shortage of fertile males, but a fertile
female is much rarer.
-anisogamy gives rise to 2 types of sexual selection.
Inter-sexual selection
-between the sexes; strategies that males use to select females or females use to select
males. Inter-sexual selection is the preferred strategy of the female, quality over quantity.
-Trivers pointed out that the female makes a greater investment of time, commitment and
other resources before, during, and after the birth of her offspring. Both sexes are choosy
partners but the consequences of making a wrong partner choice are more serious for the
female, so it pays for her to be especially selective.
-It is this female preference which determines which features are passed onto the offspring;
runway process e.g., if being tall is attractive, more tall men will reproduce and more
generations of tall men will appear.
-Fisher developed a sexy sons hypothesis- the genes we see today are those that enhanced
reproductive success. A female who mates with a male who has a certain characteristic will
then have sons who inherit this ‘sexy’ trait, and her sons are also more likely to be selected
by successive generations of females. Therefore, the preference for this ‘sexy’ trait is
perpetuated.
Intra-sexual selection
-within each sex; strategies between males to be the one that is selected. The preferred
strategy of the male, quantity over quality.
-competition between males to be selected to mate with a female. The winner of the
competition reproduces and therefore the characteristics that contributed to his victory may
be passed onto his offspring.
-this strategy has given rise to dimorphism (two forms); males and females end up looking
very different due to intra-sexual selection, e.g., in any physical competition between males,
,size matters. Larger males have an advantage and are therefore more likely to be
reproductively successful.
-in females, youthfulness is selected because males have a preference to mate with younger,
more fertile women (e.g., 0.7 waist to hip ratio).
-intra-sexual selection also has behavioural consequences, although these are controversial.
For example, males may benefit from behaving aggressively in order to acquire fertile
females and protect them from competing males, which leads to the selection of
aggressiveness in males.
+RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR INTER-SEXUAL SELECTION
Clarke and Hatfield sent male and female psychology students out across a uni campus, and
they approached other students individually with the question: ‘I have been noticing you
around campus. I find you to be very attractive. Would you go to bed with me tonight?’. Not
a single female student agreed to the request, while 75% of males did, immediately,
supporting the view that females are choosier than males when it comes to selecting sexual
partners. ALPHA BIAS?!
C/A: The argument that one strategy is adaptive for all males, and another is adaptive for all
females is simplistic. At the very least it appears that strategies differ according to the length
of the relationship. Buss and Schmitt argue that both males and females adopt similar
mating strategies when seeking long-term relationships. Both sexes are choosy and look for
partners who are loving, loyal, and kind.
+RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR INTRA-SEXUAL SELECTION
Buss carried out a survey of over 10,000 adults in 33 countries, asking questions relating to a
variety of attributes that evolutionary theory predicts are important in partner preference.
He found that females placed greater value on resource related characteristics than males
did, such as good financial prospects and ambition. Males valued physical attractiveness and
youth more than females did, reflecting consistent sex differences in partner preferences
and support the predictions from sexual selection theory. ALPHA BIAS?!
-SOCIAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES UNDERESTIMATED
Partner preferences over the past century have undoubtedly been influenced by rapidly
changing social norms of behaviour, which develop mush faster than evolutionary timescales
imply and have instead come about due to cultural factors. Women’s greater role in the
workplace means they are no longer dependent on men to provide for them. Bereczkei et al
argue that this social change has consequences for women’s mate preferences, which may
no longer be resource oriented. LOW CULTURAL AND TEMPORAL VALIDITY (alternatives to
sexual selection: egg freezing, sperm donors, delaying childbirth).
-SEXUAL SELECTION AND HOMOSEXUALITY
The sexual selection theory cannot explain partner preferences of gay men and lesbian
women, because in homosexual relationships, partners are not assessing genetic fitness.
Lawson et al looked at ‘personal ads’ placed by hetero/homosexual men and women, and
they found that the preferences of homosexual men and women differ just as they do in
heterosexual men and women, so maybe the differences are overexaggerated.
, Factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships: Self-disclosure
Self-disclosure
: revealing personal information about yourself. Romantic partners reveal more about their
true selves as their relationship develops. These self-disclosures about one’s deepest
thoughts and feelings can strengthen a romantic bond when used appropriately.
-by revealing ourselves to another person, we share our likes and dislikes, hopes and fears
etc.
-self-disclosure has a vital role beyond just initial attraction. Used wisely and effectively, it
can really help the course of true love run smoother.
-Sprecher found that disclosure of personal disappointments and accomplishments and info
about previous sexual relationships have a greater influence on relationship satisfaction than
more ‘neutral’ types of self-disclosure.
Social penetration theory
-Altman and Taylor’s theory of how relationships develop
-gradual process of revealing inner thoughts, reciprocal exchange of information between
intimate partners.
-when one partner reveals personal information, they signal a sense of trust. Then the other
goes onto reveal sensitive info. As they increasingly disclose more and more, romantic
partners ‘penetrate’ more deeply into each other’s lives and gain a greater understanding of
each other.
Breadth and depth of self-disclosure
-as both of these increase, romantic partners become more committed to each other.
-the researchers use the metaphor of the many layers of an onion to illustrate this process.
We disclose a lot about ourselves at the start of a relationship, but what we reveal is
superficial, mostly ‘on the surface’ -type of ‘low-risk’ info we would reveal to friends, co-
workers, even acquaintances.
-breadth of disclosure is narrow as many topics are ‘off-limits’ in the early stage of a
relationship. If we reveal too much too soon, we may get the response TMI!
-as a relationship develops, self-disclosure becomes deeper, progressively removing more
layers to reveal our true selves and encompassing a wider range of topics, especially those
that matter most to us. Eventually we are prepared to reveal intimate, high-risk info.
-Altman and Taylor used the term ‘depenetration’ to describe how dissatisfied partners self-
disclose less as they gradually disengage from the relationship.
-when people reveal more about themselves earlier than in a face-to-face interaction,
relationships get very intense very quickly (boom). Because the underlying trust and true
knowledge about the person is not there or gradual, it becomes difficult to sustain the
relationship (bust)- AKA the boom and bust phenomenon suggested by Cooper and
Sportolari.
Reciprocity of self-disclosure
-Reis and Shaver point out that, for a relationship to develop, as well as an increase in
breadth and depth, there needs to be a reciprocal element to disclosure.
-once you disclose something revealing your true self, hopefully your partner responds in a
rewarding way, with empathy and also their own intimate thoughts and feelings.
Evolutionary explanations for partner preferences
Sexual selection
Sexual selection: an evolutionary explanation of partner preference. Attributes or behaviours
that increase reproductive success are passed on and may become exaggerated over
succeeding generations of offspring.
-females who select males with characteristics showing genetic fitness are more likely to
produce robust offspring and therefore the preference is perpetuated in future generations.
-other characteristics such as aggression are adaptive as they provide an advantage for a
male over competitors for reproductive rights.
Anisogamy
-the basis of human reproductive behaviour is anisogamy, which refers to the differences
between male and female sex cells.
-male gametes are small, highly mobile, created continuously in vast numbers and do not
need much energy to be produced.
-female gametes are large, static, produced at intervals for a limited number of fertile years
and require a significant investment of energy.
-one consequence of anisogamy is that there is no shortage of fertile males, but a fertile
female is much rarer.
-anisogamy gives rise to 2 types of sexual selection.
Inter-sexual selection
-between the sexes; strategies that males use to select females or females use to select
males. Inter-sexual selection is the preferred strategy of the female, quality over quantity.
-Trivers pointed out that the female makes a greater investment of time, commitment and
other resources before, during, and after the birth of her offspring. Both sexes are choosy
partners but the consequences of making a wrong partner choice are more serious for the
female, so it pays for her to be especially selective.
-It is this female preference which determines which features are passed onto the offspring;
runway process e.g., if being tall is attractive, more tall men will reproduce and more
generations of tall men will appear.
-Fisher developed a sexy sons hypothesis- the genes we see today are those that enhanced
reproductive success. A female who mates with a male who has a certain characteristic will
then have sons who inherit this ‘sexy’ trait, and her sons are also more likely to be selected
by successive generations of females. Therefore, the preference for this ‘sexy’ trait is
perpetuated.
Intra-sexual selection
-within each sex; strategies between males to be the one that is selected. The preferred
strategy of the male, quantity over quality.
-competition between males to be selected to mate with a female. The winner of the
competition reproduces and therefore the characteristics that contributed to his victory may
be passed onto his offspring.
-this strategy has given rise to dimorphism (two forms); males and females end up looking
very different due to intra-sexual selection, e.g., in any physical competition between males,
,size matters. Larger males have an advantage and are therefore more likely to be
reproductively successful.
-in females, youthfulness is selected because males have a preference to mate with younger,
more fertile women (e.g., 0.7 waist to hip ratio).
-intra-sexual selection also has behavioural consequences, although these are controversial.
For example, males may benefit from behaving aggressively in order to acquire fertile
females and protect them from competing males, which leads to the selection of
aggressiveness in males.
+RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR INTER-SEXUAL SELECTION
Clarke and Hatfield sent male and female psychology students out across a uni campus, and
they approached other students individually with the question: ‘I have been noticing you
around campus. I find you to be very attractive. Would you go to bed with me tonight?’. Not
a single female student agreed to the request, while 75% of males did, immediately,
supporting the view that females are choosier than males when it comes to selecting sexual
partners. ALPHA BIAS?!
C/A: The argument that one strategy is adaptive for all males, and another is adaptive for all
females is simplistic. At the very least it appears that strategies differ according to the length
of the relationship. Buss and Schmitt argue that both males and females adopt similar
mating strategies when seeking long-term relationships. Both sexes are choosy and look for
partners who are loving, loyal, and kind.
+RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR INTRA-SEXUAL SELECTION
Buss carried out a survey of over 10,000 adults in 33 countries, asking questions relating to a
variety of attributes that evolutionary theory predicts are important in partner preference.
He found that females placed greater value on resource related characteristics than males
did, such as good financial prospects and ambition. Males valued physical attractiveness and
youth more than females did, reflecting consistent sex differences in partner preferences
and support the predictions from sexual selection theory. ALPHA BIAS?!
-SOCIAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES UNDERESTIMATED
Partner preferences over the past century have undoubtedly been influenced by rapidly
changing social norms of behaviour, which develop mush faster than evolutionary timescales
imply and have instead come about due to cultural factors. Women’s greater role in the
workplace means they are no longer dependent on men to provide for them. Bereczkei et al
argue that this social change has consequences for women’s mate preferences, which may
no longer be resource oriented. LOW CULTURAL AND TEMPORAL VALIDITY (alternatives to
sexual selection: egg freezing, sperm donors, delaying childbirth).
-SEXUAL SELECTION AND HOMOSEXUALITY
The sexual selection theory cannot explain partner preferences of gay men and lesbian
women, because in homosexual relationships, partners are not assessing genetic fitness.
Lawson et al looked at ‘personal ads’ placed by hetero/homosexual men and women, and
they found that the preferences of homosexual men and women differ just as they do in
heterosexual men and women, so maybe the differences are overexaggerated.
, Factors affecting attraction in romantic relationships: Self-disclosure
Self-disclosure
: revealing personal information about yourself. Romantic partners reveal more about their
true selves as their relationship develops. These self-disclosures about one’s deepest
thoughts and feelings can strengthen a romantic bond when used appropriately.
-by revealing ourselves to another person, we share our likes and dislikes, hopes and fears
etc.
-self-disclosure has a vital role beyond just initial attraction. Used wisely and effectively, it
can really help the course of true love run smoother.
-Sprecher found that disclosure of personal disappointments and accomplishments and info
about previous sexual relationships have a greater influence on relationship satisfaction than
more ‘neutral’ types of self-disclosure.
Social penetration theory
-Altman and Taylor’s theory of how relationships develop
-gradual process of revealing inner thoughts, reciprocal exchange of information between
intimate partners.
-when one partner reveals personal information, they signal a sense of trust. Then the other
goes onto reveal sensitive info. As they increasingly disclose more and more, romantic
partners ‘penetrate’ more deeply into each other’s lives and gain a greater understanding of
each other.
Breadth and depth of self-disclosure
-as both of these increase, romantic partners become more committed to each other.
-the researchers use the metaphor of the many layers of an onion to illustrate this process.
We disclose a lot about ourselves at the start of a relationship, but what we reveal is
superficial, mostly ‘on the surface’ -type of ‘low-risk’ info we would reveal to friends, co-
workers, even acquaintances.
-breadth of disclosure is narrow as many topics are ‘off-limits’ in the early stage of a
relationship. If we reveal too much too soon, we may get the response TMI!
-as a relationship develops, self-disclosure becomes deeper, progressively removing more
layers to reveal our true selves and encompassing a wider range of topics, especially those
that matter most to us. Eventually we are prepared to reveal intimate, high-risk info.
-Altman and Taylor used the term ‘depenetration’ to describe how dissatisfied partners self-
disclose less as they gradually disengage from the relationship.
-when people reveal more about themselves earlier than in a face-to-face interaction,
relationships get very intense very quickly (boom). Because the underlying trust and true
knowledge about the person is not there or gradual, it becomes difficult to sustain the
relationship (bust)- AKA the boom and bust phenomenon suggested by Cooper and
Sportolari.
Reciprocity of self-disclosure
-Reis and Shaver point out that, for a relationship to develop, as well as an increase in
breadth and depth, there needs to be a reciprocal element to disclosure.
-once you disclose something revealing your true self, hopefully your partner responds in a
rewarding way, with empathy and also their own intimate thoughts and feelings.
