Women's Preferences for Strong Men Under Perceived Harsh Versus Safe Ecological Conditions.

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Evolutionary Psychology Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1177/14747049211032351
Ray Garza, Farid Pazhoohi, Jennifer Byrd-Craven
{"title":"Women's Preferences for Strong Men Under Perceived Harsh Versus Safe Ecological Conditions.","authors":"Ray Garza,&nbsp;Farid Pazhoohi,&nbsp;Jennifer Byrd-Craven","doi":"10.1177/14747049211032351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ecological conditions provide information about available resources for one's environment. In humans, this has been shown to influence reproductive behavior, as individuals may engage in trade-offs between partner quality and investment. For instance, many women may trade-off preferences for men with physical features indicative of social dominance and health over physical features indicative of commitment and investment. The current study explored women's preferences for formidable men under safe vs. harsh ecological conditions. Across three studies, U.S. university women (<i>N</i> = 1,098) were randomly assigned to a perceived harsh or safe ecological condition. They were asked to rate the attractiveness of men's body types (i.e., muscular vs. less muscular). Findings revealed that in general, women rated stronger men as more attractive than weaker men irrespective of the ecological condition. Evidence for preference as a function of ecology appeared only when a two-alternative forced-choice task was used (Study 3), but not in rating tasks (Studies 1 and 2). Study 3 showed that women had a relatively stronger preference for stronger men for short-term relationships in a resource scarce ecological condition. This research provides some evidence that perceived ecological conditions can drive women's preferences for men with enhanced secondary sex characteristics as a function of mating context. These findings are consistent with previous research indicating the importance of physical characteristics in men's attractiveness, and it adds to the existing literature on ecological factors and mating preferences.</p>","PeriodicalId":47499,"journal":{"name":"Evolutionary Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14747049211032351","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evolutionary Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049211032351","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Ecological conditions provide information about available resources for one's environment. In humans, this has been shown to influence reproductive behavior, as individuals may engage in trade-offs between partner quality and investment. For instance, many women may trade-off preferences for men with physical features indicative of social dominance and health over physical features indicative of commitment and investment. The current study explored women's preferences for formidable men under safe vs. harsh ecological conditions. Across three studies, U.S. university women (N = 1,098) were randomly assigned to a perceived harsh or safe ecological condition. They were asked to rate the attractiveness of men's body types (i.e., muscular vs. less muscular). Findings revealed that in general, women rated stronger men as more attractive than weaker men irrespective of the ecological condition. Evidence for preference as a function of ecology appeared only when a two-alternative forced-choice task was used (Study 3), but not in rating tasks (Studies 1 and 2). Study 3 showed that women had a relatively stronger preference for stronger men for short-term relationships in a resource scarce ecological condition. This research provides some evidence that perceived ecological conditions can drive women's preferences for men with enhanced secondary sex characteristics as a function of mating context. These findings are consistent with previous research indicating the importance of physical characteristics in men's attractiveness, and it adds to the existing literature on ecological factors and mating preferences.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在严酷与安全的生态条件下,女性对强壮男性的偏好。
生态条件提供了一个环境中可用资源的信息。在人类中,这已被证明会影响生殖行为,因为个体可能会在伴侣质量和投资之间进行权衡。例如,许多妇女可能会权衡对具有社会支配地位和健康特征的男子的偏好,而不是具有承诺和投资特征的男子。目前的研究探讨了女性在安全与恶劣的生态条件下对强大男性的偏好。在三项研究中,美国大学女性(N = 1098)被随机分配到一个环境恶劣或安全的环境中。他们被要求评价男性体型的吸引力(即肌肉发达与肌肉不足)。研究结果显示,总的来说,无论生态环境如何,女性都认为强壮的男性比弱小的男性更有吸引力。偏好作为生态功能的证据仅在使用两种选择的强迫选择任务时出现(研究3),但在评级任务中没有出现(研究1和2)。研究3表明,在资源稀缺的生态条件下,女性对短期关系中较强的男性有相对更强的偏好。这项研究提供了一些证据,表明感知到的生态条件可以作为交配环境的功能,驱动女性对第二性征增强的男性的偏好。这些发现与先前的研究一致,表明身体特征对男性吸引力的重要性,并且它增加了关于生态因素和交配偏好的现有文献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Evolutionary Psychology
Evolutionary Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
22
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evolutionary Psychology is an open-access peer-reviewed journal that aims to foster communication between experimental and theoretical work on the one hand and historical, conceptual and interdisciplinary writings across the whole range of the biological and human sciences on the other.
期刊最新文献
The Role of Intrasexual Competition and the Big 5 in the Perpetration of Digital Dating Abuse. The Relation Between War, Starvation, and Fertility Ideals in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Life History Perspective. Jealousy as Predicted by Allocation and Reception of Resources in an Economic Game. Sex Differences in the Etiology of Victimization in Adulthood. Paternal Filicide in Sweden: Background, Risk Factors and the Cinderella Effect.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1