Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 28, Issue 2 , Pages 118-123 , March 2007

Overestimation bias in mate competition

  • Sarah E. Hill

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station A8000, Austin, TX 78712, USA. Tel.: +1 512 417 5714.

Received 20 April 2006 ,Revised 14 August 2006 ,Accepted 21 August 2006.

References 

  1. Alley TR. Social and applied aspects of perceiving faces. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1988;
  2. Berry DS. Accuracy in face perception: A view from ecological psychology. Journal of Personality. 1993;61:497–520
  3. Burriss RP, Little AC. Effects of partner conception risk phase on male perception of dominance in faces. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2006;27:297–305
  4. Buss DM. From vigilance to violence: Tactics of mate retention in American undergraduates. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1988;9:291–317
  5. Buss DM. The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1988;54:616–628
  6. Buss DM. Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses testing in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1989;12:1–49
  7. Buss DM. Evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York: Basic Books; 1994/2003;
  8. Buss DM. The dangerous passion: Why jealousy is as necessary as love and sex. New York: The Free Press; 2000;
  9. Buss DM, Dedden LA. Derogation of competitors. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 1990;7:395–422
  10. Buss DM, Larsen RJ, Westen D, Semmelroth J. Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psychology. Psychological Science. 1992;3:251
  11. Buss DM, Schmitt DP. Strategic self-promotion and competition derogation: Sex and conflict effects on perceived effectiveness of mate attraction tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996;70:1185–1204
  12. Buss DM, Shackelford TK. From vigilance to violence: Mate retention in married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1997;72:346–361
  13. Buunk BP, Dijkstra P, Fetchenhauer D, Kenrick DT. Age and gender differences in mate selection criteria for various involvement levels. Personal Relationships. 2002;9:271–278
  14. Cosmides L, Tooby J. Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty. Cognition. 1996;58:1–73
  15. Cunningham MR, Barbee AP, Pike CL. What do women want? Facial metric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1990;59:61–72
  16. Daly M, Wilson M, Weghorst SJ. Male sexual jealousy. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1982;3:11–27
  17. Dunning D, Heath C, Suls JM. Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2004;5:69–106
  18. Fisher ML. Female intrasexual competition decreases female facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B Suppl. 2004;271:S283–S285
  19. Gutierres SE, Kenrick DT, Partch JJ. Beauty, dominance, and the mating game: Contrast effects in self-assessment reflect gender differences in mate selection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1999;25:1126–1134
  20. Haselton MG, Buss DM. Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000;78:81–90
  21. Hill SE, Reeve HK. Mating games: The evolution of human mating transactions. Behavioral Ecology. 2004;15:748–756
  22. Kenrick DT, Gutierres SE. Contrast effects and judgments of physical attractiveness: When beauty becomes a social problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1980;38:131–140
  23. Kenrick DT, Li NP, Butner J. Dynamical evolutionary psychology: Individual decision rules and emergent social norms. Psychological Review. 2003;110:3–28
  24. Kenrick DT, Montello DR, Gutierres SE, Trost MR. Effects of physical attractiveness on affect and perceptual judgments: When social comparison overrides social reinforcement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1993;19:195–199
  25. Kenrick DT, Neuberg SL, Zierk KL, Krones JM. Evolution and social cognition: Contrast effects as functions of sex, dominance, and physical attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1994;20:210–217
  26. Mathes EW, Brennan SM, Haugen PM, Rice HB. Ratings of physical attractiveness as a function of age. Journal of Social Psychology. 1985;125:157–168
  27. Nesse RM, Williams GC. Evolution and the origins of disease. Scientific American. 1998;11:86–93
  28. Symons D. The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press; 1979;
  29. Tomarken AJ, Mineka S, Cook M. Fear-relevant selective associations and covariation bias. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 1989;98:381–394
  30. Trivers R. Parental investment and sexual selection. In:  Campbell B editors. Sexual selection and the descent of man: 1871–1971. Chicago: Aldin; 1972;p. 136–179
  31. Wiley RH. Errors, exaggeration, and deception in animal communication. In:  Real L editors. Behavioral mechanisms in ecology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1994;p. 157–189

PII: S1090-5138(06)00074-2

doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.08.006

Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 28, Issue 2 , Pages 118-123 , March 2007

Article Tools