Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 28, Issue 6 , Pages 382-391 , November 2007

The structure and measurement of human mating strategies: toward a multidimensional model of sociosexuality

  • Jenée James Jackson

      Affiliations

    • University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Family Studies and Human Development, University of Arizona, PO Box 210033, Tucson, AZ 85721-0033, USA. Tel.: +1 520 621 5884.
    • ,
  • Lee A. Kirkpatrick

      Affiliations

    • College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA, USA

Received 7 November 2005 ,Accepted 18 April 2007.

References 

  1. Bailey JM, Gaulin S, Agyei Y, Gladue BA. Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionarily relevant aspects of human mating psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1994;66:1081–1093
  2. Barber N. The role of reproductive strategies in academic attainment. Sex Roles. 1998;38:313–323
  3. Brase GL, Walker G. Male sexual strategies modify ratings of female models with specific waist-to-hip ratios. Human Nature. 2004;15:209–224
  4. Brennan KA, Clark CL, Shaver PR. Self-report measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In:  Simpson JA,  Rholes WS editor. Attachment theory and close relationships. New York: Guilford Press; 1998;p. 46–76
  5. Brennan KA, Shaver PR. Dimensions of adult attachment, affect regulation, and romantic relationship functioning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1995;21:267–283
  6. Buss DM. Sexual strategies theory: Historical origins and current status. Journal of Sex Research. 1998;35:19–34
  7. Buss DM. Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 1999;
  8. Buss DM, Schmitt DP. Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review. 1993;100:204–232
  9. Cattell RB. The scree test for number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1966;1:245–276
  10. Clark AP. Self-perceived attractiveness and masculinization predict women's sociosexuality. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2004;25:113–124
  11. Finch JF, West SG. The investigation of personality structure: Statistical models. Journal of Research in Personality. 1997;31:439–485
  12. Fisher HE. Evolution of serial pairbonding. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 1989;78:331–354
  13. Fisher HE. Lust, attraction, and attachment in mammalian reproduction. Human Nature. 1998;9:23–52
  14. Gangestad SW, Simpson JA. Toward an evolutionary history of female sociosexual variation. Journal of Personality. 1990;58:69–96
  15. Gangestad SW, Simpson JA. The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2000;23:573–587
  16. Greiling H, Buss DM. Women's sexual strategies: The hidden dimension of extra-pair mating. Personality and Individual Differences. 2000;28:929–963
  17. Havlicek J, Roberts SC, Flegr J. Women's preference for dominant male odour: Effects of menstrual cycle and relationship status. Biology Letters. 2005;1:256–259
  18. Hazan C, Shaver P. Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987;52:511–524
  19. Hirsch LR, Paul L. Human male mating strategies: Courtship tactics of the quality and quantity alternatives. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1996;17:55–70
  20. Hoier S. Father absence and age at menarche: A test of four evolutionary models. Human Nature. 2003;14:209–233
  21. Kirkpatrick LA. Evolution, pair-bonding, and reproductive strategies: A reconceptualization of adult attachment. In:  Simpson JA,  Rholes WS editor. Attachment theory and close relationships. New York: Guilford Press; 1998;p. 353–393
  22. Klusmann D. Sexual motivation and the duration of partnership. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 2002;31:275–287
  23. Lalumiere, M. L., Seto, M. C., & Quinsey, V. L. (1995). Self-perceived mating success and the mating desires of human males and females. Unpublished manuscript.
  24. Lancaster JB, Kaplan H. Human mating and family formation strategies: The effects of variability among males in quality and the allocation of mating effort and parental investment. In:  Nishida T,  McGrew WC,  Marler P,  Pickford M,  deWaal FBM editor. Topics in primatology. Human origins. Vol. 1:Tokyo: University Tokyo Press; 1994;p. 21–33
  25. Landolt MA, Lalumiere ML, Quinsey VL. Sex differences in intra-sex variations in human mating tactics: An evolutionary approach. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1995;16:3–23
  26. Li NP, Bailey JM, Kenrick DT, Linsenmeier JAW. The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. 2002;82:947–955
  27. Little AC, Jones BC, Penton-Voak IS, Burt DM, Perrett DI. Partnership status and the temporal context of relationships influence human female preferences for sexual dimorphism in male face shape. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B. 2002;269:1095–1100
  28. Michalski RL, Shackelford TK. Birth order and sexual strategy. Personality and Individual Differences. 2002;33:661–667
  29. Mikach SM, Bailey JM. What distinguishes women with unusually high numbers of sex partners?. Evolution and Human Behavior. 1999;20:141–150
  30. Ostovich JM, Sabini J. How are sociosexuality, sex drive, and lifetime number of sexual partners related?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2004;30:1255–1266
  31. Penton-Voak IS, Perrett DI, Castles DL, Kobayashi T, Burt DM, Murray LK, et al. Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature. 1999;399:741–742
  32. Regan PC. What if you can't get what you want? Willingness to compromise ideal mate selection standards as a function of sex, mate value, and relationship context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1998;24:1294–1303
  33. Reise SK, Wright TM. Personality traits, cluster B personality disorders, and sociosexuality. Journal of Research in Personality. 1996;30:128–136
  34. Salmon C. Birth order and relationships: Family, friends, and sexual partners. Human Nature. 2003;14:73–88
  35. Schmitt DP, Shackelford TK, Duntley J, Tooke W, Buss DM. The desire for sexual variety as a key to understanding basic human mating strategies. Personal Relationships. 2001;8:425–455
  36. Simpson JA, Gangestad SW. Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1991;60:870–883
  37. Simpson JA, Gangestad SW. Sociosexuality and romantic partner choice. Journal of Personality. 1992;60:31–51
  38. Symons D. A critique of Darwinian anthropology. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1989;10:131–144
  39. Tooby J, Cosmides L. The past explains the present: Emotional adaptations and the structure of ancestral environments. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1990;11:375–424
  40. Townsend JM. Sexuality and partner selection: Sex differences among college students. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1993;14:305–330
  41. Townsend JM. Sex without emotional involvement: An evolutionary interpretation of sex differences. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1995;24:173–206
  42. Townsend JM, Kline K, Wasserman TH. Low-investment copulation: Sex differences in motivations and emotional reactions. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1995;16:25–51
  43. Trivers RL. Parental investment and sexual selection. In:  Campbell B editors. Sexual selection and the descent of man. Chicago: Aldine; 1972;p. 136–179
  44. Webster, G. D., & Bryan, A. (in press). Sociosexual attitudes and behaviors: Why two factors are better than one. Journal of Research in Personality.
  45. Wiederman MW, Dubois SL. Evolution and sex differences in preferences for short-term mates: Results from a policy capturing study. Evolution and Human Behavior. 1998;19:153–170
  46. Zeifman D, Hazan C. Attachment: The bond in pair-bonds. In:  Simpson J,  Kenrick DT editor. Evolutionary social psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1997;p. 237–263

PII: S1090-5138(07)00043-8

doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.04.005

Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 28, Issue 6 , Pages 382-391 , November 2007

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution