Sexual Selection

doi:10.1017/9781108943529.004

2 - Sexual Selection

from Part I - Foundations of Evolution

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 June 2022

Mohammad Atari

Edited by

Todd K. Shackelford

Show author details

Todd K. Shackelford: Affiliation:
Oakland University, Michigan

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Darwin found that many animals had characteristics that were difficult to explain in terms of natural selection (i.e., the gradual process in which organisms better adapted to their environment survive and reproduce more successfully over sufficiently long time periods). He proposed a new selective force, sexual selection, which refers to the process generated by differential sexual access to opposite-sex mates. The process of sexual selection, in its classic conceptualization, consisted of two components: male–male competition, resulting in built-in weapons, and female choice, resulting in ornaments. Following Darwin, sexual selection is often divided into two forms: (1) intrasexual selection, in which members of one sex, most often males, compete with one another to gain sexual access to opposite-sex mates; and (2) intersexual selection, in which individuals of one sex, most often females, choose among individuals of the opposite sex as mates. The two forms of sexual selection have been investigated in humans across cultures, producing a large body of work on psychological similarities and differences between women and men in the context of mating. Post-mating sexual selection and its effect on sexual psychology have also gained increasing research attention in the last two decades. Two post-mating strategies in sexual selection are discussed: sperm competition (the competition between the sperm of two or more males to fertilize the egg(s) of a single female) and mate guarding (behaviors used to maintain reproductive opportunities and sexual access to a mate). Previous applications of sexual selection to sexual psychology and future directions in integration of multiple perspectives in evolutionary social sciences are discussed.

Keywords

sexual selection intrasexual competition mate choice sperm competition mate retention sexual psychology.

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Psychology , pp. 21 - 53

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108943529.004 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2022

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

Alcock, J. (2001). Animal behavior, 7th ed. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.Google Scholar

Andersson, M. (1986). Evolution of condition‐dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: Sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution, 40, 804–816.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Apicella, C. L. (2014). Upper-body strength predicts hunting reputation and reproductive success in Hadza hunter–gatherers. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35, 508–518.Google Scholar

Apicella, C. L., Feinberg, D. R., & Marlowe, F. W. (2007). Voice pitch predicts reproductive success in male hunter-gatherers. Biology Letters, 3, 682–684.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Archer, J. (2009). Does sexual selection explain human sex differences in aggression? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 249–266.Google Scholar

Arnocky, S., & Piché, T. (2014). Cosmetic surgery as intrasexual competition: The mediating role of social comparison. Psychology, 5, 1197–1205.Google Scholar

Arnocky, S., & Vaillancourt, T. (2012). A multi-informant longitudinal study on the relationship between aggression, peer victimization, and adolescent dating status. Evolutionary Psychology, 10, 253–270.Google Scholar

Atari, M. (2017). Assessment of long-term mate preferences in Iran. Evolutionary Psychology, 15, 1474704917702459.Google Scholar

Atari, M., Barbaro, N., Sela, Y., Shackelford, T. K., & Chegeni, R. (2017). Consideration of cosmetic surgery as part of women’s benefit-provisioning mate retention strategy. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1389.Google Scholar

Atari, M., Chaudhary, N., & Al-Shawaf, L. (2020). Mate preferences in three Muslim-majority countries: Sex differences and personality correlates. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11, 533–545.Google Scholar

Atari, M., Graham, J., & Dehghani, M. (2020). Foundations of morality in Iran. Evolution and Human Behavior, 41, 367–384.CrossRef Google Scholar

Atari, M., & Jamali, R. (2016). Dimensions of women’s mate preferences: Validation of a mate preference scale in Iran. Evolutionary Psychology, 14, 1474704916651443.Google Scholar

Atari, M., Lai, M. H., & Dehghani, M. (2020). Sex differences in moral judgements across 67 countries. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 287, 20201201.Google Scholar

Baker, R. R., & Bellis, M. A. (1989). Number of sperm in human ejaculates varies in accordance with sperm competition theory. Animal Behaviour, 37, 867–869.Google Scholar

Balliet, D., Li, N. P., Macfarlan, S. J., & Van Vugt, M. (2011). Sex differences in cooperation: A meta-analytic review of social dilemmas. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 881–909.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bateman, A. J. (1948). Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity, 2, 349–368.Google Scholar

Bellis, M. A., Baker, R. R., & Gage, M. J. G. (1990). Variation in rat ejaculates consistent with the Kamikaze Sperm Hypothesis. Journal of Mammalogy, 71, 479–480.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bergstrom, C. T., & Real, L. A. (2000). Towards a theory of mutual mate choice: Lessons from two-sided matching. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 2, 493–508.Google Scholar

Birkhead, T. R., & Møller, A. P. (1992). Sperm competition in birds. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Bönte, W. (2015). Gender differences in competitive preferences: New cross-country empirical evidence. Applied Economics Letters, 22, 71–75.Google Scholar

Bovet, J. (2019). Evolutionary theories and men’s preferences for women’s waist-to-hip ratio: Which hypotheses remain? A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1221.Google Scholar

Burbank, V. K. (1987). Female aggression in cross-cultural perspective. Behavior Science Research, 21, 70–100.Google Scholar

Buss, D. M. (1988a). From vigilance to violence: Tactics of mate retention in American undergraduates. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 291–317.CrossRef Google Scholar

Buss, D. M. (1988b). The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 616–628.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–14.Google Scholar

Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Buss, D. M. (2007). The evolution of human mating. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 39, 502–512.Google Scholar

Buss, D. M., & Dedden, L. A. (1990). Derogation of competitors. Journal of Personal and Social Relationships, 7, 395–422.Google Scholar

Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.Google Scholar

Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 77–110.Google Scholar

Butovskaya, M., Sorokowska, A., Karwowski, M., Sabiniewicz, A., Fedenok, J., Dronova, D., … & Sorokowski, P. (2017). Waist-to-hip ratio, body-mass index, age and number of children in seven traditional societies. Scientific Reports, 7, 1–9.Google Scholar

Buunk, A. P., & Fisher, M. (2009). Individual differences in intrasexual competition. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 37–48.Google Scholar

Buunk, A. P., Stulp, G., & Ormel, J. (2014). Parental social status and intrasexual competitiveness among adolescents. Evolutionary Psychology, 12, 1022–1037.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Caman, S., Kristiansson, M., Granath, S., & Sturup, J. (2017). Trends in rates and characteristics of intimate partner homicides between 1990 and 2013. Journal of Criminal Justice, 49, 14–21.Google Scholar

Chagnon, N. A. (1988). Life histories, blood revenge, and warfare in a tribal population. Science, 239, 985–992.Google Scholar

Clutton-Brock, T. H., Guinness, F. E., & Albon, S. D. (1982). Red deer: Behavior and ecology of two sexes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Cobey, K. D., Klipping, C., & Buunk, A. P. (2013). Hormonal contraceptive use lowers female intrasexual competition in pair-bonded women. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34, 294–298.CrossRef Google Scholar

Conroy-Beam, D., & Buss, D. M. (2016). Mate preferences. In Weekes-Shackelford, V. & Shackelford, T. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar

Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection. London: John Murray.Google Scholar

Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex (2 vols.). London: John Murray.Google Scholar

Davis, A. C., & Arnocky, S. (2020). An evolutionary perspective on appearance enhancement behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508-020-01745-4Google Scholar

Davis, A. C., Dufort, C., Desrochers, J., Vaillancourt, T., & Arnocky, S. (2018). Gossip as an intrasexual competition strategy: Sex differences in gossip frequency, content, and attitudes. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 4, 141–153.Google Scholar

De Cremer, D., & Van Knippenberg, D. (2004). Leader self-sacrifice and leadership effectiveness: The moderating role of leader self-confidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 95, 140–155.Google Scholar

Dugand, R. J., Tomkins, J. L., & Kennington, W. J. (2019). Molecular evidence supports a genic capture resolution of the lek paradox. Nature Communications, 10, 1–8.Google Scholar

Durkee, P. K., Polo, P., Munoz-Reyes, J. A., Rodríguez-Ruiz, C., Losada-Pérez, M., Fernández-Martínez, A. B., … & Pita, M. (2019). Men’s bodily attractiveness: Muscles as fitness indicators. Evolutionary Psychology, 17, 1474704919852918.Google Scholar

Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1994). Are people prejudiced against women? Some answers from research on attitudes, gender stereotypes, and judgments of competence. European Review of Social Psychology, 5, 1–35.Google Scholar

Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408–423.Google Scholar

Eberhard, W. G. (2009). Postcopulatory sexual selection: Darwin’s omission and its consequences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 10025–10032.Google Scholar

Ellemers, N., Van den Heuvel, H., De Gilder, D., Maass, A., & Bonvini, A. (2004). The underrepresentation of women in science: Differential commitment or the queen bee syndrome? British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 315–338.Google Scholar

Endler, J. A., & McLellan, T. (1988). The processes of evolution: Toward a newer synthesis. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 19, 395–421.Google Scholar

Feinberg, D. R., Jones, B. C., & Armstrong, M. M. (2019). No evidence that men’s voice pitch signals formidability. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 34, 190–192.Google Scholar

Feinberg, D. R., Jones, B. C., Smith, M. L., Moore, F. R., DeBruine, L. M., Cornwell, R. E., … & Perrett, D. I. (2006). Menstrual cycle, trait estrogen level, and masculinity preferences in the human voice. Hormones and Behavior, 49, 215–222.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1930). The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Frederick, D. A., & Haselton, M. G. (2007). Why is muscularity sexy? Tests of the fitness indicator hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1167–1183.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gage, M. J. G. (1994). Associations between body-size, mating pattern, testis size and sperm lengths across butterflies. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 258, 247–254.Google Scholar

Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–587.Google Scholar

Garza, R., Heredia, R. R., & Cieslicka, A. B. (2016). Male and female perception of physical attractiveness: An eye movement study. Evolutionary Psychology, 14, 1474704916631614.Google Scholar

Godin, J. G. J., & McDonough, H. E. (2003). Predator preference for brightly colored males in the guppy: A viability cost for a sexually selected trait. Behavioral Ecology, 14, 194–200.Google Scholar

Goetz, A. T., Shackelford, T. K., Weekes-Shackelford, V. A., Euler, H. A., Hoier, S., Schmitt, D. P., & LaMunyon, C. W. (2005). Mate retention, semen displacement, and human sperm competition: A preliminary investigation of tactics to prevent and correct female infidelity. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 749–763.Google Scholar

Gomendio, M., Harcourt, A. H., & Roldán, E. R. S. (1998). Sperm competition in mammals. In Birkhead, T. R. & Møller, A. P. (Eds.), Sperm competition and sexual selection (pp. 667–756). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Grafen, A. (1990). Biological signals as handicaps. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144, 517–546.Google Scholar

Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2004). Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus, 133, 55–66.Google Scholar

Hamilton, W. D., & Zuk, M. (1982). Heritable true fitness and bright birds: A role for parasites? Science, 218, 384–387.Google Scholar

Harcourt, A. H., Harvey, P. H., Larson, S. G., & Short, R. V. (1981). Testis weight, body weight, and breeding system in primates. Nature, 293, 55–57.Google Scholar

Harris, M., Dunn, M., & Alwyn, T. (2017). Intrasexual competition as a potential influence on anabolic-androgenic steroid use initiation. Journal of Health Psychology, 24, 1210–1220.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Henrich, J. (2015). The secret of our success: How culture is driving human evolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83.Google Scholar

Hinde, R. A. (1973). Nobel recognition for ethology. Nature, 245, 346.Google Scholar

Honarvar, B., Salehi, F., Barfi, R., Asadi, Z., Honarvar, H., Odoomi, N., … & Lankarani, K. B. (2016). Attitudes toward and experience of singles with premarital sex: A population-based study in Shiraz, southern Iran. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 395–402.Google Scholar

Hopcroft, R. L. (2006). Sex, status, and reproductive success in the contemporary United States. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 104–120.Google Scholar

Hosken, D. J., & Ward, P. I. (2001). Experimental evidence for testis size evolution via sperm competition. Ecology Letters, 4, 10–13.Google Scholar

Iredale, W., Van Vugt, M., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2008). Showing off in humans: Male generosity as mate signal. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 386–392.Google Scholar

Irons, W. (1979). Cultural and biological success. In Chagnon, N. A. & Irons, W. (Eds.), Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: An anthropological perspective (pp. 257–272). Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press.Google Scholar

Joensen, G., Lorentsen, E., Sagstad, K. M., Raes, E., Chegeni, R., & Sagoe, D. (2021). Heterosexual women rate perceived anabolic steroid-using men as less attractive for long-term romantic relationships. Journal of Substance Use, 1, 36–39.CrossRef Google Scholar

Johnson, A. M., Mercer, C. H., Erens, B., Copas, A. J., McManus, S., Wellings, K., … & Field, J. (2001). Sexual behaviour in Britain: Partnerships, practices, and HIV risk behaviours. The Lancet, 358, 1835–1842.Google Scholar

Karimi-Malekabadi, F., & Esmaeilinasab, M. (2019). Religiosity, intrasexual rivalry, and mate retention behaviors in Iran. Personality and Individual Differences, 149, 135–140.Google Scholar

Karimi-Malekabadi, F., Ghanbarian, E., Afhami, R., & Chegeni, R. (2019). Theory-driven assessment of intrasexual rivalry. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 5, 286–293.Google Scholar

Kelly, C. D., & Jennions, M. D. (2011). Sexual selection and sperm quantity: Meta-analyses of strategic ejaculation. Biological Reviews, 86, 863–884.Google Scholar

Kilgallon, S. J., & Simmons, L. W. (2005) Image content influences men’s semen quality. Biology Letters, 1, 253–255.Google Scholar

Kirkpatrick, M., & Ryan, M. (1991). The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature, 350, 33–38.Google Scholar

Klindworth, H., & Voland, E. (1995). How did the Krummhörn elite males achieve above-average reproductive success? Human Nature, 6, 221–240.Google Scholar

Kościński, K. (2014). Assessment of waist-to-hip ratio attractiveness in women: An anthropometric analysis of digital silhouettes. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 989–997.Google Scholar

Kruger, D. J., & Fitzgerald, C. J. (2012). Evolutionary perspectives on male–male competition, violence, and homicide. In Shackelford, T. K. & Weekes-Shackelford, V. A. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of evolutionary perspectives on violence, homicide, and war (pp. 153–170). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Leivers, S., Rhodes, G., & Simmons, L. W. (2014). Sperm competition in humans: Mate guarding behavior negatively correlates with ejaculate quality. PLoS One, 9, e108099.Google Scholar

Leivers, S., & Simmons, L. W. (2014). Human sperm competition: Playing a defensive strategy. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 46, 1–44.Google Scholar

Li, N. P., Bailey, J. M., Kenrick, D. T., & Linsenmeier, J. A. W. (2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 947–955.Google Scholar

Li, N. P., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Sex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: What, whether, and why. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 468–489.Google Scholar

Llaurens, V., Raymond, M., & Faurie, C. (2009). Ritual fights and male reproductive success in a human population. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 22, 1854–1859.Google Scholar

Malik, A. H., Ziermann, J. M., & Diogo, R. (2018). An untold story in biology: The historical continuity of evolutionary ideas of Muslim scholars from the 8th century to Darwin’s time. Journal of Biological Education, 52, 3–17.Google Scholar

Mallidis, C., Howard, E. J., & Baker, H. W. G. (1991). Variation of semen quality in normal men. International Journal of Andrology, 14, 99–107.Google Scholar

Manning, A., & Stamp-Dawkins, M. (1998). An introduction to animal behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Marlowe, F. W. (2004). Mate preferences among Hadza hunter-gatherers. Human Nature, 15, 365–376.Google Scholar

Mead, L. S., & Arnold, S. J. (2004). Quantitative genetic models of sexual selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19, 264–271.Google Scholar

Medin, D. L. (2017). Psychological science as a complex system: Report card. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 669–674.Google Scholar

Medin, D., Bennis, W., & Chandler, M. (2010). Culture and the home-field disadvantage. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 708–713.Google Scholar

Miner, E. J., Starratt, V. G., & Shackelford, T. K. (2009). It’s not all about her: Men’s mate value and mate retention. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 214–218.Google Scholar

Mooijman, M., Meindl, P., Oyserman, D., Monterosso, J., Dehghani, M., Doris, J. M., & Graham, J. (2018). Resisting temptation for the good of the group: Binding moral values and the moralization of self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115, 585.Google Scholar

Nakahashi, W. (2017). Cultural sexual selection in monogamous human populations. Royal Society Open Science, 4, 160946.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Newman, L. E., & Higham, J. P. (2019). Intrasexual male competition. In Shackelford, T. & Weekes-Shackelford, V. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar

Oyserman, D. (2017). Culture three ways: Culture and subcultures within countries. Annual Review of Psychology, 68, 435–463.Google Scholar

Parker, G. A. (1970). Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biological Reviews, 45, 525–567.Google Scholar

Parker, G. A. (1982). Why are there so many tiny sperm? Sperm competition and the maintenance of two sexes. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 96, 281–294.Google Scholar

Parker, G. A. (2020). Conceptual developments in sperm competition: A very brief synopsis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375, 20200061.Google Scholar

Parker, G. A., Ball, M. A., Stockley, P., & Gage, M. J. G. (1997). Sperm competition games: A prospective analysis of risk assessment. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 264, 1793–1802.Google Scholar

Pazhoohi, F., Doyle, J. F., Macedo, A. F., & Arantes, J. (2018). Arching the back (lumbar curvature) as a female sexual proceptivity signal: An eye-tracking study. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 4, 158–165.Google Scholar

Pham, M. N., Barbaro, N., Holub, A. M., Holden, C. J., Mogilski, J. K., Lopes, G. S., … & Welling, L. L. (2018). Do men produce higher quality ejaculates when primed with thoughts of partner infidelity? Evolutionary Psychology, 16, 1474704918757551.Google Scholar

Pham, M. N., & Shackelford, T. K. (2013). The relationship between objective sperm competition risk and men’s copulatory interest is moderated by partner’s time spent with other men. Human Nature, 24, 476–485.Google Scholar

Pham, M. N., Shackelford, T. K., Holden, C. J., Zeigler-Hill, V., Hummel, A., & Memering, S. L. (2014). Partner attractiveness moderates the relationship between number of sexual rivals and in pair copulation frequency in humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 128, 328–331.Google Scholar

Pitnick, S., Markow, T. A., & Spicer, G. S. (1995). Delayed male maturity is a cost of producing large sperm in Drosophila. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 92, 10614–10618.Google Scholar

Pitnick, S., Miller, G. T., Reagan, J., & Holland, B. (2001). Males’ evolutionary responses to experimental removal of sexual selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 268, 1071–1080.Google Scholar

Pound, N., & Gage, M. J. G. (2004). Prudent sperm allocation in Rattus Norvegicus: A mammalian model of adaptive ejaculate adjustment. Animal Behaviour, 68, 819–823.Google Scholar

Price, C. S., Dyer, K. A., & Coyne, J. A. (1999). Sperm competition between Drosophila males involves both displacement and incapacitation. Nature, 400, 449–452.Google Scholar

Puts, D. A. (2005). Mating context and menstrual phase affect women’s preferences for male voice pitch. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 388–397.Google Scholar

Puts, D. A., Gaulin, S. J., & Verdolini, K. (2006). Dominance and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in human voice pitch. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 283–296.Google Scholar

Reynolds, T. A. (2021). Our grandmothers’ legacy: Challenges faced by female ancestors leave traces in modern women’s same-sex relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508-020-01768-xGoogle Scholar

Reynolds, T., Baumeister, R. F., & Maner, J. K. (2018). Competitive reputation manipulation: Women strategically transmit social information about romantic rivals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 78, 195–209.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rosvall, K. A. (2011). Intrasexual competition in females: Evidence for sexual selection? Behavioral Ecology, 22, 1131–1140.Google Scholar

Rudman, L. A., & Goodwin, S. A. (2004). Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: Why do women like women more than men like men? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 494–509.Google Scholar

Russell, R., Batres, C., Courrèges, S., Kaminski, G., Soppelsa, F., Morizot, F., & Porcheron, A. (2019). Differential effects of makeup on perceived age. British Journal of Psychology, 110, 87–100.Google Scholar

Ryan, M. J. (1988). Coevolution of sender and receiver: Effect on local mate preference in cricket frogs. Science, 240, 1786.Google Scholar

Sell, A., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., Sznycer, D., von Rueden, C., & Gurven, M. (2009). Human adaptations for the visual assessment of strength and fighting ability from the body and face. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 276, 575–584.Google Scholar

Shackelford, T. K. (2005). An evolutionary psychological perspective on cultures of honor. Evolutionary Psychology, 3, 147470490500300126.Google Scholar

Shackelford, T. K., & Goetz, A. T. (2007). Adaptation to sperm competition in humans. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 47–50.Google Scholar

Shackelford, T. K., LeBlanc, G. J., Weekes-Shackelford, V. A., Bleske-Rechek, A. L., Euler, H. A., & Hoier, S. (2002). Psychological adaptation to human sperm competition. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 123–138.Google Scholar

Simmons, L. W. (2001). Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Simmons, L. W., & García‐González, F. (2008). Evolutionary reduction in testes size and competitive fertilization success in response to the experimental removal of sexual selection in dung beetles. Evolution, 62, 2580–2591.Google Scholar

Simmons, L. W., Parker, G. A., & Hosken, D. J. (2020). Evolutionary insight from a humble fly: Sperm competition and the yellow dungfly. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375, 20200062.Google Scholar

Singh, D. (1993). Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Role of waist-to-hip ratio. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 293–307.Google Scholar

Smith, K. M., Olkhov, Y. M., Puts, D. A., & Apicella, C. L. (2017). Hadza men with lower voice pitch have a better hunting reputation. Evolutionary Psychology, 15, 1474704917740466.Google Scholar

Smith, R. L. (1984). Human sperm competition. In Smith, R. L. (Ed.), Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems (pp. 601–660). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Smuts, B. (1995). The evolutionary origins of patriarchy. Human Nature, 6, 1–32.Google Scholar

Swami, V., & Tovée, M. J. (2005). Male physical attractiveness in Britain and Malaysia: A cross-cultural study. Body Image, 2, 383–393.Google Scholar

Townsend, J. M., & Levy, G. D. (1990). Effects of potential partners’ physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status on sexuality and partner selection. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 19, 149–164.Google Scholar

Trivers, R. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man (pp. 136–179). New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Van Brummen-Girigori, O., & Buunk, A. P. (2016). Intrasexual competitiveness and non-verbal seduction strategies to attract males: A study among teenage girls from Curaçao. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37, 134–141.Google Scholar

Van Vugt, M., Roberts, G., & Hardy, C. (2007). Competitive altruism: Development of reputation-based cooperation in groups. In Dunbar, R. I. M. & Barrett, L. (Eds.), Handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 531–540). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Walter, K. V., Conroy-Beam, D., Buss, D. M., Asao, K., Sorokowska, A., Sorokowski, P., … & Zupančič, M. (2020). Sex differences in mate preferences across 45 countries: A large-scale replication. Psychological Science, 31, 408–423.Google Scholar

West-Eberhard, M. J. (1979). Sexual selection, social competition and evolution. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 123, 222–234.Google Scholar

Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2013). Biology or culture alone cannot account for human sex differences and similarities. Psychological Inquiry, 24, 241–247.Google Scholar

Workman, L., & Reader, W. (2004). Sexual selection. In Evolutionary psychology: An introduction (pp. 58–80). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Wyckoff, J. P., Asao, K., & Buss, D. M. (2019). Gossip as an intrasexual competition strategy: Predicting information sharing from potential mate versus competitor mating strategies. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40, 96–104.Google Scholar

Yan, H., Chen, W., Wu, H., Bi, Y., Zhang, M., Li, S., & Braun, K. L. (2009). Multiple sex partner behavior in female undergraduate students in China: A multi campus survey. BMC Public Health, 9, 305.Google Scholar

Zahavi, A. (1975). Mate selection: A selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53, 205–214.Google Scholar

Zhang, L., Lee, A. J., DeBruine, L. M., & Jones, B. C. (2019). Are sex differences in preferences for physical attractiveness and good earning capacity in potential mates smaller in countries with greater gender equality? Evolutionary Psychology, 17, 1474704919852921.Google Scholar

Zuk, M., & Simmons, L. W. (2018). Sexual selection: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Book contents

2 - Sexual Selection

Summary

Keywords

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive