Relationships: topic 1 ‘evolutionary explanations for partner preference’ Flashcards
(11 cards)
What is the evolutionary explanation for partner preference?
- it is argued that modern day humans behave in ways that successfully enabled our ancestors to select the right mate, reproduce and raise children
what is sexual selection?
what is sexual selection?
- Sexual selection explains the evolution of characteristics which enable reproductive success (characteristics that are attractive to the opposite sex and enable us to successfully reproduce) rather than survival success (natural selection)
what is anisogamy?
- this refers to the differences between male and female sex cells (gametes)
- Male gametes (sperm) are small, produced in vast quantities over the males life and do not require much energy to produce
- Female gametes (eggs or ova) are relatively large, produced at intervals for a limited period of time and require a great deal of energy
- anisogamy means there is never a shortage of fertile males but a fertile female is a resource
- Therefore there will be differences in the preferences of one sex for the opposite sex, which is known as intersexual selection
What is intersexual selection?
- differences in the preferences of one sex for the opposite sex (what men want in women versus what women want in men)
male mate preference strategies
- given the minimal energy required for males to reproduce and lack of reproductive consequences, the males optimum strategy is to compete with other males in order to reproduce with as many females as possible
- this is known as intra-sexual selection, when members of one sex (usually males) compete with each other for access to members of the other sex
- the dominant male is able to meet and so will pass on their successful characteristics (eg being taller and stronger)
- for these reasons, males tend to be attracted to young females as they are more likely to be fertile as well as women with an hourglass figure as this is an inherent sign of fertility that happens at puberty
what is intra-sexual selection?
- Males competing for females
Female mate preferences
- due to the commitment females need to invest in offspring before, drawing and after birth, and the more serious consequences of choosing the wrong male, it pays for females to be much more choosy when selecting the right mate
- eg only choosing males with characteristics that enable them to provide resources and protect her and her offspring
- this means that females will look for strength in males who can instinctively protect her and her offspring, but also successful or wealthy males who have the ability to provide food and shelter for them too
- The female preference for a female male determines the features that will be passed onto their offspring (eg if height is considered an attractive trait, then over successive generations of females it would increase the male population because females would mate with tall males and overtime, produce sons who are taller and daughters who have a preference for taller males
what is Fisher’s ‘sexy sons’ hypothesis to describe the female mate preferences?
- a female mates with a male who has a desirable characteristic, and this ‘sexy’ trait is inherited by her son
- this increases the likelihood that successive generations of females will mate with her offspring
strengths of evolutionary explanations for partner preference
P - evidence to support the idea of intra-sexual competition between males comes from buss
E/E - he found that, when men and women were asked how often they are closest friend of the same sex had bragged about resources (eg how much money they earn) or displayed expensive possessions (eg cars) in trying to attract a partner in the past 3 months, men were significantly more likely to have behaved in this way than women
L - this suggests that men do seem to compete with one another in trying to attract a female partner by trying to demonstrate they can provide more resources than the competition
P - support for the notion of inter-sexual selection comes from clark and hatfield
E/E - when male and female psychology students approached other students on campus and asked ‘ would you go to bed with me tonight?’ they found that not a single female agreed, but 75% of the males did immediately
L - this suggests that males have evolved a different meeting strategy to females in order to ensure maximum reproductive success, and that women are indeed more choosy when selecting a mate, as predicted by evolutionary theory
P - evidence to support the theory that may preferences are consistent across cultures comes from buss
E - after asking 10,000 people from 37 different cultures across the world about me preferences, buss found a number of common patterns
E - for example, men consistently showed more preference for younger and physically attractive female partners, and women consistently preferred males who were ‘ good financial prospects’ are ambitious
L - this suggests that reproductive behaviour has evolved in humans as opposed to being alone through our culture, as it appears that sex differences in mate strategies are universal
limitations of evolutionary explanations for partner preference
P - a criticism of the evolutionary explanation of partner preference is that the theory presumes homosexuality, and that all relationships are sexual
E - this means that this theory is oversimplified and cannot explain all types of relationships as it assumes all relationships are motivated by the desire to reproduce
E - for example, long distance romantic relationship relationships, Internet relationships, or couples who choose not to have children
L - this therefore put over the evolutionary theory of partner preference
P - evolutionary explanations may ignore rapidly changing social norms
E - women do not need men to provide for them like they once did, they have a greater role in the workplace, and greater financial security
E - bereczkei argues that this social change has consequences for mate preferences, which may no longer be resource-orientated
L - this is a problem as partner preferences may be more likely to be a combination of cultural and evolutionary influences and any theory failing to account for both is limited
