Feminism and the Evolution of Sex Differences and Similarities

Sex Roles

Volumn 64, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 758-767

  Eagly, Alice H ^a   Wood, Wendy ^b  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Evolutionary psychology; Feminism; Gender; Sex differences and similarities

Indexed keywords

EID: 79956330512     PISSN: 03600025     EISSN: 15732762     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11199-011-9949-9     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Abelson, R. P. (1985). A variance explanation paradox: When a little is a lot. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 129-133.
2. Alexander, M. G., & Fisher, T. D. (2003). Truth and consequences: Using the bogus pipeline to examine sex differences in self-reported sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 27-35. doi: 10. 1080/00224490309552164.
3. American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
4. Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30, 319-345. doi: 10. 1016/j. neubiorev. 2004. 12. 007.
5. Buss, D. M. (1995). Psychological sex differences: Origins through sexual selection. American Psychologist, 50, 164-168. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 50. 3. 164.
6. Buss, D. M., & Malamuth, N. M. (Eds.). (1996). Sex, power, and conflict: Evolutionary and feminist perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Chrisler, J. C., & Erchull, M. J. (2010). The treatment of evolutionary psychology in social psychology textbooks. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9783-5.
8. Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64, 170-180. doi: 10. 1037/a0014564.
9. Deaux, K., & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 369-389. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 94. 3. 369.
10. Eagly, A. H. (2007). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: Resolving the contradictions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 1-12. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1471-6402. 2007. 00326. x.
11. Eagly, A. H. (2009). The his and hers of prosocial behavior: An examination of the social psychology of gender. American Psychologist, 64, 644-658. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 64. 8. 644.
12. Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408-423.
13. Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2007). Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 245-264. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 94. 2. 245.
14. Eastwick, P. W., Eagly, A. H., Finkel, E. J., & Johnson, S. E. (2011). Implicit and explicit preferences for physical attractiveness in a romantic partner: A double dissociation in predictive validity. Manuscript under review.
15. Ellis, L. (2011). Evolutionary and neuroandrogenic theory and universal gender differences in cognition and behavior. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9927-7.
16. Epstein, S. (2007). Inclusion: The politics of difference in medical research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17. Fausto-Sterling, A. (1985). Myths of gender: Biological theories of women and men. New York: Basic Books.
18. Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000). Beyond difference: Feminism and evolutionary psychology. In H. Rose & S. Rose (Eds.), Alas, poor Darwin: Arguments against evolutionary psychology (pp. 209-227). New York: Harmony Books.
19. Fine, C. (2010). Delusions of gender: How our minds, society, and neurosexism create difference. New York: W. W. Norton.
20. Frisby, B. N., Dillow, M. R., Gaughan, S., & Nordlund, J. (2010). Flirtatious communication: An experimental examination of perceptions of social-sexual communication motivated by evolutionary forces. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9864-5.
21. Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2007). Whither science of the evolution of mind? In S. W. Gangestad & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), The evolution of mind: Fundamental questions and controversies (pp. 397-437). New York: Guilford.
22. Geary, D. C. (2009). Male, female: The evolution of human sex differences (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
23. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
24. Gowaty, P. A. (2003). Power asymmetries between the sexes, mate preferences, and components of fitness. In C. B. Travis (Ed.), Evolution, gender, and rape (pp. 61-86). Cambridge: MIT.
25. Hannagan, D. C. (2011). One species, two sexes, and politics by other means [Book review]. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-011-9944-1.
26. Harris, C. R. (2010). Menstrual cycle and facial preferences reconsidered. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9772-8.
27. Heatherington, T. F. (2011). Neuroscience of self and self-regulation. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 363-390. doi: 1146/annurev. psych. 121208. 131616.
28. Henrich, H., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61-135. doi: 10. 1017/S0140525X0999152X.
29. Hrdy, S. B. (2009). Mothers and others: The evolutionary origins of mutual understanding. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University.
30. Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581-592. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 60. 6. 581.
31. Johnson, K. L., & Tassinary, L. G. (2007). Compatibility of basic social perceptions determines perceived attractiveness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104, 5246-5251. doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 0608181104.
32. Jordan-Young, R. M. (2010). Brainstorm: The flaws in the science of sex differences. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
33. Kay, A. C., Jost, J. T., Mandisodza, A. N., Sherman, S. J., Petrocelli, J. V., & Johnson, A. L. (2007). Panglossian ideology in the service of system justification: How complementary stereotypes help us to rationalize inequality. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 39, pp. 305-358). San Diego: Academic. doi: 10. 1016/S0065-2601(06)39006-5.
34. Kurzban, R., & Weeden, J. (2007). Do advertised preferences predict the behavior of speed daters? Personal Relationships, 14, 623-632. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1475-6811. 2007. 00175. x.
35. Lickliter, R., & Honeycutt, H. (2003). Developmental dynamics: Toward a biologically plausible evolutionary psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 819-835. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 129. 6. 819.
36. Liesen, L. T. (2010). Feminists, fear not evolutionary theory, but remain very cautious of evolutionary psychology [Book Review]. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9857-4.
37. Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
38. Low, B. (2000). Why sex matters: A Darwinian look at human behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
39. Marlowe, F., & Wetsman, A. (2001). Preferred waist-to-hip ratio and ecology. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 481-489. doi: 10. 1016/S0191-8869(00)00039-8.
40. Martin, E. (2003). What is "rape?"-toward a historical, ethnographic, approach. In C. B. Travis (Ed.), Evolution, gender, and rape (pp. 363-381). Cambridge: MIT.
41. Morton, T. A., Postmes, T., Haslam, S. A., & Hornsey, M. J. (2009). Theorizing gender in the face of social change: Is there anything essential about essentialism? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 653-664. doi: 10. 1037/a0012966.
42. Organization for the Study of Sex Differences. (2011). Homepage. Retrieved from http://web.memberclicks.com/mc/page.do?sitePageId=51319&orgId=ossd.
43. Oxford English Dictionary Online. (2011). Sex. Retrieved from http://www. oed. com/view/Entry/176989?rskey=KdLtTC&result=1&isAdvanced=false#.
44. Panksepp, J., & Panksepp, J. B. (2000). The seven sins of evolutionary psychology. Evolution and Cognition, 6, 108-131.
45. Pederson, W. C., Putcha-Bhagavatula, A., & Miller, L. C. (2010). Are men and women really that different? Examining some of sexual strategies theory (SST)'s key assumptions about sex-distinct mating mechanisms. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9811-5.
46. Perrin, P. B., Heesacker, M., Tiegs, T. J., Swan, L. K., Lawrence, A. W., Jr., Smith, M. B., et al. (2010). Aligning Mars and Venus: The social construction and instability of gender differences in romantic relationships. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9804-4.
47. Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (2007). Psychological essentialism of human categories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 202-206. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-8721. 2007. 00504. x.
48. Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (2005). Not by genes alone: How culture transformed human evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49. Rosenthal, R. (1990). How are we doing in soft psychology? American Psychologist, 45, 775-777. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 45. 6. 775.
50. Sex Roles. (2010). Aims and scopes page. Retrieved from http://www. springer. com/psychology/personality+%26+social+psychology/journal/11199.
51. Shields, S. A. (1975). Functionalism, Darwinism, and the psychology of women: A study in social myth. American Psychologist, 30, 739-754. doi: 10. 1037/h0076948.
52. Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301-311. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-008-9501-8.
53. Shields, S. A., & Bhatia, S. (2009). Darwin on race, gender, and culture. American Psychologist, 64, 111-119. doi: 10. 1037/a0013502.
54. Singh, D., & Singh, D. (2011). Shape and significance of feminine beauty: An evolutionary perspective. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-011-9938-z.
55. Smiler, A. P. (2010). Sexual strategies theory: Built for the short term or the long term? Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9817-z.
56. Smith, C. A., Konik, J. A., & Tuve, M. V. (2010). In search of looks, status, or something else? Partner preferences among butch and femme lesbians and heterosexual men and women. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9861-8.
57. Sylwester, K., & Pawlowski, B. (2010). Daring to be darling: Attractiveness of risk takers as partners in long- and short-term sexual relationships. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9790-6.
58. Tate, C. (2010). The problem of number revisited: The relative contributions of psychosocial, experiential, and evolutionary factors to the desired number of sexual partners. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9774-6.
59. Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. T. (2000). A natural history of rape: Biological bases of sexual coercion. Cambridge: MIT.
60. Travis, C. B. (Ed.). (2003). Evolution, gender, and rape. Cambridge: MIT.
61. Vandermassen, G. (2010). Evolution and rape: A feminist Darwinian perspective. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9895-y.
62. Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
63. Winterhalder, B., & Smith, E. A. (2000). Analyzing adaptive strategies: Human behavioral ecology at twenty-five. Evolutionary Anthropology, 9, 51-72. doi: 10. 1002/(SICI)1520-6505(2000)9: 2< 51:: AID-EVAN1> 3. 3. CO; 2-7.
64. Wood, W. (1987). A meta-analytic review of sex differences in group performance. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 53-71. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 102. 1. 53.
65. Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699-727. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 128. 5. 699.
66. Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2010). Gender. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology, (Vol. 5, pp. 629-667). Hoboken: Wiley.