Priming concerns about pathogen threat versus resource scarcity: Dissociable effects on women's perceptions of men's attractiveness and dominance

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

Volumn 66, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 1549-1556

  Watkins, Christopher D ^a,e   DeBruine, Lisa M ^b   Little, Anthony C ^c   Feinberg, David R ^d   Jones, Benedict C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

^d MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ABERTAY DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Context specificity; Face perception; Masculinity; Pathogen threat; Priming; Prosocial mates; Resource scarcity

Indexed keywords

FEMALE BEHAVIOR; MATE CHOICE; MENS HEALTH; MORPHOLOGY; PATHOGEN; PERCEPTION; RESOURCE AVAILABILITY; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; VIOLENCE;

EID: 84869178349     PISSN: 03405443     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-012-1408-2     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Apicella CL, Feinberg DR, Marlowe FW (2007) Voice pitch predicts reproductive success in male hunter-gatherers. Biol Lett 3: 682-684.
2. Bergeron P, Grignolio S, Apollonio M, Shipley B, Festa-Bianchet M (2010) Secondary sexual characters signal fighting ability and determine social rank in Alpine ibex (Capra ibex). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64: 1299-1307.
3. Boothroyd LG, Jones BC, Burt DM, DeBruine LM, Perrett DI (2008) Facial correlates of sociosexuality. Evol Hum Behav 29: 211-218.
4. Boothroyd LG, Cross CP, Gray AW, Coombes C, Gregson-Curtis K (2011) Perceiving the facial correlates of sociosexuality: further evidence. Pers Indiv Differ 50: 422-425.
5. Burriss RP, Welling LLM, Puts DA (2011) Mate-preference drives mate-choice: men's self-rated masculinity predicts their female partner's preference for masculinity. Pers Indiv Differ 51: 1023-1027.
6. DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Little AC, Boothroyd LG, Perrett DI, Penton-Voak IS, Cooper PA, Penke L, Feinberg DR, Tiddeman BP (2006) Correlated preferences for facial masculinity and ideal or actual partner's masculinity. Proc R Soc Lond B 273: 1355-1360.
7. DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Crawford JR, Welling LLM, Little AC (2010a) The health of a nation predicts their mate preferences: cross-cultural variation in women's preferences for masculinized male faces. Proc R Soc Lond B 277: 2405-2410.
8. DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Tybur JM, Lieberman D, Griskevicius V (2010b) Women's preferences for masculinity in male faces are predicted by pathogen disgust, but not moral or sexual disgust. Evol Hum Behav 31: 69-74.
9. DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Little AC, Crawford JR, Welling LLM (2011a) Further evidence for regional variation in women's masculinity preferences. Proc R Soc Lond B 278: 813-814.
10. DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Watkins CD, Roberts SC, Little AC, Smith FG, Quist M (2011b) Opposite-sex siblings decrease attraction, but not prosocial attributions, to self-resembling opposite-sex faces. P Natl Acad Sci USA 108: 11710-11714.
11. Duncan LA, Schaller M, Park JH (2009) Perceived vulnerability to disease: development and validation of a 15-item self-report instrument. Pers Indiv Differ 47: 441-546.
12. Emlen DJ (2008) The evolution of animal weapons. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 39: 387-413.
13. Feinberg DR, DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Little AC, O'Connor JJM, Tigue CC (2012) Women's self-perceptions of health and attractiveness predict male vocal masculinity preferences in different directions across short- and long-term relationship contexts. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 66: 413-418.
14. Fink B, Neave N, Seydel H (2007) Male facial appearance signals physical strength to women. Am J Hum Biol 19: 82-87.
15. Gangestad SW, Simpson JA (2000) The evolution of human mating: trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behav Brain Sci 23: 675-687.
16. Gangestad SW, Merriman LA, Thompson ME (2010) Men's oxidative stress, fluctuating asymmetry and physical attractiveness. Anim Behav 80: 1005-1013.
17. Hughes SM, Gallup GG Jr (2003) Sex differences in morphological predictors of sexual behavior: shoulder to hip and waist to hip ratios. Evol Hum Behav 24: 173-178.
18. Jewkes R (2002) Intimate partner violence: causes and prevention. Lancet 359: 1423-1429.
19. Johnston VS, Hagel R, Franklin M, Fink B, Grammer K (2001) Male facial attractiveness: evidence of hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evol Hum Behav 22: 251-267.
20. Jones BC, DeBruine LM, Little AC, Conway CA, Welling LLM, Smith FG (2007) Sensation seeking and men's face preferences. Evol Hum Behav 28: 439-446.
21. Jones BC, DeBruine LM, Main JC, Little AC, Welling LLM, Feinberg DR, Tiddeman BP (2010) Facial cues of dominance modulate the short-term gaze-cuing effect in human observers. Proc R Soc Lond B 277: 617-624.
22. Lee AJ, Zietsch BP (2011) Experimental evidence that women's mate preferences are directly influenced by cues of pathogen prevalence and resource scarcity. Biol Lett 7: 892-895.
23. Little AC, Jones BC (2003) Evidence against perceptual bias views for symmetry preferences in human faces. Proc R Soc Lond B 279: 1759-1763.
24. Little AC, Cohen DL, Jones BC, Belsky J (2007) Human preferences for facial masculinity change with relationship type and environmental harshness. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61: 967-973.
25. Little AC, DeBruine LM, Jones BC (2011a) Exposure to visual cues of pathogen contagion changes preferences for masculinity and symmetry in opposite-sex faces. Proc R Soc Lond B 278: 2032-2039.
26. Little AC, Jones BC, DeBruine LM (2011b) Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research. Philos T Roy Soc B 366: 1638-1659.
27. Malo AF, Roldan ERS, Garde JJ, Soler AJ, Vicente J, Gortazar C, Gomendio M (2009) What does testosterone do for red deer males? Proc R Soc Lond B 276: 971-980.
28. Marty JS, Higham JP, Gadsby EL, Ross C (2009) Dominance, coloration, and social and sexual behavior in male drills Mandrillus leucophaeus. Int J Primatol 30: 807-823.
29. Moore FR, Cassidy C (2007) Female status predicts female mate preferences across nonindustrial societies. Cross-Cult Res 41: 66-74.
30. Moore FR, Cassidy C, Law Smith MJ, Perrett DI (2006) The effects of female control of resources on sex differentiated mate preferences. Evol Hum Behav 27: 193-205.
31. O'Connor JJM, Re DE, Feinberg DR (2011) Voice pitch influences perceptions of sexual infidelity. Evol Psychol 9: 64-78.
32. O'Connor JJM, Fraccaro PJ, Feinberg DR (2012) The influence of male voice pitch on women's perceptions of relationship investment. J Evol Psychol 10: 1-13.
33. Park JH, van Leeuwen F, Stephen ID (2012) Homeliness is in the disgust sensitivity of the beholder: relatively unattractive faces appear especially unattractive to individuals higher in pathogen disgust. Evol Hum Behav 33: 569-577.
34. Pelletier F, Festa-Bianchet M (2006) Sexual selection and social rank in bighorn rams. Anim Behav 71: 649-655.
35. Prentice DA, Miller DT (1992) When small effects are impressive. Psychol Bull 112: 160-164.
36. Preston BT, Stevenson IR, Pemberton JM, Coltman DW, Wilson K (2003) Overt and covert competition in a promiscuous mammal: the importance of weaponry and testes size to male reproductive success. Proc R Soc Lond B 270: 633-640.
37. Price ME, Kang J, Dunn J, Hopkins S (2011) Muscularity and attractiveness as predictors of human egalitarianism. Pers Indiv Differ 50: 636-640.
38. Puts DA (2005) Mating context and menstrual phase affect women's preferences for male voice pitch. Evol Hum Behav 26: 388-397.
39. Puts DA (2010) Beauty and the beast: mechanisms of sexual selection in humans. Evol Hum Behav 31: 157-175.
40. Puts DA, Apicella CL, Cardenas RA (2012a) Masculine voices signal men's threat potential in foraging and industrial societies. Proc R Soc Lond B 279: 601-609.
41. Puts DA, Welling LLM, Burriss RP, Dawood K (2012b) Men's masculinity and attractiveness predict their female partners' reported orgasm frequency and timing. Evol Hum Behav 33: 1-9.
42. Rantala M, Moore FR, Skrinda I, Krama T, Kivleniece I, Kecko S, Krams I (2012) Evidence for the stress linked immunocompetence handicap in humans. Nat Commun 3: 694.
43. Rhodes G, Chan J, Zebrowitz LA, Simmons LW (2003) Does sexual dimorphism in human faces signal health? Proc R Soc Lond B 270: S93-S95.
44. Rhodes G, Simmons L, Peters M (2005) Attractiveness and sexual behaviour: does attractiveness enhance mating success? Evol Hum Behav 26: 186-201.
45. Rowland DA, Perrett DI (1995) Manipulating facial appearance through shape and colour. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 15: 70-76.
46. Santos ESA, Scheck D, Nakagawa S (2011) Dominance and plumage traits: meta-analysis and metaregression analysis. Anim Behav 82: 3-19.
47. Scott IML, Clark AP, Boothroyd LG, Penton-Voak IS (2012). Do men's faces really signal heritable immunocompetence? Behav Ecol. doi: 10. 1093/beheco/ars092.
48. Seielstad MT, Minch E, Cavalli-Sforza LL (1998) Genetic evidence for a higher female migration rate in humans. Nat Genet 20: 278-280.
49. Sell A, Cosmides L, Tooby J, Sznycer D, von Rueden C, Gurven M (2009a) Human adaptations for the visual assessment of strength and fighting ability from the body and face. Proc R Soc Lond B 276: 575-584.
50. Sell A, Tooby J, Cosmides L (2009b) Formidability and the logic of human anger. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106: 15073-15078.
51. Shallice T (1988) From neuropsychology to mental structure. Cambridge University Press, New York.
52. Stirrat M, Perrett DI (2010) Valid facial cues to cooperation and trust: male facial width and trustworthiness. Psychol Sci 21: 349-354.
53. Thornhill R, Gangestad SW (2006) Facial sexual dimorphism, developmental stability, and susceptibility to disease in men and women. Evol Hum Behav 27: 131-144.
54. Tiddeman BP, Burt DM, Perrett DI (2001) Prototyping and transforming facial texture for perception research. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 21: 42-50.
55. Tybur JM, Gangestad SW (2011) Mate preferences and infectious disease: theoretical considerations and evidence in humans. Philos T Roy Soc B 366: 3375-3388.
56. Watkins CD, Jones BC (2012) Priming men with different contest outcomes modulates their dominance perceptions. Behav Ecol 23: 539-543.
57. Watkins CD, Fraccaro PJ, Smith FG, Vukovic J, Feinberg DR, DeBruine LM, Jones BC (2010a) Taller men are less sensitive to cues of dominance in other men. Behav Ecol 21: 943-947.
58. Watkins CD, Jones BC, DeBruine LM (2010b) Individual differences in dominance perception: dominant men are less sensitive to facial cues of male dominance. Pers Indiv Differ 49: 967-971.
59. Welling LLM, Conway CA, DeBruine LM, Jones BC (2007a) Perceived vulnerability to disease predicts variation in preferences for apparent health in faces. J Evol Psychol 5: 131-139.
60. Welling LLM, Jones BC, DeBruine LM, Conway CA, Law Smith MJ, Little AC, Feinberg DR, Sharp M, Al-Dujaili EAS (2007b) Raised salivary testosterone in women is associated with increased attraction to masculine faces. Horm Behav 52: 156-161.
61. Welling LLM, Jones BC, DeBruine LM (2008a) Sex drive is positively associated with women's preferences for sexual dimorphism in men's and women's faces. Pers Indiv Differ 44: 161-170.
62. Welling LLM, Jones BC, DeBruine LM, Smith FG, Feinberg DR, Little AC, Al-Dujaili EAS (2008b) Men report stronger attraction to femininity in women's faces when their testosterone levels are high. Horm Behav 54: 703-708.