On Jealousy and Female Mating Strategies - By Tom_Anon

This is an article I generated regarding studies such as Dr. David Buss's Mate Switching Hypothesis that I figured people here would find interesting, so please let me know what you think:

Abstract

The following article reviews literature regarding female mate guarding, male mate guarding, and female aversion to mate guarding in the context of Good Genes Sexual Selection Theory, Sperm Retention Hypothesis, and Mate Switching Hypothesis. Mate guarding by both sexes is preceded by jealousy and serves to protect relationships and the propagation of genes from mate poachers. While male mate guarding is heightened when partners are fertile and more attractive, females may mate guard valued partners due to mate value discrepancies. Mate guarding manifests differently amongst the sexes and may be indicative of mate switching being a primary function of humans.

Keywords: jealousy; mate guarding; aversion to mate guarding; good genes

How Jealousy Made Us

Jealousy is commonly viewed as childish, characteristic of low self-esteem, or simply not conducive to an effective relationship. From a perspective based in evolutionary psychology, this is far from the case. To understand jealousy in a contemporary context, research investigating its origins is taken into consideration. Jealousy serves a multifaceted purpose in our motivations to be vigilant regarding a partner’s fidelity (Buss, 2011). These motivations may lead us to acts ranging anywhere from leaving behind a pair of underwear at a significant other’s apartment to engaging in a full-on brawl.

Humans have a vested interest in providing for their own offspring, and as human females have an internal fertilization process, they always know that a child is partially theirs. Males, on the other hand, aren’t so lucky. For males, a partner’s sexual infidelity runs him the risk of being cuckolded. This is in complete opposition to his vested interest of investing in his own offspring as he may end up investing in a competitor’s genes. On the other hand, although a woman always know that a child is hers, a partner’s emotional infidelity may mean a loss of commitment, and ultimately, their resources to take care of the child. By this, jealousy is hypothesized to be an emotion elicited by perceived threats to relationships, and their resources.
In accordance with the jealousy hypothesis, a cross-cultural study looking at Germany, the United States, and the Netherlands, found that males were troubled by imagining a partner’s sexual infidelity while females were bothered by imagining a partner’s emotional infidelity (Buunk, Angleitner, Oubaid, & Buss, 1996). Manifesting as the emotion of jealousy, pair bonded individuals may mate guard to protect reproductive resources. David Buss (2002) hypothesizes that mate guarding evolved for two reasons: to deter partners from switching mates (e.g., higher status mates) and hinder the success of mate poachers. The goal of mate poachers being to persuade a party in a preexisting pair bond to engage in sexual acts (Davies, Shackelford, & Hass, 2007). This is bolstered by more than 80% of females and males reporting either a previous partner or themselves being the target of a mate poacher (Schmitt & Buss, 2001).
The purpose of this article is to examine male and female mate guarding as well as female aversion to mate guarding in the context of Good Genes Sexual Selection Theory, the Sperm Retention Hypothesis, and the Mate Switching Hypothesis (Buss, Goetz, Duntley, Asao, & Conroy-Beam, 2017; Gangestad, Garver-Apgar, & Simpson, 2007; Sela, Weekes-Shackelford, Shackelford, & Pham, 2015).

Literature Review

Good Genes Sexual Selection Theory

Good Genes Sexual Selection Theory emphasizes female mate choice during the fertile phase with implications in when males are prone to mate guard. In human reproduction, variance by genetic material that offspring receive by progenitors may hinder or facilitate their reproductive success (Gangestad, Garver-Apgar, & Simpson, 2007). Due to these reproductive pressures, mating with individuals displaying traits characteristic of reproductive success provides reproductive advantages to offspring. In long-term relationships, a male’s willingness to provide as well as his genetic material constitute his value to the female. However, females during the fertile period are more attracted to indicators of good genes (see also Gangestad & Haselton, 2015) such as muscularity, social dominance, and, in particular, males who are less faithful. Furthermore, females pair bonded (in a relationship) to males not possessing traits found attractive during the fertile period had a heightened interest in other males.
A short-term/long-term mating dichotomy (i.e., dalliances vs. committed relationships) may exist as an evolutionary adaption to guide female mating practices toward males with optimal genetic material (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000). Men would be successful as long-term or short-term mates insofar as their ability to satiate female preferences throughout their fertility cycle. In other words, males possessing less optimal genetic material are predisposed to taking on a long-term mating strategy whilst those with optimal genetic material would take on a short-term mating strategy. As short-term males appear more attractive than long-term males to females, a ramification may be variances in behavior to heighten chances of reproductive success (Berry & Kuczaj, 2000). For example, due to short-term males being attractive, they may gain sexual access to multiple women. However, long-term males would need to provide benefits such as provisioning to gain sexual access.
As women can only conceive during 20% of their fertility cycle, shifts occur in attraction to facilitate reproducing with males possessing optimal genes; in turn producing offspring with a heightened reproductive advantage (Gangestad, Thornhill, & Garver-Apgar, 2005). This hormonally driven tendency in females is indicative of natural selection for those who chose mates with optimal genes. Unlike other species that display overt signs of ovulation such as baboons during estrus, women have a concealed form (Gangestad & Haselton, 2015), an indicator of which is heightened attractiveness. Concealed ovulation may serve to facilitate sexual acts outside a primary pair bond (short-term mating) while maintaining provisioning from a primary pair bond (long-term mating). An infidelity rate of 20% and 50% in the United States (TED, 2017) further bolsters this hypothesis. However, an alternative hypothesis to this mating dichotomy is that environmental factors such as a heightened level of pathogens drives females to prioritize good genes (Broude, 2000).

Moreover, the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) consists of varying genes serving to tell the body what is a pathogen and what is the body (Garver-Apgar, Gangestad, Thornhill, Miller, & Olp, 2006). MHC alleles vary among individuals and possession of an identical MHC is improbable; however, matching MHC alleles women had with partners inversely correlated with relationship sexual satisfaction. Concomitantly, a heightening of women’s attraction to those outside their relationship and infidelity was reported (mostly during a fertile period). Potentially, female preferences for males possessing dissimilar MHC serves to hinder inbreeding (Penn & Potts, 1999)

Sperm Retention Hypothesis

The Sperm Retention Hypothesis emphasizes female sexual satisfaction in relation to partner status (Sela, Weekes-Shackelford, Shackelford, & Pham, 2015); potentially heightening mate guarding in males. Female orgasm is hypothesized to facilitate retaining sperm from males possessing good genes. In a study comparing rates of female orgasm to male partner attractiveness, females mated to more attractive males reported higher rates of orgasm. This was moderated by perceptions of male partner attractiveness made by other females. This selective retention of sperm benefits the reproductive success of offspring, increases chances of healthy offspring, and pairing with healthy males.

Mate Switching Hypothesis

The Mate Switching Hypothesis explains that, primarily, humans evolved to switch mates instead of staying within the confines of monogamy (Buss, Goetz, Duntley, Asao, & Conroy-Beam, 2017). Predominantly focusing on female mating tendencies, factors such as relationship costs/benefits, fluctuations in partner and own mate value, and alternative mates displaying interest are of focus. These factors may lead to male mate guarding and female aversion to it. Successful mate switching would require cognitive adaptions to assess mate value as respective to all parties involved (extant partner, own, and prospective partner’s). Potentially due to these cognitive adaptions, it’s hypothesized that a heightening of mate value in females will be inversely correlated with emotional satisfaction of extant partners. Concomitantly, a heightening in mate guarding aversion, acquiring backup mates, initiation of relationships with males of higher mate value, and ultimately dissolution of the primary relationship may occur. Colloquially phrased as “keeping one foot out of the door”, the inclination to assess mates may persist regardless of relationship type.

Similarly, Davies and Shackelford (2017) hypothesized for mate poachers to succeed, they must possess reproductive resources (e.g., attractiveness and affluence) surpassing that of the target’s extant partner. Like the Mate Switching Hypothesis, a cost/benefit analysis is emphasized. This was also in accordance with a finding that females and males report less satisfaction with extant relationships following exposure to individuals of the opposite sex displaying higher mate value (Kenrick, Neuberg, Zierk, & Krones, 1994). By women’s responses, there was a positive correlation between the amount of reproductive resources a poacher must possess to be successful and extant relationship commitment. In other words, it would be harder to poach someone married versus dating. However, reproductive resources required to poach a cohabiting target were the same as those in long-term relationships.

Although reproductive resources are necessitated by females in the mate selection process, as environments change, pressures to acquire them may fluctuate. One study spanning over half a century found that between 1939 and 1996, “good financial prospect” was prioritized more in mate selection by females than males; a trend that has been increasing both by females and males alike (Buss, Shackelford, Kirkpatrick, & Larsen, 2001). This recent increase by males is thought to be caused by the contemporary trajectory of females in the workplace leading to an even standard to gauge mate value. Correspondingly, David Buss (1989) in a cross-cultural study examining mate preferences, found that females (more than males) prioritized “good financial prospect” within 36 of the 37 countries. Likewise, “ambitiousness and industriousness” were also prioritized among females in 34 of the 37 countries.

Male Mate Guarding

For men, failed mate guarding attempts can result in genetic cuckoldry (investing in a competitor’s genes) or the mate switching of partners (Buss, 2002; Buss, Goetz, Duntley, Asao, & Conroy-Beam, 2017). Due to the dire nature of the human reproductive condition, males exhibit a vast repertoire of mate guarding behaviors (e.g., staying close to partners, heightening displays of commitment, and challenging rivals) serving to hinder the success of mate poachers, partner interest in poachers, and minimize their potential instances. Seemingly a co-evolved cue, a partner’s clothing color also may elicit mate guarding in males. Reports by males and females found that, although females expected no change in male mate guarding when wearing a black or red dress, males reported heightened mate guarding when partners wore red (Prokop & Pazda, 2016).

Not only red clothing, but provocative clothing may also serve to heighten mate guarding in males. As the fertile period drives women to acquire mates with optimal genetic material, intrasexual competition amongst females by dint of provocative clothing and accessories occurs (Meston & Buss, 2010). Females during the fertile phase also report a heightened sense of attractiveness, sexual appeal, and desire for attending social events (e.g., bars) conducive to meeting males (Haselton & Gangetad, 2006). In accordance with the Mate Switching Hypothesis, these finding may suggest, as increases in female mate value are hypothesized to decrease their satisfaction with extant relationships, heightened attractiveness during the fertile period may facilitate mate switching (Buss, Goetz, Duntley, Asao, & Conroy-Beam, 2017). Coupled with a heightened desire to attend social events, mate switching may be expedited.

It’s apparent that a multitude of factors (e.g., the conditional nature of fertility) may hinder the reproductive success of males; placing higher pressure to mate guard. Female infidelity would serve to obtain higher quality genetic material for offspring, but given the potential risks (e.g., losing a long-term partner’s resources), it is more likely when the primary partner’s genetic quality is relatively low (Haselton & Gangestad, 2006). Robert Briffault (1931) elucidates this in stating, “The female, not the male, determines the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place” (p. 21-22).

Given this heightened pressure on predominately less attractive males, jealousy, which precedes mate guarding by males, becomes heightened when partners are fertile (Haselton & Gangestad, 2006). However, fewer displays of jealousy and mate guarding may increase perceived attractiveness. Conversely, a ramification of heightening these tendencies may be relationship dissolution (Jonas, Li, & Buss, 2010). Due to female attraction variance throughout the fertility cycle, colloquially termed the “alpha-beta dichotomy”, heightened mate guarding behavior during the fertile period may be beneficial due to increases in female attraction to confrontative males (Gangestad, Garver-apgar, & Simpson, 2007).

Female Mate Guarding

For females, failed mate guarding attempts can result in the loss of a partner’s provisioning and protection (Buss, 2002). Although cuckoldry doesn’t pose a threat, this may cause damage to their reputation. Rollo Tomassi (2013) further elucidates cues eliciting female mate guarding in establishing the concept of “Dread”. He posits females face innate competition anxiety that heightens with age following comparative analyses between own and partner mate value. Male partners accruing economic resources over time, an asset attractive particularly to females (Buss, Shackelford, Kirkpatrick, & Larsen, 2001), heightens male mate value; concomitantly causing heightened vigilance in female partners facing declining youth and fertility. Due to this perceived discrepancy in mate value, fear of relationship dissolution and an inability to reobtain security elicits mate guarding.

Fear of discrepancies in mate value or a partner’s realization of them may be warranted considering more than 50% of females admit attempting to mate poach, more than 80% of males admit to being targets, and half are successfully poached (as cited in Krems, Neel, Neuberg, Puts, & Kenrick, 2016). Furthermore, male pheromones heighten fertility (Meston & Buss, 2010); implications being males become more attracted as fertility heightens female attraction. This conditionally-heightened fertility, leading to a heightened sense of attractiveness and attraction to males with good genes (Haselton & Gangetad, 2006; Krems, Neel, Neuberg, Puts, & Kenrick, 2016), may also increase the female drive to mate poach. To inhibit poaching success, females prefer indirectly aggressive (e.g., heightening affection), but sometimes overt (e.g., preventing partner’s interaction with females or fighting poachers) mate guarding behavior when engaging in intrasexual competition (Krems, Neel, Neuberg, Puts, & Kenrick, 2016). Potentially an adaption to successfully mate guard; women in relationships perceive fertile women as untrustworthy and distance partners perceived as desirable.
Like males, clothing color serves as a cue for mate guarding in females. Females reported they perceived other females wearing red to be indicative of sexual receptivity; heightening mate guarding in pair bonded females (Pazda, Prokop, & Elliot, 2014). Covertly, derogation of these females’ fidelity was utilized in mate guarding. It is not known, however, whether the cause of these tendencies is based in biology or social conditioning.

Female Aversion to Mate Guarding

Females avoid mate guarding for a multitude of reasons including interests in infidelity, engaging in short-term relationships, or having little interest in an extant relationship (Abell & Brewer, 2016). In accordance with Good Genes Sexual Selection Theory and the Mate Switching Hypothesis, female aversion to mate guarding potentially facilitates gauging the interest of prospective mates (Buss, Goetz, Duntley, Asao, Conroy-Beam, 2017); switching to them as a long-term partner or cuckolding extant partners through short-term mating. Moreover, in accordance with the Sperm Retention Hypothesis, higher rates of orgasm due to sex with more attractive mates may also facilitate cuckoldry (Sela, Weekes-Shackelford, Shackelford, & Pham, 2015). Consequently, the French Government may be trying to prevent relationship dissolution due to cuckoldry as French men who attempt to obtain paternity tests without their partner’s consent may face a €15,000 fine and jail time of one year (“Penal Code”, 2005).

A potential catalyst in infidelity; discrepancies in mate value or them being perceived may also cause aversion to mate guarding. Females who perceived themselves to be higher in mate value than their partners reported flirting outside of relationships, thoughts of relationship dissolution, and an overall feeling of less commitment (Fugere, Cousins, & MacLaren, 2015). As criteria for male mate value (e.g., status) can’t be gauged completely from appearance, females may have adapted to consider other females in a male’s proximity as a positive cue for attraction (Hill & Buss, 2008). Reports by females were in accordance with this as males displayed with other females were found more attractive than males displayed alone. This is in accordance with the Sperm Retention Hypothesis as higher rates of orgasm with attractive mates was moderated by attractiveness perceived by other females (Sela, Weekes-Shackelford, Shackelford, & Pham, 2015). An adaption of multifaceted benefits; gauging males by females in their proximity serves to circumvent risks of personally assessing mate value, expedites chances of acquiring a quality mate, and heightens chances of producing male offspring other females will find attractive.

Summary and Conclusion

Despite contemporary views, jealousy as a catalyst to mate guarding, served to heighten chances of passing on genetic material throughout antiquity. Failed mate guarding attempts by men and women would potentially mean the end of their genetic line by genetic cuckoldry or reallocation of resources, respectively. This article focused on the variances in mate guarding as well as aversion by sex. By mate guarding and hindering mate poacher success, both sexes optimize their ability to preserve reproductive resources acquired through their partners. As variance exists in what constitutes mate value for males and females, they are incentivized to mate guard or avoid attempts by partners for differing reasons; further explained when considering the Good Genes Sexual Selection Theory, Sperm Retention Hypothesis, and Mate Switching Hypothesis.

Based on the literature review, potentially, fertility heightens female attractiveness (perceived by self and others), changes in attraction (long-term to short-term), and increased interests in social events conducive to meeting males. By this, the mate switching process may be expedited. Furthermore, due to male pheromones heightening fertility, the existence of a cycle wherein this heightened fertility increases male attraction to females and their poaching tendencies is suggested. However, female attraction will only be heightened by males displaying good genes. In accordance with the Mate Switching Hypothesis, this would serve to diminish female satisfaction with extant partners. Concomitantly, this would also intensify mate guarding by males. Investigating this proposed cycle may be a direction for future research.

For females, by the concept of Dread, an incentivization to mate guard is competition anxiety due to mate value discrepancies (i.e., increasing male resources and decreasing female youth/fertility) within relationships. Dread manifests as heightened mate guarding as a successful poach would mean relationship dissolution and potentially having to reobtain security. Fear of reentering the dating market may serve to heighten mate guarding as males prioritize more youthful partners. Conversely, female aversion to mate guarding may serve to gauge prospective mates, switch mates, or commit infidelity (potentially resulting in cuckoldry). Research taking into consideration dread may also be a direction for future research. Due to variances in mate value as respective to the sexes, mate guarding as well as aversion may manifest in different ways. Moreover, due to the precarious nature of the relationship between the sexes, mate switching may by a primary function.

References

Abell, L., & Brewer, G. (2016). Machiavellianism, perceived quality of alternative mates, and resistance to mate guarding. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 236-239.  doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.013
Berry, D. S., & Kuczaj, S. A. (2000). Individual differences in evolutionary perspective: The games people play. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(4), 592-593.  doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00283374
Briffault, R. (1931). The mothers: The matriarchal theory of social origins. New York, NY: The Macmillan Company
Broude, G. J. (2000). Eating their cake and having it too: Or, how women maximize reproductive success by simultaneous mating and dating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(4), 595-595.  doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00313371
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49.  doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00023992
Buss, D. M. (2002). Human mate guarding. Neuroendocrinology Letters Special Issue, 23(4), 23-29. Retrieved from  labs.la.utexas.edu/buss/files/2015/10/buss- 2002-human-mate-guarding.pdf
Buss, D. M. (2011). The dangerous passion: Why jealousy is as necessary as love and sex. New York, NY: Free Press.
Buss, D. M., Goetz, C., Duntley, J. D., Asao, K., & Conroy-beam, D. (2017). The mate switching hypothesis. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 143-149. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.07.022
Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Kirkpatrick, L A., & Larsen, R. J. (2001). A half century of mate preferences: The cultural evolution of values. Journal of Marriage and Family. 63, 491 503.  doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00491.x
Buunk, B. P., Angleitner, A., Oubaid, V., & Buss, D. M. (1996). Sex differences in jealousy in evolutionary and cultural perspective: Tests from the Netherlands,Germany, and the United States. Psychological Science, 7(6), 359-363.  doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00389.x
Davies, A. P. C., & Shackelford, T. K. (2017). Don’t you wish your partner was hot like me?: The effectiveness of mate poaching across relationship types considering the relative mate-values of the poacher and the partner of the poached. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 32-35.  doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.029
Davies, A. P. C., Shackelford, T. K., & Hass, R. G. (2007). When a “poach” is not a poach: Re-defining human mate poaching and re-estimating its frequency. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 702-701.
doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9158-8
Fugere, M. A., Cousins, A. J., & MacLaren, S. A. (2015). (Mis)matching in physical attractiveness and women’s resistance to mate guarding. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 190 195.  doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.07.048
Gangestad, S. W., Garver-apgar, C. E., & Simpson, J. A. (2007). Changes in women’s mate preferences across the ovulatory cycle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 92(1), 151 163.  doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.151
Gangestad, S. W., & Haselton, M. G. (2015). Human estrus: Implications for relationship science. Current Opinion in Psychology, 1, 45-51.  doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2014.12.007
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573-644  doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x0000337x
Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Garver-apgar, C. E. (2005). Adaptions to ovulation: implications for sexual and social behavior. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 14(6), 312 316.  doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00388.x
Garver-apgar, C. E., Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., Miller, R. D., & Olp, J. J. (2006). Major histocompatibility complex alleles, sexual responsivity, and unfaithfulness in romantic couples. Psychological Science, 17(10), 830-835.  doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01789.x
Haselton, M. G., & Gangestad, S. W. (2006). Conditional expression of women’s desires and men’s mate guarding across the ovulatory cycle. Hormones and Behavior, 49, 509 518.  doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.10.006
Hill, S. E., & Buss, D. M. (2008). The mere presence of opposite-sex others on judgements of sexual and romantic desirability: Opposite effects for men and women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(5), 635-647.  doi.org/10.1177/0146167207313728
Jonas, P. K., Li, N. P., & Buss, D. M. (2010). The costs and benefits of the dark triad: Implications for mate poaching and mate retention tactics. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 373 378.  doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.11.003
Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Zierk, K. L., & Krones, J. M. (1994). Evolution and social cognition: Contrast effects as a function of sex, dominance, and physical attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(2), 210-217.  doi.org/10.1177/0146167294202008
Krems, J. A., Neel, R., Neuberg, S. L., Puts, D. A., & Kenrick, D. T. (2016). Women selectively guard their (desirable) mates from ovulating women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(4), 551-573  doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000044
Meston, C. M., & Buss, D. M. (2010). Why women have sex: Women reveal the truth about their sex lives, from adventure to revenge (and everything in between). New York, NY: St. Martin’s Griffin.
Pazda, A. D., Prokop, P., & Elliot, A. J. (2014). Red and romantic rivalry: Viewing another woman in red increases perceptions of sexual receptivity, derogation, and intentions to mate-guard. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(10), 1260-1269.  doi.org/10.1177/0146167214539709
Penal Code. (2005). Retrieved from  www.legifrance.gouv.fr/conte...../Code_33.pdf
Penn, D. J., & Potts, W. K. (1999). The evolution of mating preferences and major histocompatibility complex genes. The American Naturalist, 153(2), 145-164.  doi.org/10.1086/303166
Prokop, P., & Pazda, A. D. (2016). Women’s red clothing can increase mate-guarding from their male partner. Personality and Individual Differences, 98, 114-117.  doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.021
Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2001) Human mate poaching: Tactics and temptation for infiltrating existing mateships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 894-917.  doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.80.6.894
Sela, Y., Weekes-shackelford, V. A., Shackelford, T. K., & Pham, M. N. (2015) Female copulatory orgasm and male partner’s attractiveness to his partner and other women. Personality and Individual Differences, 79, 152-156.  doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.008
TED. (2017, November 14). David Buss: Sexual Conflict in Human Mating [Video file]. Retrieved from 
Tomassi, R. (2013). The rational male. Lightning Source Inc.