Personality and Social Psychology
Individual differences in preference for risky behaviors during courtship
Pavol Prokop,
Adam Pazda,
Corresponding Author
Pavol Prokop
Department of Environmental Ecology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia
Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia
Pavol Prokop, Department of Environmental Ecology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, Ilkovičova 6, 842 15 Bratislava, Slovakia. Tel: +42160296236; e-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorAdam Pazda
Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina Aiken, Aiken, SC, USA
Search for more papers by this authorPavol Prokop,
Adam Pazda,
Corresponding Author
Pavol Prokop
Department of Environmental Ecology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia
Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia
Pavol Prokop, Department of Environmental Ecology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, Ilkovičova 6, 842 15 Bratislava, Slovakia. Tel: +42160296236; e-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorAdam Pazda
Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina Aiken, Aiken, SC, USA
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Engaging in risky behaviors is a sexual signalling strategy that men use to procure mates. The present study investigates men’s preferences for engaging in risky behaviors (along with women’s preferences for their male partner’s risky behavior) within dating couples. We investigated associations between relationship length, self-perceived attractiveness, sociosexuality orientation, and preference for risky behaviors in a sample of 256 couples. Results indicated that men had stronger preferences for risky behaviors than their partner’s ideal preference. Furthermore, relationship length was associated with a decline in women’s preference for their partner’s risk-taking, but not men’s preference for their own risk-taking. Self-perceived attractiveness was negatively associated with risk preference, and sociosexuality orientation was not directly related to risk preference. Female preferences for less intense male risky behaviors could reflect the need of paternal investment which is required for offspring care. Decreased male sexual signalling could account for lower preferences of risky behaviors in females who are involved in longer lasting romantic relationships.
References
- Apalkova, Y., Butovskaya, M. L., Bronnikova, N., Burkova, V., Shackelford, T. K. & Fink, B. (2018). Assessment of male physical risk-taking behavior in a sample of russian men and women. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 4, 314–332.
10.1007/s40806-018-0140-1 Google Scholar
- Apicella, C. L., Crittenden, A. N. & Tobolsky, V. A. (2017). Hunter-gatherer males are more risk-seeking than females, even in late childhood. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38, 592–603.
- Aung, T., Hughes, S. M., Hone, L. S. & Puts, D. A. (2019). Operational sex ratio predicts binge drinking across US counties. Evolutionary Psychology, 17, 1–11.
- Baker, M. D. Jr & Maner, J. K. (2008). Risk-taking as a situationally sensitive male mating strategy. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 391–395.
- Baker, M. D. Jr & Maner, J. K. (2009). Male risk-taking as a context-sensitive signaling device. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1136–1139.
- Barber, N. (1995). The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16, 395–424.
- Brown, W. M., Cronk, L., Grochow, K., Jacobson, A., Liu, C. K., Popovic, Z. et al. (2005). Dance reveals symmetry especially in young men. Nature, 438, 1148–1150.
- Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–14.
- Buss, D. M. & Shackelford, T. K. (2008). Attractive women want it all: Good genes, economic investment, parenting proclivities, and emotional commitment. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 134–146.
- Buston, P. M. & Emlen, S. T. (2003). Cognitive processes underlying human mate choice: The relationship between self-perception and mate preference in Western society. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 8805–8810.
- Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C. & Schafer, W. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 367–383.
- Chu, S., Hardaker, R. & Lycett, J. E. (2007). Too good to be ‘true’? The handicap of high socio-economic status in attractive males. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1291–1300.
- Diamond, J. (1992). The third chimpanzee: The evolution and future of the human animal. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
- Farthing, G. W. (2005). Attitudes toward heroic and nonheroic physical risk takers as mates and as friends. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 171–185.
- Fink, B., Hamdaoui, A., Wenig, F. & Neave, N. (2010). Hand-grip strength and sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 789–793.
- Fischer, D. & Hills, T. T. (2012). The baby effect and young male syndrome: Social influences on cooperative risk-taking in women and men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 530–536.
- Greitemeyer, T. (2013). Exposure to media with prosocial content reduces the propensity for reckless and risky driving. Journal of Risk Research, 16, 583–594.
- Jokela, M. (2009). Physical attractiveness and reproductive success in humans: Evidence from the late 20th century United States. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 342–350.
- Kelly, S. & Dunbar, R. I. (2001). Who dares, wins. Human Nature, 12, 89–105.
- Li, N. P., Kenrick, D. T., Bailey, J. M. & Linsenmeier, J. A. W. (2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 947–955.
- Lie, H. C., Rhodes, G. & Simmons, L. W. (2008). Genetic diversity revealed in human faces. Evolution: International Journal of Organic. Evolution, 62, 2473–2486.
- Little, A. C., Burt, D. M., Penton-Voak, I. S. & Perrett, D. I. (2001). Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces. Proceedings from the Royal Society of London, 268, 39–44.
- Lukaszewski, A. W., Larson, C. M., Gildersleeve, K. A., Roney, J. R. & Haselton, M. G. (2014). Condition-dependent calibration of men’s uncommitted mating orientation: Evidence from multiple samples. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35, 319–326.
- McIntyre, M., Gangestad, S. W., Gray, P. B., Chapman, J. F., Burnham, T. C., O'Rourke, M.T. & Thornhill, R. (2006). Romantic involvement often reduces men's testosterone levels – but not always: The moderating role of extrapair sexual interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 642–651.
- Park, J. H., Buunk, A. P. & Wieling, M. (2007). Does the face reveal athletic flair? Positions in team sports and facial attractiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1960–1965.
- Pawlowski, B., Atwal, R. & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2008). Sex differences in everyday risk-taking behavior in humans. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 29–42.
- Pawlowski, B. & Dunbar, R. I. M. (1999). Impact of market value on human mate choice. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 266, 281–285.
- Penke, L. & Asendorpf, J. B. (2008). Beyond global sociosexual orientations: a more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1113–1135.
- Petraitis, J. M., Lampman, C. B., Boeckmann, R. J. & Falconer, E. M. (2014). Sex differences in the attractiveness of hunter-gatherer and modern risks. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44, 442–453.
- Prokop, P. (2015). Perception of intensity of sperm competition on the part of males. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 99–103.
- Prokop, P. & Fedor, P. (2013). Associations between body morphology, mating success and mate preferences among Slovak males and females. Anthropologischer Anzeiger, 70, 121–135.
- Rhodes, G., Simmons, L. W. & Peters, M. (2005). Attractiveness and sexual behavior: Does attractiveness enhance mating success? Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 186–201.
- Ronay, R. & Hippel, W. V. (2010). The presence of an attractive woman elevates testosterone and physical risk taking in young men. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 57–64.
- Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 247–275.
- Searcy, W. A. & Nowicki, S. (2005). The evolution of animal communication: Reliability and deception in signaling systems. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Sevi, B., Aral, T. & Eskenazi, T. (2018). Exploring the hook-up app: Low sexual disgust and high sociosexuality predict motivation to use Tinder for casual sex. Personality and Individual Differences, 133, 17–20.
- Simpson, J. A. & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–883.
- Sugiyama, L. S. (2005). Physical attractiveness: An adaptationist perspective. The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, (pp. 1–68). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
- Sylwester, K. & Pawłowski, B. (2011). Daring to be darling: Attractiveness of risk takers as partners in long-and short-term sexual relationships. Sex Roles, 64, 695–706.
- Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Trivers, R. (1972). Parental investment and sexual sSelection (Vol. 136, p. 179). Cambridge, MA: Biological Laboratories, Harvard University.
- Velez-Blasini, C. J. (2008). Evidence against alcohol as a proximal cause of sexual risk taking among college students. Journal of Sex Research, 45, 118–128.
- Wang, X. T., Kruger, D. J. & Wilke, A. (2009). Life history variables and risk-taking propensity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 77–84.
- Watkins, C. D. (2017). Creating beauty: Creativity compensates for low physical attractiveness when individuals assess the attractiveness of social and romantic partners. Royal Society Open Science, 4, 160955.
- Wilke, A., Hutchinson, J. M., Todd, P. M. & Kruger, D. J. (2006). Is risk taking used as a cue in mate choice? Evolutionary Psychology, 4, 367–393.
10.1177/147470490600400130 Google Scholar
- Wilson, M. & Daly, M. (1985). Competitiveness, risk taking, and violence. The young male syndrome. Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 59–73.
- Zahavi, A. (1975). Mate selection – a selection for handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53, 205–214.
- Zheng, L. J. & Zheng, Y. (2014). Online sexual activity in Mainland China: Relationship to sexual sensation seeking and sociosexuality. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 323–329.
