Abstract: Research has focused on the role of prosocial behaviors in mate choice, across both social and evolutionary psychology. Several studies provide strong support for the role of altruism in mate choice, whereby people find prosociality attractive in potential mates. As most research focuses on the role of altruism in mate choice, most research has found that people exhibit altruism towards attractive people, suggesting altruistic behavior is driven by mate choice motivation. Although studies have supported the notion that men’s altruism towards women is driven by mate choice, the findings are inconsistent, which may be due to the methodologies adopted by researchers. To our knowledge, this review paper is the first to critically review the literature concerning prosociality and mate choice. We provide an outline of the research thus far, methodological issues, and considerations for future research.
Keywords: Mate choice Prosocial behavior Sexual selection Game theory
Check also Further support for the role of heroism in human mate choice. Manpal Singh Bhogal & James E Bartlett. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/08/both-men-and-women-found-heroic-targets.html
---
Inside The role of prosocial behaviors in mate choice: A critical review of the literature. Manpal Singh Bhogal, Daniel Farrelly, Niall Galbraith...
Research suggests that prosocial traits such as altruism and cooperation are sexually selected traits (Miller 2000, 2007; Tessman 1995; Zahavi 1995), increasing one’s chances of securing mating opportunities (Gintis et al. 2001). Farrelly et al. (2007) suggest that investing in altruistic ventures is important to both sexes, as it provides valuable information when engaging with, and evaluating a potential mate. Being willing to share may signal commitment to a relationship, as well as signalling a generous nature, which may be of more importancetowomen,aswomenvalueaman’sabilitytogain and share resources (Tessman 1995), thus strengthening the argument that altruism acts as a courtship display and is a reliable indicator of mate quality (Miller 2007). Furthermore, according to Parental Investment Theory (Trivers 1972), women invest far more into offspring thanmen do, and therefore choose partners who display good partner/parental qualities. In support, altruistic men are expected to be better partners and fathers than non-altruistic men (Miller 2000, 2007). As a result, altruism contributes to one’s mating efforts and reproductive success, which according to Roberts (2015) has been ‘overlooked’ (p. 425) in the literature. Much of the research exploring the desirability of altruistic mates began with Barclay (2010), who manipulated altruism and non-altruism in a series of vignettes. He found that men and women (particularly women) found altruistic targets to be more desirable for longterm relationships compared to short-term relationships. Furthermore, using a modified version of Buss’s Mate Preferences Questionnaire (Buss 1989), Bhogal et al. (2019) found that women placed higher importance on altruism when seeking long-term, compared to shortterm relationships, signifying the powerful role of relationship length in preferences for altruistic partners. They also found that women placed greater importance on cooperativeness in a mate compared to men, although this preference was not influenced by relationship length. Research suggests that women prefer altruistic partners (Moore et al. 2013), and this preference is particularly important when seeking long-term relationships (Farrelly 2013; Farrelly et al.2016). Moore et al. (2013) found that altruistic targets were rated as more attractive than nonaltruistic targets. Farrelly (2013) found that both men and women valued altruistic mates when seeking long-term partners compared to short-term partners, a finding which has been recently replicated by Farrelly and King (2019). Farrelly et al. (2016) argue that altruism is a sign of phenotypic quality, as opposed to singularly relaying genetic quality. In support, Farrelly (2011) found that women valued cooperative partners when seeking long-term relationships more than when seeking a short-term relationship. Farrelly (2011) found that preferences did not differ across women’s menstrual cycle, thus suggesting altruism is attractive because it signals phenotypic rather than genetic quality. Furthermore, Farrelly et al. (2016) explored the role of altruism and physical attractiveness when seeking a longterm/short-term relationship. Women rated a series of attractive and unattractive male images, accompanied by scenarios, where they were asked to rate the desirability of men in 12 scenarios including varying levels of altruism. They found that women rated those who were altruistic as more desirable than non-altruistic, seeking longterm mates only. However, non-altruists were more desirable than altruists when women were seeking a shortterm mate. Perhaps this is because altruism signals one’s positive traits and is indicative of future behavior as a parent and partner rather than genetic quality (Farrelly 2011, 2013). However, Farrelly et al. (2016) argue that a limitation of using scenarios and hypothetical situations in research on mate choice, is that these descriptions may relay other qualities, apart from altruism alone, such as heroism or strength. In support, Kelly and Dunbar (2001) found that women rate brave men higher on desirability compared to altruistic men for short and long-term mates. This could be exploredinfutureresearch, asthere isa finelinebetween acts of heroism that are altruistic, and altruism in the form of generosity in economic games. To conceptualise the different explanations for the evolution of altruism, it is important to assess why prosocial tendencies appear to be so important in mate choice. Perhaps research should explore the costs related to the altruistic acts being displayed. For example, recent evidence has unpacked prosociality by exploring its varying facets, such as heroism (Margana et al. 2019) and trustworthiness (Ehlebracht et al. 2018). Margana et al. (2019) found that women were attracted to attractive, heroic men more so than attractive, altruistic men. This preference was stronger when seeking long-term relationships compared to short-term relationships, providing further support that research must unpack the varying facets of prosocial behavior and mate choice. Thus far, research has largely focused on altruistic and cooperative behavior in mate choice settings, largely ignoring other forms of prosociality (also see Norman and Fleming 2019). In addition to unpacking prosociality, research seldom focuses on high vs low cost altruism in relation to mate choice. For example, Fitzgerald et al. (2010) argue that differences in self-reported altruism are influenced by whether the altruistic act is of small or of high cost to the altruist. Future research shouldtakethis into account, as there also appear to be differences in self-reported altruism and hypothetical scenarios (see Tables 1 and 2 for the varying resources and stakes used across the research reviewed here1). Although much of the research has found that women express an interest in dating altruistic men, recent findings suggest that in Chinese students, women advertised themselves as altruistic, and men were attracted to altruistic traits in women (Guo et al. 2017). Interestingly, they found the preference for altruistic mates was not influenced by whether they were seeking a short-term or long-term partner, thus suggesting there maybecultural differences in preferences for altruism in mate choice, which to our knowledge have not been fully explored in the literature. Perhaps future research could explore cultural influences on mate preferences for prosocial behaviors in mate choice, as most research exploring these constructs has been conducted in Western cultures. Cultural influences could be prevalent whereby it is against the norm to be non-altruistic, which is more prevalent in Eastern, collectivist cultures compared to Western, individualistic cultures (Yama 2018). One final discussion point for this section relates to mutual mate choice (Snowdon 2013). Farrelly and King (2019) argue that researchers must explore the role of mutual mate choice in the evolution of altruism rather than focusing solely on female mate choice. Although most research discussed (particularly those finding a sex difference in preferences for altruism outlined in Table 1) finds that women prefer altruistic mates to a greater extent compared to men, there is emerging literature which suggests that altruism has not only evolved via female choice, but via mutual mate choice. Mutual mate choice refers to when men and women both exercise similar choice and control over the traits they seek in a romantic partner (Farrelly and King 2019). The argument here relates to the fact that altruism signals good parental and partner qualities, which can also be important to men, particularly as men and women engage in bi-parental care (Phillips et al. 2008). For example, Farrelly and King (2019) recently found that when asking participants to state how desirable altruistic targets are as potential mates, desirability ratings are very similar. This pattern has also been found in Farrelly (2013) whereby, although women rated altruistic targets as more desirable compared to men, men still rated altruistic women as desirable partners. This signifies the point that although altruism is more important to women in mate choice, this does not necessarily mean men are also not attracted to altruistic tendencies in women. So far, we have discussed research exploring the desirability of prosocial behaviors in mate choice. We will now discuss the literature aiming to investigate whether men and women display prosocial acts, or public displays of altruism towards potential mates, using a variety of experimental designs, stimuli, and monetary resources.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment