An evolutionary perspective on intergroup dating bias. Samantha Brindley, Melissa M. McDonald, Lisa L. M. Welling & Virgil Zeigler-Hill. Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology, https://doi.org/10.1080/23743603.2018.1436939
ABSTRACT: Across a diversity of contexts, men tend to exhibit greater intergroup bias than do women. However, in the domain of dating, this trend is reversed, such that women more strongly prefer to date men of their own racial group. Researchers employing an evolutionary perspective suggest that this sex difference can be explained by an evolutionary history in which men and women faced distinct adaptive challenges in their interactions with outgroup men. For women, outgroup men posed a recurrent threat of sexual coercion. Given the importance of reproductive choice in female mating strategies, this may have exerted selection pressure for psychological mechanisms that promote avoidance of outgroup men. Here we pre-registered a two-study design to examine whether women’s intergroup dating bias, manipulated via nationality to control for racial stereotypes, could be altered by manipulating the formidability of outgroup dating targets, thereby ameliorating or exacerbating their perceived threat. The design did not produce the predicted pattern of intergroup bias, suggesting that the manipulation of group status may need to be stronger. Implications and future directions are discussed.
KEYWORDS: Intergroup bias, mate choice, dating, threat-management, female preferences
---
Psychological research has documented a tendency for women, relative to men, to exhibit greater intergroup bias in the context of dating (Hitsch, Hortaçsu, & Ariely, 2010; Hwang, 2013). Furthermore, this bias may not be offset by other person characteristics, such as income, that are typically evaluated positively in male romantic partners (Hitsch, Hortascsu, & Ariely, 2006). This finding may be surprising given that much of the research on intergroup bias suggests that men tend to express greater intergroup bias than women in a variety of other contexts (reviewed in McDonald, Navarrete, & Van Vugt, 2012). Previous research attempting to explain this discrepancy has suggested that women’s greater intergroup bias in romantic and intimate contexts might be the result of an evolutionary history in which women were often the victims of sexual coercion, committed by outgroup men during intergroup conflict (McDonald, Donnellan, Cesario, & Navarrete, 2015). From this perspective, women’s intergroup bias in dating contexts may function to protect women’s reproductive choice by avoiding men more prone to reliance on the use of sexually coercive mating tactics.
- Antrobus, J. (1983). REM and NREM sleep reports: Comparisons of word frequencies by cognitive classes, Psychophysiology, 20, 562–568.Google Scholar
- Avila-White, D., Schneider, A., Domhoff, G.W. (1999). The Most Recent Dreams of 12–13 year-old boys and girls: a methodological contribution to the study of dream content in teenagers. Dreaming, 9, 2/3, 163–171.Google Scholar
- Azzone, P., Freni, S., Maggiolini, A., Provantini, K., Viganò, D. (1998). How early adolescents describe their dreams: a quantitative analysis, Adolescence, 33, 129, 229–244.Google Scholar
- Barcaro, U., Calabrese, R., Cavallero, C., Diciotti, R., Navona, C. (2002). Significance of automatically detected word recurrences in dream associations, Dreaming, 12, 2, 93–107.Google Scholar
- Benjamin, L.S. (1996). Interpersonal diagnosis and treatment of personality disorders. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Bucci, W. (1997). Psychoanalysis and cognitive science. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- DeLaney, G.M. (1997). In your dreams: falling, flying and other dreams themes. New York: Harper & Collins.Google Scholar
- Domhoff, G.W. (1999). New directions in study of dream content using the Hall and Van de Castle coding system, Dreaming, 9, 2/3, 115–137.Google Scholar
- Domhoff, W. (1996). Finding meaning in dreams: A quantitative approach. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
- Garfield, P. (2001). The universal dream key: the 12 most common dream themes around the world. New York: Harperperennial.Google Scholar
- Grinstein, A. (1983). Freud's rules of dream interpretation. Madison: Int. Univ. Press.Google Scholar
- Hall, C.S., Van de Castle, R.L. (1966). The content analysis of dreams. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
- Kilroe, P. A. (2000). The dream as text. The dream as narrative, Dreaming, 10, 3, 125–138.Google Scholar
- Luborsky, L., Crits-Christoph, P. (1990). Understanding transference: The CCRT method. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Mergenthaler, E. Stinson, C.H. (1992). Psychotherapy transcription standard. Psychotherapy research, 2, 58–75.Google Scholar
- Mergenthaler, E., Freni, S., Giampieri, E., Ferrari, R. (1998). Regole standardizzate di trascrizione delle sedute di psicoterapia, Ricerca in Psicoterapia, 1, 29–46.Google Scholar
- Pagel, J.F., Blagrove, M., Levin, R., States, B., Stickgold, B., White, S. (2001). Definitions of dream: a paradigm for comparing flying descriptive specific studies of dream, Dreaming, 11, 4, 194–202.Google Scholar
- Popp, C. A, Diguer, L., Luborsky, L., Faude, J. (1996). Repetitive relationship themes in waking narratives and dreams, Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 64(5), 1073–1078.Google Scholar
- Roccioletti, G., Zulli, A.M., & Bertini, M. (1983). Il sogno nell'età evolutiva. Una ricerca sul contenuto manifesto. Roma: Bulzoni.Google Scholar
- Schredl, M. (2002). Questionnaires and diaries as research instruments in dream research: methodological issues, Dreaming, 12, 1, 17–26.Google Scholar
- Stevens, A. (1995). Private myths. Dreams and dreaming. London: Hamish Hamilton.Google Scholar
- Strauch, I., Lederbogen, S. (1999). The home dreams and waking fantasies of boys and girls between ages 9 and 15: a longitudinal study, Dreaming, 9, 2/3, 153–161.Google Scholar