David Buss 1989
AIMS: In 1872 Charles Darwin established the principles of Sexual Selection. In terms
of human reproductive behaviour, the Evolutionary Psychology, which developed from
Darwin’s work, has tended to allocate quite different reproductive strategies to
men and women, based on the respective size of their gametes (mature sex cells).
As men make sperm in their millions, the best reproductive strategy to pass on your
genes is to impregnate as many women as possible. For women, with a much, much smaller
number of eggs,the opportunity to pass on their genes is much more limited. Therefore,
the emphasis has to be on nurturing the fertilised egg and the child that comes from
it. This reflects Robert Trivers’ (1972) concept of Parental Investment -
From an Evolutionary perspective, therefore, it makes sense for a woman to partner a man who has resources to support her and the young child.
From an Evolutionary perspective, if a man is to limit his reproductive opportunities
by partnering just one woman, then he has to be sure of both her fertility (the probability
of reproduction now -
Another factor to take into consideration is the fact that a women knows that, unless there has been a child swap, any offspring is hers. Prior to DNA tests, the man could only hope the child was his. According to Mildred Dickemann (1981) and Martin Daly, Margo Wilson & Suzanne Weghorst (1982), this explains why men place such a value on the chastity of their partners and often guard them jealously,
Like a great many Evolutionary psychologists, David Bus took the view that, the more an attitude or behaviour held across different cultures, the more likely it was to be the results of evolutionary pressures.
Bus wanted to test several predictions across multiple cultures...namely that:-
PROCEDURE (METHOD): 37 samples were acquired from 33 countries covering 6 continents.
Countries with culturally-
Sampling methods varied from country to country -
2 questionnaires were administered to all participants in their native language.
The first...
The second questionnaire asked participants to rank 13 factors affecting mate choice in order of importance, including the target variables of ‘good earning capacity’ and ‘physical attractiveness.
Where English was not the first language of the participant communities, 3 translators
were used -
The level of statistical significance set was p<0.05.
FINDINGS (RESULTS): Overall the results supported Evolutionary theory -
Only in Spain did was the importance placed by women on finance fractionally more important than that given by men. In the other 36 cultures (97%) the importance placed by women on finance was significantly more important than that given by men.
In 34 of the 37 cultures (92%) women placed more emphasis on ambition and industriousness than men; but the
|
Prediction |
Adaptive Value |
|
Women, more than men, should rate earning potential in a mate more highly |
The fitness of a woman’s offspring can be increased by allocation of resources |
|
Men, more than women, should rate physical attractiveness highly |
The fitness and reproductive potential of a female is more heavily influenced by age than for a male |
|
Men will, on the whole, prefer women younger than themselves |
Men reach sexual maturity later than women. Also the fitness and reproductive potential of a female is more heavily influenced by age than for a male |
|
Men, more than women will value chastity |
“Mummy’s babies - |
|
Women, more than men, should regard ambition and drive positively |
Ambition and drive are linked to the ability to secure resources and offer protection,
both of which would be fitness- |
partners.
In all 37 cultures the average age of men’s ideal woman (24.83) was significantly
younger than themselves. Similarly, in all 37 cultures women wanted older men (average
28.81) -
In all 37 cultures men rated good looks more important than women -
Averaged out across cultures, the top 7 most desirable personality traits in a partner
were:-
Chastity and lack of previous sexual experience was the factor that varied most across
cultures. Out of the Western European countries, only Ireland placed much emphasis
on chastity. In only 23 of the 37 cultures (62%) -
CONCLUSIONS: Buss concluded that there was support for all the predictions from Evolutionary theory tested in the study.
There was a strong trend for men to choose mates on the basis of aged and attractiveness
-
Women, however, placed more emphasis on ambition, industriousness and earning capacity.
These findings do suggest that parental investment, reproductive value and paternal
probability do play a role in mate selection in humans -
CRITICISMS (EVALUATION): Buss’ study was seminal -
It was also impressively large-
The use of 2 questionnaires about factors affecting mate preference is also considered a strength of the study, as it enables the researcher to look for consistency on 2 different instruments. Some sociologists and social psychologists regard questionnaires like these as better measures than (‘real life’) marriage records which may measure mate selection, rather than mate preference or, in cultures where arranged marriages are the norm, the preferences of the marital partners’ families.
However, people can and do lie on questionnaires -
Buss’ study is particularly vulnerable to criticisms over the sampling methods used and the fact there were such uneven numbers from different cultures. While the findings do appear to support the Evolutionary hypotheses across multiple cultures, it can be argued that, had the sample numbers been more representative, there is no guarantee the hypotheses would have been so well supported.
A perhaps inevitable omission in Buss’ study -
However, David Schmitt, Cheung-
|
Country |
Sample Size |
|
USA |
1670 |
|
Germany |
1083 |
|
Brazil |
630 |
|
Israel |
582 |
|
Taiwan |
566 |
|
China |
500 |
|
Netherlands |
417 |
|
Estonia |
303 |
|
Australia |
280 |
|
Bulgaria |
269 |
|
Japan |
259 |
|
Poland |
240 |
|
South Africa |
228 |
|
Canada |
206 |
|
Finland |
204 |
|
Venezuela |
193 |
|
France |
191 |
|
Nigeria |
172 |
|
Sweden |
172 |
|
New Zealand |
151 |
|
Belgium |
145 |
|
Indonesia |
143 |
|
Yugoslavia |
140 |
|
Colombia |
139 |
|
Norway |
134 |
|
Greece |
132 |
|
Great Britain |
130 |
|
Spain |
124 |
|
Ireland |
122 |
|
Zambia |
119 |
|
Italy |
101 |
|
Iran |
55 |
|
Hypothesis |
No of Cultures supporting |
% of total |
No of cultures contrary (con) or result not significant (ns) |
% of total |
|
Women, more than men, value earning potential |
36 |
97 |
1 ns |
3 |
|
Men, more than women, value physical attributes |
34 |
92 |
3 ns |
8 |
|
Women, more than men, value ambition and industriousness |
29 |
78 |
3 cons 5 ns |
8 13 |
|
Men, more than women, value chastity |
23 |
62 |
14 ns |
38 |
|
Men prefer women younger than themselves |
37 |
100 |
0 |
0 |
difference was of statistical significance in only 29 of the cultures (78%). In 3
samples -
Both sexes in the Nigerian, Zulu, Chinese, Taiwanese, Estonian, Israeli Palestinian, Colombian and Venezuelan samples rated this mate characteristic highly.
Interestingly, when very high-
| 'So what is a MeshWORK?' |
| 'When BLUE fails, call for Clint!' |
| Is Racism Natural...? |
| Underclass: the Excreta of Capitalism |
| MeshWORKS |
| Power & Government |
| Pro- & Anti-Social Behaviour |
| Build a MeshWORK |
| Gernia Variation |
| The Nature of Power |
| Democracy |
| The State |
| Voters |
| Social Reform |
| Volunteering |
| Power |
| Gender in Politics |
| Rosedale MeshWORK |
| Don Beck & South Africa |
| Organisation LifeCycle |
| 'Companies by Neurological Levels' |
| 'The Thriving Organisation' |
| Company by Neurological Levels |
| 'The SME Spiral' |
| LifeCycle Position Test |
| LifeCycle Roles Test |
| Behavioural Abnormality |
| Little Albert |
| Biological Abnormality |
| Genetic Basis for Mental Disorders |
| Psychodynamic Abnormality |
| Autism |
| Autism Symptoms |
| Diagnosing Autism |
| Causes of Autism |
| Autism & Pathophysiology |
| Eating Disorders |
| Eating Disorders - Behavioural |
| Eating Disorders - Biological |
| Eating Disorders - Cognitive |
| Eating Disorders - Psychodynamic |
| Ancestry of Anorexia |
| Obesity |
| Diagnosis of Depression |
| Depression - Biological |
| Depression - Psychological |
| Social Support, Self-Esteem & Depression |
| Depression - Evolutionary |
| Learned Helplessness |
| Aspects of Bipolar Disorder |
| Dissociative Identity or Multiple Personality? |
| What's in a Name? |
| 3 Faces of Eve |
| History of Schizophrenia |
| Diagnosis of Schizophrenia |
| Schizophrenia |
| Schizophrenia - Diagnostic Issues |
| Causes of Schizophrenia |
| The Schizophrenic Brain |
| Schizophrenia - Evolutionary Explanations |
| What is Stress? |
| Stress & Illness |
| Stress Vulnerability |
| Stress & Individual Differences |
| Sources of Stress |
| Life Changes & Stress |
| Work-Related Stress |
| Stress Management |
| Models |
| Services |
| Society |
| Miscellaneous |
| 'Knowing Me, Knowing You' |
| Contents |
| What they've said... |
| Coaching & Mentoring |
| Consultancy |
| Personal Therapy |
| Training |
| Tuition |
| Case Studies - Business |
| Case Studies - Education |
| Case Studies - Local Government |
| Case Studies - Individuals |
| Client Satisfactiion |
| Coaching & Mentoring |
| Coaching for Headteachers |
| Visioning Leadership |
| Change Management |
| Strategic Planning |
| Open Space |
| Recruitment & Selection |
| Personal Therapy |
| Telephone Support |
| Integrated SocioPsychology Courses |
| Courses Schedule |
| Course Quotes |
| Tuition |
| Tips for Success! |
| Online Tuition |
| Hodgson Sealants |
| The Parks |
| North Lincolnshire CIT |
| 'James' & 'Alan' |
| 'Susan' |
| 'William' |
| 'Jasmine' |
| 'Shirley' |
| 'Jay' |
| Client Quotes |
| 21st Century Group |
| HemsMESH |
| Humber MeshWORKS |
| MESH Network |
| Terms of Business |
| Site Map |
| Using this Site |
| Bibliography |
| Structural-Functionalism |
| Symbolic Interactionism |
| Attribution Theory |
| Correspondent Inference Theory |
| Covariation Theory |
| Attribution Biases |
| Dilts' Brain Science |
| Selfplex Defence Mechanisms |
| Graves Model |
| Hierarchy of Needs |
| Self-Actualisation |
| Self-Transcendence |
| vMEME Transition Stages |
| A Biological Basis for vMEMES..? |
| Biological Psychology |
| Cognitive Psychology |
| The Brain |
| Neurons & Neurotransmitters |
| Genes & Behaviour |
| Hormones & Behaviour |
| Biological Rhythms |
| Menstrual Cycle |
| Disruption of Biological Rhythms |
| Models of Memory |
| Linked Models of Memory |
| Forgetting - Short-Term Memory |
| Forgetting - Long-Term Memory |
| Emotional Factors in Forgetting |
| Social Influence |
| 'A Downward Spiral...' |
| 'Potential Spiral Strategies' |
| 'Good Boys gone Bad...?' |
| Intelligence & Learning |
| Day Care |
| Education |
| Moral Development |
| Defining Day Care |
| Day Care & Cognitive Development |
| Day Care & Emotional Development |
| Day Care & Social Development |
| Day Care... or not? |
| Cognitive Development in Educatiion |
| Stages of Moral Devleopment |
| 'How the Brain develops the Mind' |
| Infant Attachments |
| Gender Development |
| Approaches to Gender Development |
| Gender Development Comparison Chart |
| Is Sexual Infidelity Innevitable? |
| Relationships (General) |
| Sexual/Romantic Relationships |
| Friendship |
| Families |
| Development of Friendship |
| Stages of Friendship |
| Sex Differences in Friendship |
| Popularity & Rejection |
| Parental Investment |
| Types of Family |
| Roles in the Family |
| Perspectives on the Family |
| Changes to the Family |
| Ageing Population |
| Family Issues |