In der gestern behandelten Studie waren zwei interessante Studien zu männlicher Dominanz und der Attraktivitätsbewertung durch Frauen enthalten.
In der ersten Studie geht es darum, wie sich die Vorliebe für Dominanz zum Zyklus der Frau verhält:
Recent studies have reported that women exhibit elevated preferences for behavioral dominance in potential mates on higher fertility days of the menstrual cycle. This study was designed to test which hormonal signals may be associated with such cycle phase shifts in dominance preferences. Women indicated their mate preferences for dominant personality traits, and self-reported cycle day was used to estimate each woman’s levels of estrogen, FSH, LH, progesterone, prolactin, and testosterone on her day of testing. Women’s preferences for dominance in long-term mates were elevated on cycle days when estrogen is typically elevated, including during the luteal phase when conception is not possible. Preferences for dominance in short-term mates were highest on cycle days when LH and FSH are typically peaking. These ﬁndings support the existence of two types of hormone-regulated psychological mechanisms, each of which is proposed by a distinct functional theory of menstrual phase preference shifts: (1) a between-cycle mechanism that increases preferences for dominance in long-term mates during more fertile cycles characterized by higher estrogen, and (2) a within-cycle mechanism that couples enhanced preferences for dominance in short-term mates to the timing of ovulation
Quelle: Estimated hormones predict women’s mate preferences for dominant personality traits (Volltext, PDF)
Hier die wesentlichen Daten:
3.2. Results for ratings of long-term mate attractiveness
Among the sub-sample of women not using hormonal contraceptives who rated traits for long-term mate attractiveness (n = 42), the zero-order correlation between estimated estrogen and dominance preference was marginally signiﬁcant, r = .30, p = .057. However, the effect of estrogen became much stronger when dominance preferences were simultaneously regressed on all of the hormones presented in Table 1, b = .57, p = .008 (no other hormones exerted signiﬁcant inﬂuences in this model). Fig. 2A suggests that this estrogen effect was generated as much by an elevation of dominance preferences in the mid-luteal phase (when estrogen is also elevated) as by an elevation during the fertile window; consistent with this, the size of the zero-order correlation between estrogen and dominance preference became slightly larger when analyses were restricted to women tested during the luteal phase (n = 17), r = .37, p = .145. 3.3.
Results for ratings of short-term mate attractiveness
A somewhat different pattern emerged among the sub-sample of women who rated traits for short-term mate attractiveness (n = 50). The zero-order correlation between estimated estrogen and dominance preference was positive but not signiﬁcant, r = .22, p = .13, whereas both estimated LH, r = .31, p = .03, and estimated FSH, r = .30, p = .032 were signiﬁcantly correlated with dominance preferences. When dominance preferences were regressed on all of the hormones presented in Table 1, there was a marginally signiﬁcant positive effect only for LH, b = .47, p = .081. When FSH was substituted for LH in the model, FSH became the only signiﬁcant predictor of dominance preferences, b = .44, p = .043 (the inﬂuence of estrogen in this model was positive but not signiﬁcant, b = .33, p = .174). Fig. 2B suggests that this LH/FSH effect was likely a product of the sharp mid-cycle peak in dominance preferences seen among women rating for short-term mate attractiveness.
Die Schwankungen mit dem Hormonspiegel waren also nicht so stark, aber nachweisbar.
Aus der Diskussion:
Between-cycle theory proposes mechanisms that read estrogen concentrations as evidence of the fertility of a current cycle in order to up-regulate scrutiny of men’s sexual attractiveness in more vs. less fertile cycles. The theory posits a simple prediction that higher estrogen will be associated with stronger attraction to components of sexual attractiveness, regardless of whether the estrogen elevations occur during the fertile window. Our ﬁndings for ratings of long-term mate attractiveness (and for results collapsed across rating contexts) were consistent with this prediction, as we found elevated preferences for dominance on days when estrogen tends to be elevated, including during parts of the luteal phase when conception is not possible. Mixed-mating theory does not directly predict such luteal phase preference elevations, although the luteal phase patterns could be by-products of a mechanism that uses estrogen to index the timing of the fertile window. In sum, the results for ratings of long-term attractiveness were directly consistent with the predictions of between-cycle theory, but might also be explained as by-products of the mechanisms proposed by mixed-mating theory.
Preferences for dominance in short-term mates, on the other hand, were more tightly coupled to the fertile window, with a pronounced peak on the days that LH and FSH are typically peaking. This pattern is consistent with mixed-mating theory’s postulation of evaluative mechanisms that hone in on markers of phenotypic quality in potential sexual partners on the precise days of the cycle that conception is most likely. In conjunction with the ﬁndings for long-term ratings, then, our overall ﬁndings are consistent with the existence of two general types of mechanisms: a between-cycle mechanism that reads estrogen concentrations and operates speciﬁcally on judgments of potential long-term mates, and a within-cycle mechanism that reads hormonal signals associated with the fertile window and operates speciﬁcally on judgments of potential short-term sexual partners.
Es gibt also zwei interessante Punkte, bei denen Dominanz eine Rolle spielt: Einmal bei einer Langzeitbetrachtung, bei der die jeweilige allgemeine Fruchtbarkeit eine Rolle für die Bewertung der Attraktivität von Dominanz spielt und eine Kurzzeitbetrachtung, bei der die konkrete im Moment bestehende Fruchtbarkeit eine Rolle spielt. In beiden Fällen ist jeweils mit höherer Fruchtbarkeit Dominanz attraktiver.
Es wäre demnach zu vermuten, dass weiblicherer Frauen im Schnitt eher dominante Männer interessant finden, männlichere Frauen dies allerdings in einem geringeren Maße tun. Vielleicht auch ein Grund, warum diese Theorien im feministischen Bereich eher auf Unverständnis stoßen, da hier meiner Vermutung nach viele männlichere Frauen vorhanden sein müssten, da gerade diese die Geschlechterrollen als belastender empfinden sollten.
Die zweite Studie geht in die gleiche Richtung:
Women prefer both the scent of symmetrical men and masculine male faces more during the fertile (late follicular and ovulatory) phases of their menstrual cycles than during their infertile (e.g., luteal) phases. Men’s behavioral displays in social settings may convey signals that affect women’s attraction to men even more strongly. This study examined shifts in women’s preferences for these behavioral displays. A sample of 237 normally ovulating women viewed 36 or 40 videotaped men who were competing for a potential lunch date and then rated each man’s attractiveness as a short-term and a long-term mate. As predicted, women’s preference for men who displayed social presence and direct intrasexual competitiveness increased on high-fertility days relative to low-fertility days, but only in a short-term, not a long-term, mating context. These ﬁndings add to the growing literature indicating that women’s mate preferences systematically vary across the reproductive cycle.
Also zumindest bezüglich der Kurzzeitstrategie ein ähnliches Ergebnis, wobei bei der anderen Studie insbesondere ein Hoch in der Mitte des Zyklus für die Langzeitstratgie und das Verhältnis von Dominanz interessant war.
Zu den Kriterien findet sich in der Studie das Folgende:
Although scent and facial attractiveness may importantly affect women’s attraction to men (Buss & Schmitt, 1993; Herz & Cahill, 1997; Regan & Berscheid, 1995), men’s behavior—how they interact with women and other men—may be even more important determinants of attraction. Women prefer men who display self-assurance and stand up for themselves with other men, but who exhibit warmth and agreeableness (e.g., Cunningham, Druen, & Barbee, 1997; Graziano, Jensen-Campbell, Todd, & Finch, 1997; Jensen-Campbell, Graziano, & West, 1995). The former attributes, which reﬂect intrasexual competitiveness, may partly function as signals of genetic beneﬁts (i.e., broadly deﬁned heritable condition) that are also conveyed by facial masculinity and developmental stability.
Auch hier findet sich also die Einteilung in Dominanz auf der anderen Seite aber komfortbezogene Elemente auf der einen Seite. Dominanz wird hier als Ausdruck der Fähigkeit beurteilt sich innerhalb einer intrasexuellen Konkurrenz durchzusezten, also gut darin zu sein, sich in einer Männergruppe und der dort herrschenden Konkurrenz durchzusetzen. Wer sich bewusst macht, wie wichtig für hierarchisch lebende Tiere die soziale Hierarchie ist, der erkennt auch schnell die Bedeutung der Domianz in diesem Bereich und dessen Wichtigkeit als Partnerwahlkriterium.
Hier die Werte in einer Tabelle:
Man sieht hier, dass sowohl Attraktivität als auch die Fähigkeit in intrasexueller Konkurrenz zu bestehen hohe Werte haben.
Eine weitere Studie behandelt das Thema unter dem hier bereits häufiger besprochenen „Nice Guy“ Oberbegriff:
- Mögen Frauen Arschlöcher?
- Mögen Frauen Arschlöcher? II
- Wissen Frauen auf was sie bei Männern stehen?
- Das “Nice Guy Stereotyp”: Sagen Frauen, dass sie liebe Jungs wollen, stehen aber eigentlich eher auf Machos?
- Attraktivität und Dominanz
- Die dunkle Triade (“Dark Triad”) als evolutionäre Kurzzeitpaarungsstrategie
Aus der Studie:
We examined whether or not different behavioral expressions of dominance by a male affected how introverted and extraverted women rated his sexual attractiveness. We assessed 81 women on the extraversion scale of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire–Revised Short Scale (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1991), and they then watched a 1-minute silent video of a male confederate in 3 dominance conditions (closed body posture [low], open body posture , and open body posture with gesticulation [high]) and rated the male for sexual attractiveness. Results showed that higher dominance behavior significantly increased the confederate’s attractiveness, accounting for 10% of the variance in attractiveness ratings. However, the women’s personalities appeared to have no significant effect on these ratings. These results are discussed in relation to extant literature on the phenomenon that women do not select “nice guys” in preference to other men.
Aus der Studie:
The results showed only partial support for our hypotheses. First, we found a significant main effect of the dominance condition on ratings of attractiveness, which generally supports previous research in which similar experimental methods were used (e.g., Renninger et al., 2004; Sadalla et al., 1987). It is noteworthy that, even in this highly controlled experimental setting, slight changes to the posture (i.e., sitting position) of a male significantly increased his levels of attractiveness. This indicates that women may use simple nonverbal signals of dominance as criteria for male attractiveness. Thus, our results contribute to extant literature on the “nice guys finish last” phenomenon by showing that dominant body postures do result in higher ratings of sexual attractiveness. Of course, this is not to argue that other variables, such as prosocial orientation, do not mediate these results. Rather, when operationalized independently, dominant nonverbal behavior appears to increase women’s ratings of men’s attractiveness. Neither a significant main effect of participant personality nor a significant interaction between personality and dominance conditions was found. These results suggest that extraverted and introverted women both perceive dominant men as being higher in sexual attractiveness. It may be the case that dominance, as an interpersonal trait, is a desirable trait, regardless of the observer’s personality
Auch hier zeigt sich also, dass dominantere Männer als attraktiver wahrgenommen werden, und dies wohl übereinstimmend über die verschiedenen Persönlichkeiten der Frauen.
Angesichts der Bedeutung der intrasexuellen Konkurrenz nicht verwunderlich.