Diese aus meiner Sicht sehr interessante Grafik wurde neulich in einer Diskussion bei Twitter gepostet, leider ohne Quelle.
Sie scheint mir einen ganz interessanten Überblick darzustellen über die Auswirkungen bestimmter Hormone, Rezeptoren etc.
Wenn jemand eine Quelle kennt gerne in den Kommentaren.
Ich speichere sie hier mal zur späteren Verwendung
David Buss hat mit Sexual Strategies Theory eine sehr interessante Theorie entwickelt und es lohnt sich, sie hier zu besprechen.
Sexual Strategies Theory: An Evolutionary Perspective on Human Mating
Bisherige Teile finden sich hier:
Weiter geht es:
A Note on the Empirical Tests
This section summarizes the specific hypotheses and predictions that follow from Sexual Strategies Theory and summarizes the relevant empirical tests of each. For those empirical tests that have been published already, readers are referred to the original articles for further methodological and statistical details. For those tests specifically designed for this article, sufficient methodological and statistical details are presented to allow readers to evaluate the findings and their bearing on the hypotheses and predictions. In all cases, we report sample composition, sample size, the methods used, statistical tests such as tests and associated p values, and magnitudes of effect. Although some studies are based on self-report methodology, we note that self-report is a reasonable method of choice for gauging mate preferences (Buss, 1989b), albeit a method with some obvious limitations, and that numerous other studies using alternative methods such as psychophysiological techniques, observational recording, and behavioral decision making are reported to provide convergent evidence for the key hypotheses and predictions. Discussions of the limitations of these studies may be found in the General Discussion section and in the originally published articles.
Okay, das wäre im wesentlichen das Vorwort.
Hypothesis 1: Because of the Lower Levels of Minimum Parental Investment Incurred by Men, Short-Term Mating Will Represent a Larger Component of Men’s Sexual Strategy Than of Women’s Sexual Strategy
Eine Hypothese, für die es denke ich sehr viele Anzeichen überall gibt. Das einfachste wäre, dass Männer, die nur mit Männern Sex haben, also Homosexuelle, Dark Rooms geschaffen haben und die Dating App für Schwule Grindr auch für schnellen unproblematischen Sex genutzt wird. Wie sagte Adrian in einem Kommentar so ungefähr: „Man kann ja erst mal Sex haben und dann schauen ob es sonst passt“.
Nicht umsonst gibt es auch für Männer eine Sexindustrie, für Frauen nur in einem deutlich kleineren Umfang. Soweit Frauen Sextourismus machen wollen sie dort auch nicht einfach Sex, sondern eher eine Kurzzeitbeziehung mit einem Mann, der sich den Urlaub über für sie interessiert. Männer wollen mehr Sexpartner, würden eher Sex mit einer Frau haben, die sie darauf anspricht, Frauen empfinden Ansprechen auf Sex eher als sexuelle Belästigung, die Liste lässt sich sehr lange fortsetzen.
Prediction 1: Men will express greater desire for, or interest in,short-term mates than will women.
To test this prediction, a sample of 148 college students, 75 men and 73 women, rated on 7-point scales (1 = not at all currently seeking and 7 = strongly currently seeking) the degree to which they were currently seeking a short-term mate (defined as a 1-night stand, brief affair, etc.), and, independently, the degree to which they were currently seeking a long-term mate (defined as a marriage partner). The results are shown in Figure 1. Although men and women did not differ in their stated proclivities for seeking a long-term mate (t = 0.48, ns), men more than women in this study reported that they were currently seeking short-term sexual partners (/ = 5.37, p < .001, y = 0.87).2
These findings, although obviously limited by sample and age restrictions, support the hypothesis that short-term mating strategies represent a larger component of men’s mating effort.3
Hier die Grafik:
Man sieht sehr gut, wie die Unterschiede immer geringer werden, wenn es auf eine Langzeitbeziehung zugeht. Das alles ist wenig überraschend.
Prediction 2: For any given period of time (e.g., a month, a year a decade, or a lifetime), men will desire a larger number of mates than will women (solution to the problem of number).
To test this prediction, 75 men and 73 women estimated how many sexual partners they would ideally like to have over a series of time intervals: during the next month, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, and a lifetime. The results of this study are shown in Figure 2. At each time interval, men reported that they desire a larger number of sex partners than women reported. During the next 2 years, for example, men reported desiring approximately eight sex partners, whereas women reported desiring approximately one. Over the course of a lifetime, men reported, on average, desiring more than 18 sex partners, whereas women reported desiring 4 or 5. At each time interval men expressed a desire for a greater number of partners (p < .001 for t tests conducted for each interval, y range = 0.49 to 0.87, mean y = 0.63). Whether these preferred partners involve premarital-sex partners, extramarital affairs, or serial marriages cannot be evaluated from these data. Nonetheless, these results, although limited in scope, support the hypothesis that short-term mating represents a larger component of men’s mating strategies than of women’s mating strategies. They also support the prediction that men possess solutions to the problem of partner number, in this case in the form of consciously articulated desires
Und hier die Grafik:
Auch hier recht deutliche Unterschiede, Männer landen schließlich knapp unter 20, Frauen knapp über 5, wenn ich das richtig sehe.
Ich vermute, dass die Frage nach steigenden Zeiträumen zu einer geringeren Endzahl führt, weil man keine so großen Sprünge macht.
Aus einer anderen Studie:
Over the course of a lifetime, men wanted around 18, whereas women desired 4 or 5. Miller and Fishkin (1997) asked a sample of college students how many sex partners they would like to have over the entire rest of their lives if they were not constrained by any factors such as disease or laws. The mean response by the women was that they would ideally like to have 2.7 sex partners, whereas the men’s mean response was 64. (…)
Auch hier alles nicht sehr überraschend.
Prediction 3: Men will be willing to engage in intercourse after less time has elapsed in knowing a potential partner than will women (solution to the problem of number).
Auch dazu hatte ich oben bereits etwas geschrieben. Einen Mann zu Sex zu überreden ist wesentlich leichter als eine Frau.
To test this prediction, a sample of 75 men and 73 women were posed with the following question: „If the conditions were right, would you consider having sexual intercourse with someone you viewed as desirable .. . if you had known that person for 5 years .. . if you had known that person for 2 years .. . if you had known that person for 1 year.. . if you had known that person for 6 months. . . if you had known that person for 3 months. . .1
month .. . 1 week… 1 day.. . 1 evening… 1 hour?“ Each time interval was rated on a scale ranging from -3 (definitely not) to 3 (definitely yes).
Also 5 Jahre, 2 Jahre, 1 Jahr, 6 Monate, 1 Woche, 1 Tag, 1 Abend, 1 Stunde
The results are summarized in Figure 3. When they have known a desirable potential mate for 5 years, both men and women stated that they would probably have sexual intercourse with that person. At every time interval briefer than 5 years, however, men stated that they would be more likely to have sexual intercourse with the potential partner. If he has known a woman for 6 months, for example, a man is just as likely to consent to sex as if he had known her for 5 years. In contrast, women dropped from 2 (probably yes) to close to 0 (neutral) when the interval shifted from 5 years to 6 months. Having known a potential mate for only 1 week, men were still on average positive about the possibility of consenting to sex. Women, in sharp contrast, stated that they are highly unlikely to have sex after knowing someone for just 1 week. After knowing a potential mate for just 1 hour, men are slightly disinclined to consider having sex, but the disinclination is not strong. For most women, sex after just 1 hour is a virtual impossibility. The sex differences are highly significant (p < .001) at each time period less than 5 years (7 = 0.46 to 1.21, mean 7 = 1.00).
Hier die Grafik: Noch einmal: die Skala war
-3 auf keinen Fall bis +3 auf jeden Fall.
Erstaunliche Zahlen. Man könnte meinen die Studie ist älter, aber sie ist von 1993. Natürlich ist es eine Selbsteinschätzung und eine hypothetische Person, dass macht es immer etwas schwieriger. Ich könnte mir vorstellen, dass eben viele sagen, dass er/sie attraktiv sein mag, aber man müsste ihn ja zumindest mal kennenlernen. Wäre interessant, wie die Werte heute wären, ich vermute, die Kurve wäre etwas mehr nach oben verschoben, aber ein deutlicher Unterschied wäre immer noch vorhanden.
Hier hatte ich noch mal eine Grafik dazu:
In an innovative study by different investigators (R. D. Clark & Hatfield, 1989), an attractive man or woman confederate approached strangers of the opposite sex on a college campus and posed one of three randomly selected questions: „I have been noticing you around campus. I find you very attractive, (a) Would you go out with me tonight? (b) Would you come over to my apartment tonight? (c) Would you go to bed with me tonight?“ Of the women approached for a date, roughly 50% consented; of the women approached with an invitation to go back to the man’s apartment, only 6% consented; and of the women approached with a request for sex, none consented. Of the men approached, roughly 50% agreed to go out on a date (same percentage as women), 69% agreed to go back to the woman’s apartment, and fully 75% agreed to go to bed with her that evening. These findings have been replicated (R. D. Clark & Hatfield, 1989) and appear to be robust.
These behavioral data indicate that men are even more willing to engage in casual sex with a virtual stranger than the self-reported estimates in the aforementioned study. The discrepancy may be due to two key differences in the studies. First, a living physically attractive woman presented herself in the R. D. Clark and Hatfield (1989) study, whereas it was merely an imagined partner in the self-report study. Second, the female confederates indicated that they found the subjects to be very attractive, which also might have made men even more inclined to casual sex. Taken together, however, both studies support the hypothesis that men are more oriented toward short-term mating opportunities and solve the problem of number in part by allowing little time to elapse before seeking or consenting to sex.
Das Thema an sich hatte ich bereits hier besprochen. Es passt aus meiner Sicht sehr gut zu unserer Biologie, dass der abstrakte Test deutlich zurückhaltendere Ergebnisse liefert als der tatsächliche Test. Einfach weil dort bei den Männern wahrscheinlich wesentlich mehr der „Reptilienteil“ unseres Gehirn aktiv wird, die Chance bewehrtet und die Produktion von Lust ankurbelt und die Vernunft überstimmt, während das bei der abstrakten Frage nicht der Fall ist.
Prediction 4: Across all desired attributes in potential shortterm mates, men will impose less stringent standards than women impose (solution to the problem of number).
Scheint mir auch nicht sehr umstritten zu sein. Haben Frauen einen Begriff wie „Resteficken“? Männer werden eher als eine Frau um des Sex willen mit jemanden Sex haben, der sie sonst nicht interessiert und den sie auch nicht so attraktiv finden, dass sie ihn als Partner wollen.
Artikel dazu:
To test this prediction, we assembled 67 characteristics that had previously been nominated as potentially desirable in a mate (see Buss &
Barnes, 1986). These spanned a gamut of attributes ranging from adventurous, artistic, and athletic to stylish in appearance, understanding, and well liked by others. A sample of 57 men and 51 women rated each characteristic on a 7-point scale ranging from 3 (extremely desirable) through 0 (inconsequential or uncertain) to —3 (extremely undesirable) in a short-term mate, defined as previously described.
On 41 of the 67 characteristics, approximately two thirds, men’s standards for a short-term mate were significantly lower than those of women (p < .05, two-tailed, for each t test). For example, men required in a short-term mate lower levels of charm, athleticism, education, devotion, social skills, generosity, honesty, independence, kindness, intellectuality, loyalty, sense of humor, sociability, wealth, responsibility, open-mindedness, spontaneity, courteousness, cooperativeness, and emotional stability. For no characteristics were men more exacting than women in the short-term mating context. A summary score, representing a composite across all 67 characteristics, showed men to be substantially less exacting than women in their standards for a short-term mate (p < .001, 7 = 0.79) and less exacting in short-term than in long-term contexts (p < .001, 7 = 1.90). These findings support the prediction that men relax their standards in short-term mating contexts, providing a partial solution to the problem of number.
Auch ein interessantes Gebiet für Studien.
The hypothesis of relaxed male standards in short-term contexts also has received independent empirical support from Kenrick, Sadalla, Groth, and Trost (1990). Using a unique methodology, they asked subjects to report on what their minimum levels of acceptability would be for characteristics such as intelligence and kindness in different types of relationships.
They found that, although both sexes expressed high minimum standards in a marriage partner for these traits (at least 60th percentile), the standards men imposed for someone with whom they would have only sexual relations dropped dramatically (e.g., 40th percentile on intelligence), whereas women’s standards remained uniformly high for such relationships (e.g., at least 55th percentile on intelligence). In summary, evidence from independent investigations supports the hypothesis of relaxed male standards in short-term mating contexts.
Auch eine sehr interessante Studie:
Assessed the selectivity involved during casual mating opportunities and that involved in choosing a long-term partner in 29 male and 64 female undergraduates asked to rate their minimum criteria on 24 partner characteristics at 4 levels of commitment. In line with an unqualified parental investment model, females were more selective overall, particularly on status-linked variables. In line with a qualified parental investment model, males‘ trait preferences depended on the anticipated investment in the relationship. Males had lower requirements for a sexual partner than did females but were nearly as selective as females when considering requirements for a long-term partner.
Prediction 5: In short-term mating contexts, men will impose less stringent exclusionary criteria than do women (i.e., they will have fewer characteristics that they find undesirable or abhorrent).
To test this prediction, we assembled a list of characteristics that were previously nominated as undesirable in a potential mate. Examples are unaifectionate, bigoted, boring, cheap, dishonest, dumb, lacks ambitions, has bad breath, and so on. A sample of 44 men and 42 women judged each characteristic on a 7-point scale, ranging from 3 (extremely desirable) to -3 (extremely undesirable) in a short-term mate.
Out of the 61 characteristics, roughly one third were judged to be more undesirable by women than by men. These included mentally abusive, physically abusive, bisexual, disliked by others, drinks a lot of alcohol, dumb, uneducated, a gambler, old, possessive, promiscuous, self-centered, selfish, lacking a sense of humor, not sensual, short, sleeps around a lot, submissive, violent, and wimpy. In contrast, only 5 of the 61 negative characteristics were judged by men to be more undesirable than judged by women. A summary score, based on a composite of all 61 characteristics, showed that women expressed significantly stronger exclusionary standards than did men when evaluating a short-term mate (p < .001, 7 = 0.57), and men expressed significantly less stringent exclusionary standards in the short-term context compared with the long-term context (p < .001, 7 = 1.52). These results provide further support for the hypothesis that men’s standards when seeking a short-term mate become relaxed, thus solving in part the problem of number.
Da ergibt sich auch ein großes Feld für Missverständnisse zwischen den Geschlechter, gebrochene Herzen, Gründe für Vorsicht, Unverständnis dafür, dass diejenige, ob wohl man ja kaum Ansprüche stellt und sie klar „schlechter“ ist als man selbst sich so anstellt etc.
Weiter im nächsten Teil
Alles Evolution 