Human Mate Choice

Evolutionary psychology is about cognitive mechanisms.

It uses a functional (adaptive) approach. Asks what is if for? If we wanted to build a mechanism that did x, what would it look like?

Evolutionary psychology is about cognitive mechanisms.

It uses a functional (adaptive) approach. Asks what is if for? If we wanted to build a mechanism that did x, what would it look like?

It assumes that natural selection (of alternative alleles) built functional cognitive architectures just as it built functional hearts, lungs and livers.

Evolutionary psychology is about cognitive mechanisms.

It uses a functional (adaptive) approach. Asks what is if for? If we wanted to build a mechanism that did x, what would it look like?

It assumes that natural selection (of alternative alleles) built functional cognitive architectures just as it built functional hearts, lungs and livers.

It assumes that these cognitive architectures are specialized for particular functions, just as other organs are specialized for their jobs.

Cognitive specialization:

The mind is not a general-purpose computer.

Cognitive specialization:

The mind is not a general-purpose computer.

It is a collection of many mental organs. Phoneme detector, grammar parser, face recognizer, emotion parser, relative motion computer, map builder, spatial updater, threat detector, mate evaluator…

Cognitive specialization:

The mind is not a general-purpose computer.

It is a collection of many mental organs. Phoneme detector, grammar parser, face recognizer, emotion parser, relative motion computer, map builder, spatial updater, threat detector, mate evaluator…

We refer to these as (mental) modules.

Cognitive specialization:

The mind is not a general-purpose computer.

It is a collection of many mental organs. Phoneme detector, grammar parser, face recognizer, emotion parser, relative motion computer, map builder, spatial updater, threat detector, mate evaluator…

We refer to these as (mental) modules.

They are domain-specific cognitive adaptations. They handle certain kinds of input and produce certain kinds of output.

Mate evaluator module(s).

What would this kind of domain-specific cognitive adaptation look like?

Interesting question: Would everybody’s look the same?

Would women’s and men’s be the same?

Let’s take one example an analyze it in detail: mate evaluator module(s).

What would this kind of domain-specific cognitive adaptation look like?

Interesting question: Would everybody’s look the same?

Would women’s and men’s be the same?

This is the strength of EP; we have an overarching theory: natural selection.

Selection builds adaptations that address recurring problems... faced by our ancestors.

Would the challenges of mate choice have been the same for ancestral males and females?

Selection builds adaptations that address recurring problems... faced by our ancestors.

Would the challenges of mate choice have been the same for ancestral males and females?

Theory of sexual selection says probably not.

Selection builds adaptations that address recurring problems... faced by our ancestors.

Would the challenges of mate choice have been the same for ancestral males and females?

Theory of sexual selection says probably not.

Male reproductive success is less limited than female reproductive success.

What do we get when we choose a mate?

1.Genes (to mix with our own in forming offspring). Probably similar adaptations in men and women.

2. Parental effort (help in rearing offspring). Probably different adaptations in men and women

Cognitive mechanisms should evolve such that we attend to best predictors.

Analogy of food preferences.

Challenges

For females: For males:

Quality Quantity

Challenges

For females: For males:

Quality Quantity

Mate with good genes Mate with good genes

Challenges

For females: For males:

Quality Quantity

Mate with good genes Mate with good genes

Good investor Good investor (economically) (physiologically)

Challenges

For females: For males:

Quality Quantity

Mate with good genes Mate with good genes

Good investor Good investor (economically) (physiologically)

Keeps resources at home Keeps paternity at home

Challenges

For females: For males:

Quality Quantity

Females more choosy Males more eager

Date solicitation experiment

Confederates asked unsuspecting subjects for a date.

Variable: coffee, apartment visit, sex.

Acceptance rate?

Date solicitation experiment

Confederates asked unsuspecting subjects for a date.

Variable: coffee, apartment visit, sex.

Acceptance rate?

Women Men

Coffee 50% 50%

Apartment 6% 69%

Sex 0% 75%

Challenges

For females: For males:

Quality Quantity

Mate with good genes Mate with good genes

Red-queen benefits Red-queen benefits

Red Queen Model for sexual reproduction

Sex appears to be a counter-strategy to parasites and pathogens.

Hence “good genes” are the ones that confer parasite and pathogen resistance.

Health and vigor are obvious mate-choice criteria for both sexes.

And so is symmetry.

Challenges

For females: For males:

Quality Quantity

Mate with good genes Mate with good genes

Good investor Good investor (economically) (physiologically)

Good resource provider: Good “mommy” potential:

status, ambition, wealth youth, fertility

Sexes value symmetry equally (good genes; parasite resistance)

But not youth or body shape (markers of female fertility)

male female markers

markers

Good genes physical physical

Good PI behavioralphysical

Challenges

For females: For males:

Quality Quantity

Mate with good genes Mate with good genes

Good investor Good investor (economically) (physiologically)

Keeps resources at home Keeps paternity at home

Avoid partner’s MRS Avoid partner’s MRS

*MRS=mixed reproductive strategy

Female mixed reproductive strategy

Take genes from one male and paternal effort from another.

Male mixed reproductive strategy

One long-term mate getting substantial investment, but also pursue short-term mating opportunities.

Of course such things can happen…but are there specific psychological mechanisms involved?

And specific psychological mechanisms geared to protection against the partner’s MRS?

Both sexes experience jealousy but MRS theory suggest their jealousy would be triggered differently.

Females: guard against partner’s emotional engagement.

Males: guard against partner’s sexual engagement

0

10

20

30

40

50

sexualinfidelity

emotionalinfidelity

sexualinfidelity

emotionalinfidelity

.

less threatening more threatening

Per

cent

age

reca

ll

men

women

A variety of domain-specific

context-specific trait-specific

sex-specific

cognitive mechanisms suggest that human posses evolved adaptations designed to promote optimal mate choice.

Take Darwin seriously!