Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-10T16:31:26.672Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - Life History Theory and Mating Strategies

from Part II - Middle-Level Theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2022

By
Aurelio José Figueredo  and
Mateo Peñaherrera-Aguirre
Edited by
Todd K. Shackelford
Todd K. Shackelford
Affiliation:
Oakland University, Michigan
Get access

Summary

This chapter provides a theoretical and empirical framework for understanding the relation between life history strategy and mating strategies. The current scientific debate regarding the structure of life history and its connection to mating behaviors inspired the authors of this chapter to conduct several theoretical and empirical examinations of this subject. For example, phylogenetic confirmatory factor analysis across a sample of 503 eutherian mammals supports the presence of a higher-order life history factor comprised of lower-order factors that have been labeled fast–slow and neoteny, respectively. Consistent with past publications, the present chapter also found evidence supporting the predicted relation between life history indicators with mating strategies. Also consistent with previously published findings, one set of phylogenetic generalized linear models identified that polygynandrous mating systems in nonhuman primates, along with the [lactation/(lactation + gestation)] ratio, positively predicted infanticide by males. These constructive replications, however, also revealed the novel finding that the higher-order life history factor did not predict these infanticides when statistically controlled for the effects of the lower-order indicators. Hence, the specific variance associated with the lower-order indicators eliminates any significant residual contribution made by the higher-order life history factor. These results are not unexpected given the principle of Brunswik symmetry, wherein to attain optimal predictive power the predictor and criterion variable must be measured at the same level of data aggregation. These findings led us to conduct a theoretical examination of the psychometrically expected relations between higher-order factors, such as life history strategy, and lower-order factors, such as mating strategies, in general. We therefore explore the characteristics of the latent hierarchical structure of life history strategy that has been found in numerous empirical studies for the purpose of deriving more specific predictions regarding the effects of general life history strategy on specific mating strategies. We afterwards test the principle of Brunswik symmetry by reporting additional analyses of the expected moderating effect of slow life history strategy on the relation between short-term and long-term mating orientations, r(STM,LTM), in humans. A sequential canonical analysis revealed that the positive effect of slow life history strategy on r(STM,LTM) was fully mediated by a general strategic differentiation-integration factor (SD-IE) on life history traits. Individuals with slower life history strategies exhibited greater integration between short-term and long-term mating strategies. Consequently, this analysis counters a long-held position regarding any fixed association between slow life history strategy and the relationship between short-term and long-term mating orientations.

Keywords

life history theorymating strategiesBrunswik symmetryinfanticidestrategic differentiation-integration effects
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Psychology , pp. 213 - 241
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Banai, B., & Pavela, I. (2015). Two-dimensional structure of the Sociosexual Orientation Inventory and its personality correlates. Evolutionary Psychology, 13(3), 1–7.Google Scholar
Berkowitz, A. (2016a). Governing behavior: How nerve cell dictatorships and democracies control everything we do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Berkowitz, A. (2016b). Is your nervous system a democracy or a dictatorship when controlling your behavior? The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/is-your-nervous-system-a-democracy-or-a-dictatorship-when-controlling-your-behavior-61888Google Scholar
Bielby, J., Mace, G. M., Bininda-Emonds, O. R., Cardillo, M., Gittleman, J. L., Jones, K. E., … & Purvis, A. (2007). The fast–slow continuum in mammalian life history: An empirical reevaluation. The American Naturalist, 169(6), 748–757.Google Scholar
Brumbach, B. H., Figueredo, A. J., & Ellis, B. J. (2009). Effects of harsh and unpredictable environments in adolescence on development of life history strategies. Human Nature, 20(1), 25–51.Google Scholar
Clutton-Brock, T. (2016). Mammal societies. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Copping, L. T., Campbell, A., & Muncer, S. (2014). Psychometrics and life history strategy: The structure and validity of the high K strategy scale. Evolutionary Psychology, 12(1), 200–222.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-F.FI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Deary, I. J., Johnson, W., & Houlihan, L. M. (2009). Genetic foundations of human intelligence. Human Genetics, 126(1), 215–232.Google Scholar
Deary, I .J., Lawn, M., & Bartholomew, D. J. (2008). A conversation between Charles Spearman, Godfrey Thomson, and Edward L. Thorndike: The International Examinations Inquiry Meetings 1931–1938. History of Psychology, 11(3), 163.Google Scholar
Del Giudice, M. (2014). An evolutionary life history framework for psychopathology. Psychological Inquiry, 25(3–4), 261–300.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck personality questionnaire. London: Hodder and Stoughton.Google Scholar
Fernandes, H. B. F., Woodley, M. A., Hutz, C. S., & Figueredo, A. J. (2016). The strength of associations among sexual strategy traits: Variations as a function of life history speed. Personality and Individual Differences, 98, 275–283.Google Scholar
Fernandes, H. B. F., Woodley, M. A., Hutz, C. S., & Kruger, D. J. (2013). Strategic differentiation-integration effort in the context of sexual strategies: A cross-national perspective. Oral presentation, Human Behavior and Evolution Society, Miami, FL.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J. (2007). The Arizona Life History Battery. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/email.arizona.edu/ajf/the-arizona-life-history-battery-alhbGoogle Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Cabeza de Baca, T., Garcia, R. A., Gable, J. C., & Weise, D. (2013). Revisiting mediation in the social and behavioral sciences. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 4(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Cuthbertson, A. M., Kauffman, I. A., Weil, E., & Gladden, P. R. (2012). The interplay of behavioral dispositions and cognitive abilities: Sociosexual orientation, emotional intelligence, executive functions, and life history strategy. Temas em Psicologia, 20(1), 81–100.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Gladden, P. R., Sisco, M. M., Patch, E. A., & Jones, D. N. (2015). The unholy trinity: The Dark Triad, sexual coercion, and Brunswik-Symmetry. Evolutionary Psychology, 13(2), 435–454.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Jacobs, W. J., Gladden, P. R., Bianchi, J., Patch, E. A., Beck, C. J. A., … & Li, N. P. (2018). Intimate partner violence, interpersonal aggression, and life history strategy. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 12(1), 1–31.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., & Rushton, J. P. (2009). Evidence for shared genetic dominance between the general factor of personality, mental and physical health, and life history traits. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 12(6), 555–563.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., & Peñaherrera-Aguirre, M. (2021). The moderating influence of the general life history strategy factor upon the relation between short-term and long-term mating orientations is mediated by a strategic differentiation-integration factor. Academia Letters, 2, 3433.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Vásquez, G., Brumbach, B. H., & Schneider, S. M. R. (2004). The heritability of life history strategy: The K-factor, covitality, and personality. Social Biology, 51, 121–143.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Vásquez, G., Brumbach, B. H., & Schneider, S. M. R. (2007). The K-factor, covitality, and personality: A psychometric test of life history theory. Human Nature, 18(1), 47–73.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Vásquez, G., Brumbach, B. H., Sefcek, J. A., Kirsner, B. R., & Jacobs, W. J. (2005). The K-Factor: Individual differences in life history strategy. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(8), 1349–1360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Woodley, M. A., Brown, S. D., & Ross, K. C. (2013). Multiple successful tests of the strategic differentiation-integration effort (SD-IE) hypothesis. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 7(4), 361–383.Google Scholar
Figueredo, A. J., Woodley of Menie, M. A., & Jacobs, W. J. (2015). The evolutionary psychology of the General Factor of Personality: A hierarchical life history model. In Buss, D. M. (Ed.), Handbook of evolutionary psychology, 2nd ed. (pp. 943–967). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (1990). Toward an evolutionary history of female sexual variation. Journal of Personality, 58, 69–96.Google Scholar
Garcia, R. A., Cabeza de Baca, T., Black, C. J., Sotomayor-Peterson, M., Smith-Castro, V., & Figueredo, A. J. (2016). Measures of domain-specific resource allocations in life history strategy: Indicators of a latent common factor or ordered developmental sequence? Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 7(1), 23–51.Google Scholar
Gorsuch, R. L. (2005). Continuous parameter estimation model: Expanding the standard statistical paradigm. Journal of the Science Faculty of Chiang Mai University, 32, 11–21.Google Scholar
Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., Hilton, N. Z., Lalumière, M. L., & Quinsey, V. L. (2007). Coercive and precocious sexuality as a fundamental aspect of psychopathy. Journal of Personality Disorders, 21(1), 1–27.Google Scholar
Herculano‐Houzel, S. (2019). Longevity and sexual maturity vary across species with number of cortical neurons, and humans are no exception. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 527(10), 1689–1705.Google Scholar
Hertler, S. C., Figueredo, A. J., Peñaherrera-Aguirre, M., & Fernandes, H. B. (2018). Life history evolution: A biological meta-theory for the social sciences. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Isler, K., & van Schaik, C. P. (2006). Metabolic costs of brain size evolution. Biology Letters, 2(4), 557–560.Google Scholar
Isler, K., & van Schaik, C. P. (2009). Why are there so few smart mammals (but so many smart birds)? Biology Letters, 5(1), 125–129.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. J., & Kirkpatrick, L. A. (2007). The structure of human mating strategies: Toward a multidimensional model of sociosexuality. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 382–391.Google Scholar
Jeschke, J. M., & Kokko, H. (2009). The roles of body size and phylogeny in fast and slow life histories. Evolutionary Ecology, 23(6), 867–878.Google Scholar
Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., Webster, G. D., and Schmitt, D. P. (2009). The dark triad: Facilitating a short-term mating strategy in men. European Journal of Personality, 23, 5–18.Google Scholar
Kaplan, H. S., & Gangestad, S. W. (2005). Life history theory and evolutionary psychology. In Buss, D. (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 68–95). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507.Google Scholar
Kretzschmar, A., & Nebe, S. (2021). Working memory, fluid reasoning, and complex problem solving: Different results explained by the Brunswik Symmetry. Journal of Intelligence, 9(1), 5.Google Scholar
Kretzschmar, A., Spengler, M., Schubert, A.-L., Steinmayr, R., & Ziegler, M. (2018). The relation of personality and intelligence: What can the Brunswik Symmetry principle tell us? Journal of Intelligence, 6(3), 30.Google Scholar
Lukas, D., & Clutton-Brock, T. (2014). Evolution of social monogamy in primates is not consistently associated with male infanticide. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(17), E1674.Google Scholar
Lukas, D., & Huchard, E. (2014). The evolution of infanticide by males in mammalian societies. Science, 346(6211), 841–844.Google Scholar
MacLean, E. L., & Nunn, C. L. (2017). Phylogenetic approaches for research in comparative cognition. In Call, J., Burghardt, G. M., Pepperberg, I. M., Snowdon, C. T., & Zentall, T. (Eds.), APA handbook of comparative psychology: Basic concepts, methods, neural substrate, and behavior (pp. 201–216). New York, NY: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Manson, J. H., Chua, K. J., & Lukaszewski, A. W. (2020). The structure of the Mini-K and K-SF-42. Human Nature, 31, 322–340.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution, and inheritance. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Minkov, M., & Bond, M. H. (2015). Genetic polymorphisms predict national differences in life history strategy and time orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 204–215.Google Scholar
Monroe, P. (Ed.). (1931). Conference on examinations. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
Navarrete, A., van Schaik, C. P., & Isler, K. (2011). Energetics and the evolution of human brain size. Nature, 480(7375), 91–93.Google Scholar
Nunn, C. L. (2011). The comparative approach in evolutionary anthropology and biology. Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Nunn, C., & van Schaik, C. (2000). Social evolution in primates: The relative roles of ecology and intersexual conflict. In van Schaik, C. & Janson, C. (Eds.), Infanticide by males and its implications (pp. 388–420). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Opie, C., Atkinson, Q. D., Dunbar, R. I., & Shultz, S. (2013). Male infanticide leads to social monogamy in primates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(33), 13328–13332.Google Scholar
Opie, C., Atkinson, Q. D., Dunbar, R. I., & Shultz, S. (2014). Reply to Lukas and Clutton-Brock: Infanticide still drives primate monogamy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(17), E1675.Google Scholar
Richardson, G. B., Sanning, B. K., Lai, M. H. C., Copping, L. T., Hardesty, P. H., & Kruger, D. J. (2017). On the psychometric study of human life history strategies: State of the science and evidence of two independent dimensions. Evolutionary Psychology, 15(1), 1474704916666840.Google Scholar
Ricklefs, R. E., & Wikelski, M. (2002) The physiology/life-history nexus. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17, 462–468.Google Scholar
Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–883.Google Scholar
Simpson, J. A., Wilson, C. L., & Winterheld, H. A. (2004). Sociosexuality and romantic relationships. In Harvey, J. H., Wenzel, A., & Sprecher, S. (Eds.), The handbook of sexuality in close relationships (pp. 87–112). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1904). “General Intelligence” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man: Their nature and measurement. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Tielbeek, J. J., Barnes, J. C., Popma, A., Polderman, T. J. C., Lee, J. J., Perry, J. R. B., … & Boutwell, B. B. (2018). Exploring the genetic correlations of antisocial behaviour and life history traits. British Journal of Psychology: Open, 4, 467–470.Google Scholar
van Doorn, W. G., & van Meeteren, U. (2003). Flower opening and closure: A review. Journal of Experimental Botany, 54(389), 1801–1812.Google Scholar
van Noordwijk, M., & van Schaik, C. (2000). Reproductive patterns in eutherian mammals: Adaptations against infanticide? In van Schaik, C. & Janson, C. (Eds.), Infanticide by males and its implications (pp. 322–360). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van Schaik, C. (2000). Vulnerability to infanticide by males: Patterns among mammals. In van Schaik, C. & Janson, C. (Eds.), Infanticide by males and its implications (pp. 61–72). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van Schaik, C. P. (2016). The primate origins of human nature. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
van Schaik, C. P., & Isler, K. (2012). Life-history evolution. In Mitani, J. C., Call, J., Kappeler, P. M., Palombit, R., & Silk, J. B. (Eds.), The evolution of primate societies (pp. 220–244). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D., & Bryan, A. (2007). Sociosexual attitudes and behaviors: Why two factors are better than one. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 917–922.Google Scholar
West-Eberhard, M. J. (2003) Developmental plasticity and evolution. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wikelski, M., Spinney, L., Schelsky, W., Scheuerlein, A., & Gwinner, E. (2003). Slow pace of life in tropical sedentary birds: A common-garden experiment on four stonechat populations from different latitudes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 270, 2383–2388.Google Scholar
Wittmann, W. W. (1990). Brunswik symmetry and the conception of the five data boxes: A framework concept for comprehensive evaluation research. Journal for Educational Psychology, 4(4), 241–251.Google Scholar
Wittmann, W. W. (1991). Meta-analysis and Brunswik symmetry. In Albrecht, G., Otto, H.-U., Karstedt-Henke, S., & Böllert, K. (Eds.), Prevention and intervention in childhood and adolescence, 11. Social prevention and the social sciences: Theoretical controversies, research problems, and evaluation strategies (p. 381–393). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Wittmann, W. W., & Süß, H.-M. (1999). Investigating the paths between working memory, intelligence, knowledge, and complex problem-solving performances via Brunswik symmetry. In Ackerman, P. L., Kyllonen, P. C., & Roberts, R. D. (Eds.), Learning and individual differences (p.p. 77–108). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Woodley, M. A., & Figueredo, A. J. (2013). Historical variability in heritable general intelligence: Its evolutionary origins and socio-cultural consequences. Buckingham: University of Buckingham Press.Google Scholar
Woodley, M. A., Figueredo, A. J., Brown, S. D., & Ross, K. C. (2013). Four successful tests of the cognitive differentiation-integration effort hypothesis. Intelligence, 41(6), 832–842.Google Scholar
Woodley of Menie, M. A., Figueredo, A. J., Cabeza de Baca, T., Fernandes, H. B. F., Madison, G., Wolf, P. S. A., & Black, C. J. (2015). Strategic differentiation and integration of genomic-level heritabilities facilitate individual differences in preparedness and plasticity of human life history. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(422), 1–10.Google Scholar
Woodley of Menie, M. A., Figueredo, A. J., Sarraf, M. A., Hertler, S., Fernandes, H. B. F., & Peñaherrera-Aguirre, M. (2017). The rhythm of the west: A biohistory of the modern era, AD 1600 to present. Washington, DC: Council for Social and Economic Studies.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Joireman, J., Teta, P., & Kraft, M. (1993). A comparison of three structural models for personality: The big three, the big five, and the alternative five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 757–768.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×