Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-kcxw8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-13T05:33:17.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inconsistent use of evolutionary frameworks in accounts of romantic relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2026

Tom Roth Open the ORCID record for Tom Roth [Opens in a new window] ,
Jorg Massen  and
Iliana Samara
Tom Roth*
Affiliation:
Animal Behaviour & Cognition, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands t.s.roth@uu.nl j.j.m.massen@uu.nl
Jorg Massen
Affiliation:
Animal Behaviour & Cognition, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands t.s.roth@uu.nl j.j.m.massen@uu.nl
Iliana Samara
Affiliation:
Cognitive Psychology Unit, Faculty of Social Sciences & Behavioural Sciences, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands Leiden Institute of Brain and Cognition (LIBC), Leiden, The Netherlands i.samara.2@fsw.leidenuniv.nl
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Wahring et al. describe that romantic relationships are more important for men than for women, drawing also on evolutionary theory. We suggest that (1) the proposed link between short-term mating motivation and relationship initiation requires clarification, and (2) the use of sexual strategies theory and strategic pluralism theory is inconsistent. Addressing these issues could improve evolutionary models of romantic relationships.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 49 , 2026 , e122
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bendixen, M. (2014). Evidence of systematic bias in sexual over- and underperception of naturally occurring events: A direct replication of Haselton (2003) in a more gender-equal culture. Evolutionary Psychology, 12(5), 1004–1021. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491401200510 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleske, A. L., & Buss, D. M. (2000). A comprehensive theory of human mating must explain between-sex and within-sex differences in mating strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(4), 593–594. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00293370 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.204 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, H. E. (1998). Lust, attraction, and attachment in mammalian reproduction. Human Nature, 9(1), 23–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-998-1010-5 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(4), 573–644. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0000337X CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haselton, M. G. (2003). The sexual overperception bias: Evidence of a systematic bias in men from a survey of naturally occurring events. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(1), 34–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00529-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.1.81 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perilloux, C., Easton, J. A., & Buss, D. M. (2012). The misperception of sexual interest. Psychological Science, 23(2), 146–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611424162 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samara, I., Roth, T. S., & Kret, M. E. (2021). The role of emotion projection, sexual desire, and self-rated attractiveness in the sexual overperception bias. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 50(6), 2507–2516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-02017-5 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man (pp. 136–179). Aldine.Google Scholar