Despite the enforced lockdown regime in late March 2020 in Russia, the phenomenon of the continued virus spreading highlighted the importance of studies investigating the range of biosocial attributes and spectrum of individual motivations underlying the permanent presence of the substantial level of spatial activity. For this matter, we conducted a set of surveys between March and June 2020 (N = 492). We found that an individual’s health attitude is the most consistent factor explaining mobility differences. However, our data suggested that wariness largely determines adequate health attitudes; hence, a higher level of wariness indirectly reduced individual mobility. Comparative analysis revealed the critical biosocial differences between the two sexes, potentially rooted in the human evolutionary past. Females were predisposed to express more wariness in the face of new environmental risks; therefore, they minimize their mobility and outdoor contacts. In contrast to them, the general level of spatial activity reported by males was significantly higher. Wariness in the males’ sample was less associated with the novel virus threat, but to a great extent, it was predicted by the potential economic losses variable. These findings correspond to the evolutionary predictions of sexual specialization and the division of family roles.

Testing individual motivations for social activity in violation of the mandated lockdown regime is a challenging research topic for evolutionary psychology. To this purpose, we analyzed twenty popular weekly routes and the potential impact of sex and relationship status (single versus coupled) on the reported level of spatial-social activity during the quarantine in Russia between March and June 2020 (N = 492). Our study revealed a significant difference between men’s and women’s mobility: men, in general, tend to exhibit substantially higher spatial activity. The results have shown that individuals living on their own have more social interactions with friends and exhibit more profound spatial mobility via public transport. On the other hand, spatial activity of coupled individuals of both sexes were mostly devoted to solving a list of economic and matrimonial tasks. At the same time, men already cohabiting with a partner leave their homes for dating purposes more frequently than single men and women. We interpret these findings in the sense that both individual and sex-specific differences in observed sociality could be a result of a fine-tuned adaptive populational response to a contemporary virus threat, predominantly rooted in the evolution of behavioral strategies in the reproductive and economic spheres of each sex. Indeed, unlike women, coupled men have been preserving highly risky and intense social behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The male behavioural strategy associated with physical risk is one of the universal foundations on which the ideas of masculinity established in society are based. Risk-taking propensity in general can signal a man's greater competitiveness, and physically risky actions can be perceived as "courageous" behavior and evidence of strength and athleticism. The results of a number of experimental studies and observations recorded sexual differences in risky behavior. In particular, young men are more likely to take physical risks than women. Evolutionary scientists have suggested that these differences may be a result of male competition for access to sexual partners. In this study we present an analysis of male and female physical risk assessments of men in the Russian sample (n = 701). Men and women were offered vignettes describing men who differed in risk-taking propensity. Respondents needed to assess the attractiveness of men in the context of long-term romantic and short-term (so-called "one night stand") relationships, as well as to assess their competitiveness, tendency to aggression, provisioning quality and a tendency to dangerous health behavior (alcohol abuse, unprotected sex, etc.). The degree of risk tolerance was significant in the evaluation of all the proposed parameters. Men who demonstrate an average degree of risk-taking propensity received the highest ratings for attractiveness for short-term relationships. Low-risk men were found to be more attractive in long-term relationships and able to provide the best quality of life. Men who choose a type of activity associated with constant physical risk and danger were assessed as the most aggressive and competitive. In addition, high risk propensity was associated with a higher propensity for unhealthy lifestyles and bad habits. Thus, male risk-taking behaviour affects men's social perception, attractiveness and quality assessment, and a high degree of risk-taking is not always perceived as a positive quality.