Altruists Attract

Farrelly, Daniel; Lazarus, John; Roberts, Gehan

doi:10.1177/147470490700500205

Cited by 111 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

105

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This supports the sexual selection hypothesis in explaining altruism; people are altruistic and cooperative towards attractive people because it assists in mating success. Although participants were not playing an economic game, the above findings are partially consistent with previous research (Barclay, 2010;Farrelly et al, 2007). Participants were altruistic and cooperative towards attractive people.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…For example, Farrelly, Lazarus, and Roberts (2007) found that people are more altruistic towards those they are attracted to when playing online economic games such as the mutualisation game and prisoners dilemma. In addition, the sexual selection hypothesis has also been tested by Barclay (2010) who found that altruists are perceived as more attractive than non-altruists, suggesting that sexual selection plays a role in explaining why we are altruistic towards non-kin and those we have had no prior communication with.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sexual selection and the evolution of altruism: males are more altruistic and cooperative towards attractive females

Bhogal

Galbraith

Manktelow

2016

Lett Evol Behav Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Explaining altruism through an evolutionary lens has been a challenge for evolutionary theorists. Where altruism towards kin is well understood through kin selection, altruism towards non-kin is an evolutionary puzzle. Contemporary research has found that, through a game-theoretic framework, sexual selection could be an explanation for the evolution of altruism. Research suggests that males are more altruistic towards females they are interested in engaging with, sexually or romantically when distributing stakes in economic games. This study, adopting a between-groups design, tested the sexual selection explanation for altruism by asking participants to self-report altruistic and cooperative intention when reading moral scenarios accompanied by attractive or unattractive images. We find that participants, particularly males, report being more altruistic and cooperative when viewing an attractive image of a female. This study replicates the sexual selection hypothesis in explaining altruism through an alternative experimental framework to game theory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sexual selection and the evolution of altruism: males are more altruistic and cooperative towards attractive females

Bhogal

Galbraith

Manktelow

2016

Lett Evol Behav Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Roberts (1998) and others (e.g. Farrelly, Lazarus and Roberts, 2007;Zahavi and Zahavi, 1997) have argued that altruism may be a costly signal that affects mate selection. People who show generosity or willingness to take risks to protect or help other people are likely to do the same thing for their own mate and children, thus making them more attractive as mates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neither Daredevils Nor Wimps: Attitudes toward Physical Risk Takers as Mates

Farthing

2007

Evol Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farthing (2005) tested a prediction derived from costly-signaling theory, that women would prefer physical risk takers (brave, athletic, fit) over risk-avoiders as longterm mates. Using scenarios involving high-risk acts, the prediction was confirmed for heroic (brave, altruistic) but not for non-heroic (brave, non-altruistic) acts. Apparently, women's concerns over risks to their mates overrode any positive signal value of men's risk taking, when the acts were highly risky and had no redeeming practical value. The present studies revisited the costly-signaling hypothesis using both medium-and highrisk scenarios, and it was predicted that for non-heroic acts women would prefer risk takers over risk avoiders for medium-level risks but not for highly risky acts. The prediction was supported in two studies. In Study 1, risk takers were preferred for non-heroic medium-risk acts, but risk avoiders were preferred for high-risk acts. For heroic acts, risk takers were preferred for both high-and medium-risk acts. Study 2 crossed two act risk levels with two actor skill levels, with non-heroic risks. Risk takers were preferred for the least risky combination (medium-risk act, high-skill actor) and also for the two moderately risky combinations, but risk avoiders were preferred for the riskiest combination (high-risk act, medium-skill actor). In Study 1, participants compared high-level risk takers versus risk avoiders on several person adjectives. Both heroic and non-heroic risk takers were perceived as more brave, athletic, physically fit, impulsive, attention-seeking, and foolish, and less emotionally stable and self-controlled, compared to risk avoiders. But only heroic risk takers were perceived as more altruistic, agreeable, conscientious, and sexy than risk avoiders.

show abstract

“…Signalers benefit from special access to cooperative social networks and greater cooperation within these networks (MILINSKI, SEMMANN and KRAMBECK 2002;BARCLAY and WILLER 2007). Signaling a capacity to share can also reassure current sharing relationships, increase the likelihood of reciprocation in times of need, and attract mates (ROBERTS 1998;GURVEN et al 2000;KELLY and DUNBAR 2001;SMITH and BLIEGE BIRD 2005;FARRELLY, LAZARUS and ROBERTS 2007).…”

Section: Costly Signaling Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Honest communication in the form of costly acts of generosity, such as making a blood donation, can help to achieve this goal. In addition to their value as reliable reciprocators, altruists have also been shown to be more appealing to the opposite sex and able to attract high quality partners (HAWKES, O'CONNELL and BLURTON JONES 2001;KELLY and DUNBAR 2001;SMITH, BLIEGE BIRD and BIRD 2003;FARRELLY, LAZARUS and ROBERTS 2007).…”

Section: Signaling Generosity and Cooperative Intentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blood donations as costly signals of donor quality

Lyle¹,

Smith²,

Sullivan³

2009

Journal of Evolutionary Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This is the first empirical investigation of blood donations in evolutionary perspective. We examine blood donor and non-donor attitudes about health and injury risks, donor characteristics, and the social value of donor participation. We propose that blood donations may communicate qualities about donors to third parties. Observers may benefit from information about the donor's health, value as a reciprocal partner, and/or ability to endure what is perceived as an anxiety-provoking and risky experience. Donors may benefit from an enhanced reputation, which can lead to greater access to cooperative networks and high-quality partners. We found that participants recognized the need for blood and perceived blood donors as generous and healthy. Study results indicated that anxiety and the perceived risk of a negative health consequence dramatically affected the willingness of donors and non-donors to donate blood in the future. These findings support our hypothesis that the act of blood donation may signal adaptive information about donor quality to third parties.

show abstract

Altruists Attract

Cited by 111 publications

References 41 publications

Sexual selection and the evolution of altruism: males are more altruistic and cooperative towards attractive females

Sexual selection and the evolution of altruism: males are more altruistic and cooperative towards attractive females

Neither Daredevils Nor Wimps: Attitudes toward Physical Risk Takers as Mates

Blood donations as costly signals of donor quality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About