Formidability assessment mechanisms: Examining their speed and automaticity

Durkee, Patrick K.; Goetz, Aaron T.; Lukaszewski, Aaron W.

doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.12.006

Cited by 49 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in order to assess this asymmetry, individuals need to compare the fighting ability of their competitor with their own. Research into this ability in human beings, strength, based on HGS measurements, has always been used as a reliable expression of muscularity and a proxy for fighting ability (Sell et al, 2009a, 2012; Muñoz-Reyes et al, 2015; Durkee et al, 2018). In this study, we tested two main predictions, the first about the relationship between upper-body muscularity and strength, and the second about the role of muscularity in the self-perception of fighting ability, with this effect being mediated by strength.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This gives men the possibility of deciding to fight or flee when faced with a conflict, a mechanism that is adaptive, and leads to a positive and close relationship between the development of physical signs of strength as cues of fighting ability and the propensity to deploy direct physical aggression, which in turn explains individual differences in aggressiveness. Accordingly, several studies (Sell et al, 2009b, 2010, 2012, 2016, 2017a,b) have demonstrated that both sexes, but especially men, can assess fighting ability based on formidable traits like physical signs of strength, upper-body muscularity being the most robust trait (Durkee et al, 2018). This ability gives men a social tool to regulate conflict.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Muscularity and Strength Affect Individual Variation in Self-Perception of Fighting Ability in Men

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: There is evidence that competitive conflicts are the main form of intrasexual competition among men. The capacity to recognize visual cues of fighting ability in competitors is thought to be an important characteristic that allows men to avoid the costs of contest competition. However, for an accurate comparison to take place, individuals need to compare the fighting ability of their competitors to their own to assess this asymmetry.Methods: In order to improve our understanding of this self-assessment process, here we study the relationship between visual fighting ability cues, namely (i) muscularity, as measured with a bioimpedance device, (ii) the real capacity to inflict cost to a rival based on strength, as measured with a hand grip dynamometer (HGS), and (iii) self-perceived fighting ability, as determined with a questionnaire. The study sample was 364 men between 18 and 38 years of age (M ± SD = 22.27 ± 3.99).Results: Our results confirm the expected positive relationship between upper-body muscularity and strength, while controlling for body mass index (BMI). However, muscularity explained only around 30.2% of the variance in strength. In addition, muscularity was related to self-perception of fighting ability in our sample, its effect being partially mediated by strength.Conclusion: The more muscular men perceive their fighting ability as being greater, and not only because they are stronger (at least in the HGS task). Accordingly, it seems that men take into account the overestimation the robustness of the relationship between strength and muscularity that prevails within his peers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Muscularity and Strength Affect Individual Variation in Self-Perception of Fighting Ability in Men

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following Darwin (), the main evolutionary explanation for greater male than female physical aggression to same‐sex others is inter‐male competition (Daly & Wilson, ; Archer, , ). This links sex differences in aggression to those in size and strength (Archer, ; see also Sell et al, ; Sell, Cosmides, & Tooby, ; Durkee, Gortz, & Lukaszewski, ). The avoidance of escalated physical aggression by females (Campbell, ), as a consequence of the greater importance of mothers in rearing their offspring, is likely to have co‐evolved with inter‐male competition.…”

Section: Inter‐male Competition and Parental Investmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

The reality and evolutionary significance of human psychological sex differences

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this article are: (i) to provide a quantitative overview of sex differences in human psychological attributes; and (ii) to consider evidence for their possible evolutionary origins. Sex differences were identified from a systematic literature search of meta‐analyses and large‐sample studies. These were organized in terms of evolutionary significance as follows: (i) characteristics arising from inter‐male competition (within‐sex aggression; impulsiveness and sensation‐seeking; fearfulness; visuospatial and object‐location memory; object‐centred orientations); (ii) those concerning social relations that are likely to have arisen from women's adaptations for small‐group interactions and men's for larger co‐operative groups (person‐centred orientation and social skills; language; depression and anxiety); (iii) those arising from female choice (sexuality; mate choice; sexual conflict). There were sex differences in all categories, whose magnitudes ranged from (i) small (object location memory; negative emotions), to (ii) medium (mental rotation; anxiety disorders; impulsivity; sex drive; interest in casual sex), to (iii) large (social interests and abilities; sociosexuality); and (iv) very large (escalated aggression; systemizing; sexual violence). Evolutionary explanations were evaluated according to whether: (i) similar differences occur in other mammals; (ii) there is cross‐cultural consistency; (iii) the origin was early in life or at puberty; (iv) there was evidence for hormonal influences; and (v), where possible, whether there was evidence for evolutionarily derived design features. The evidence was positive for most features in most categories, suggesting evolutionary origins for a broad range of sex differences. Attributes for which there was no sex difference are also noted. Within‐sex variations are discussed as limitations to the emphasis on sex differences.

show abstract

“…Another key prediction arising from The male warrior hypothesis is the effect of group formidability on the expression of both aggressive and cooperative behavior in the presence of an intergroup threat 8 . Individuals tend to assess group formidability from the overall body musculature of the outgroup 51 and from the presence or absence of a successful outgroup leader 52 . Similar to the finding that more formidable individuals tend to behave more aggressively when facing a conflict 53 , it can be expected that individual behavior during intergroup conflict is influenced by group formidability 52 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Male Warrior Hypothesis: Testosterone-related Cooperation and Aggression in the Context of Intergroup Conflict

Muñoz-Reyes

Polo

Valenzuela

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Male Warrior Hypothesis (MWH) establishes that men's psychology has been shaped by intergroup competition to acquire and protect reproductive resources. In this context, sex-specific selective pressures would have favored cooperation with the members of one's group in combination with hostility towards outsiders. We investigate the role of developmental testosterone, as measured indirectly through static markers of prenatal testosterone (2D:4D digit ratio) and pubertal testosterone (body musculature and facial masculinity), on both cooperation and aggressive behavior in the context of intergroup conflict among men. Supporting the MWH, our results show that the intergroup conflict scenario promotes cooperation within group members and aggression toward outgroup members. Regarding the hormonal underpinnings of this phenomenon, we find that body musculature is positively associated with aggression and cooperation, but only for cooperation when context (intergroup competition) is taken into account. Finally, we did not find evidence that the formidability of the group affected individual rates of aggression or cooperation, controlling for individual characteristics.

show abstract

Formidability assessment mechanisms: Examining their speed and automaticity

Cited by 49 publications

References 50 publications

Muscularity and Strength Affect Individual Variation in Self-Perception of Fighting Ability in Men

Muscularity and Strength Affect Individual Variation in Self-Perception of Fighting Ability in Men

The reality and evolutionary significance of human psychological sex differences

The Male Warrior Hypothesis: Testosterone-related Cooperation and Aggression in the Context of Intergroup Conflict

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About