Reproductive Strategy and Sexual Conflict Slow Life History Strategy Inihibts Negative Androcentrism

Abstract

Recent findings indicate that a slow Life History (LH) strategy factor is associated with increased levels of Executive Functioning (EF), increased emotional intelligence, decreased levels of sexually coercive behaviors, and decreased levels of negative ethnocentrism. Based on these findings, as well as the generative theory, we predicted that slow LH strategy should inhibit negative androcentrism (bias against women). A sample of undergraduates responded to a battery of questionnaires measuring various facets of their LH Strategy, (e.g., sociosexual orientation, mating effort, mate-value, psychopathy, executive functioning, and emotional intelligence) and various convergent measures of Negative Androcentrism. A structural model that the data fit well indicated a latent protective LH strategy trait predicted decreased negative androcentrism. This trait fully mediated the relationship between participant biological sex and androcentrism. We suggest that slow LH strategy may inhibit negative attitudes toward women because of relatively decreased intrasexual competition and intersexual conflict among slow LH strategists. DOI:10.2458/azu_jmmss_v4i1_gladden

Adversity, Adaptive Calibration, and Health: The Case of Disadvantaged Families

“…For example, in contexts (like harsh but predictable environments) that produce slow life history strategists, we should expect to see prosocial and cooperative behaviors reflecting convergent interests, meaning that individuals must cooperate with conspecifics to successfully acquire resources. Consequently, behavior of slow life history strategists is mutualistic or interpersonally-oriented, meaning that slow life history strategists behave in a manner that would be defined as “socially competent” or “prosocial” which involves successfully navigating, negotiating, and cooperating with conspecifics to extract resources from the environment (Gladden, Figueredo, Andrzejczak, Jones, & Smith-Castro, 2013). …”

“…Conversely, if the environment is both harsh and unpredictable, the collective behavior will be divergent , meaning that conspecifics will have individual and divergent interests in acquiring resources (Belsky et al, 1991; Ellis, et al, 2009; Gladden et al, 2013). Behaviorally, a fast LH strategist who resides in a harsh and unpredictable environment would pursue a behavioral strategy defined as opportunistic or antagonistic (Belsky et al, 1991; Gladden et al, 2013) which includes the use of aggressive, hostile, and impulsive behavior to successfully extract resources from one’s ecology and from conspecifics.…”

“…Behaviorally, a fast LH strategist who resides in a harsh and unpredictable environment would pursue a behavioral strategy defined as opportunistic or antagonistic (Belsky et al, 1991; Gladden et al, 2013) which includes the use of aggressive, hostile, and impulsive behavior to successfully extract resources from one’s ecology and from conspecifics. An antagonistic behavioral strategy should be enacted by schemas and a worldview that conspecifics and the environment is unreliable (Ross & Hill, 2002).…”

“…Research indeed finds behavioral variation among slow and fast life history strategists. Specifically, mutualistic strategies, including emotional intelligence and executive functioning, converged with other behavioral indicators of slow life history (Gladden et al, 2013). Taken together, these findings support the hypotheses derived from life history: slow life history strategists will be less impulsive and more emotionally attuned to conspecifics to maximize cooperation and acquisition of resources.…”

Methodologically Sound: Evaluating the Psychometric Approach to the Assessment of Human Life History [Reply to ]

“…The Copping et al (2014) critique made the important recommendation that sex differences should be tested when examining LH strategies, but asserts that within the literature relying on the psychometric approach to assessment, “sex differences are rarely considered” (p. 203). This is incorrect, as several recent publications have in fact reported systematic sex differences of between one-quarter to one-third of a standard deviation between sexes, with males being predictably “faster” than females (Figueredo, Andrzejczak, Jones, Smith-Castro, and Montero-Rojas, 2011; Figueredo, Cabeza de Baca, et al, 2013; Gladden, Figueredo, Andrejzak, Jones, and Smith-Castro, 2013; Gladden, Sisco, and Figueredo, 2008). Alternatively, what the authors of the critique might mean by this point is that the same measures were used to assess LH strategy in both males and females, and not that differences in their relative levels were not examined.…”