2014
DOI: 10.1556/jep.12.2014.1.2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Correlations between spatial skills: A test of the hunter-gatherer hypothesis

Abstract: Most studies of female facial masculinity preference have relied upon self-reported preference, with participants selecting or rating the attractiveness of faces that differ in masculinity. However, researchers have not established a consensus as to whether women's general preference is for male faces that are masculine or feminine, and several studies have indicated that women prefer neither. We investigated women's preferences for male facial masculinity using standard two-alternative forced choice (2AFC) pr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
(52 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the other hand, less masculine men can be judged attractive due to their perceived amenableness to women and look like providers who invest in their offspring (Dixson, Tam, & Awasthy, 2013 ). Until now, there is no agreement on whether women prefer more feminine or more masculine men, or show enhanced preference for either (Burriss, Marcinkowska, & Lyons, 2014 ; Perrett et al, 1998 ; Peters, Simmons, & Rhodes, 2008 ; Zietsch, Lee, Sherlock, & Jern, 2015 ). It is now clear, however, that there is no stable, common preference shared by all women throughout their lifetimes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, less masculine men can be judged attractive due to their perceived amenableness to women and look like providers who invest in their offspring (Dixson, Tam, & Awasthy, 2013 ). Until now, there is no agreement on whether women prefer more feminine or more masculine men, or show enhanced preference for either (Burriss, Marcinkowska, & Lyons, 2014 ; Perrett et al, 1998 ; Peters, Simmons, & Rhodes, 2008 ; Zietsch, Lee, Sherlock, & Jern, 2015 ). It is now clear, however, that there is no stable, common preference shared by all women throughout their lifetimes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 2019 ; Hughes et al. 2014 ), though no simple, clear strategy differences between the sexes have also been reported on a virtual T-maze where both sexes evolved in strategy preferences with training, and eventually male participants in the study preferred allocentric navigation while female participants on average showed no preference (Astur et al. 2016 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 D; Bell and Saucier 2004 ; Hughes et al. 2014 ; Lawton and Morrin 1999 ; Nazareth et al. 2019 , but cf.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Men also exhibit a stronger attentional bias for weapons than do women [9], and this effect is stronger when the weapons are depicted wielded [15]. While there is much evidence for sex differences in other cognitive domains [38][39][40][41], there remains only the two reports of sex differences in attentional bias for weapons. As such we know little about the functional implications of this sex difference men's and women's responses to weapons.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%