Pair-bond strength and stability and reproductive success.

Rasmussen, Dennis R.

doi:10.1037/0033-295x.88.3.274

Cited by 57 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 149 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The allele and genotype distributions of the three repeat polymorphisms (RS1, RS3, and GT 25 ) were similar to what has been reported in previous studies (10,11,17) and did not deviate from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. After correction for multiple tests, there was a significant global P value for an association between the RS3-repeat polymorphism and the outcome of the PBS for men (P Ͻ 0.01 after a Bonferroni correction of the six tests), but not for women (Table 1).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 67%

“…Pair bonds among nonhuman primates are generally assessed by measures of partner specific affiliative interaction, proximity, and reciprocity between two individuals (22)(23)(24). Furthermore, the strength and stability of the bond is related to its persistence through time (25). In accordance with the behavioral domains observed when studying pair-bonding among nonhuman primates, items were collected from the DAS (19), a frequently used assessment of the quality of marital relationships and similar dyads, the Support Seeking and Giving (SSG) (26) assessment measuring subjects' engagement with other people, and the Marital Instability Scale (MIS) (27).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whereas there is no sequence in the human AVPR1A 5Ј flanking region homologous to the one found in prairie voles, humans do have three repetitive sequences in this region that are polymorphic: A (GT) 25 dinucleotide repeat, a complex (CT) 4 -TT-(CT) 8 -(GT) 24 repeat (RS3), and a (GATA) 14 tetranucleotide repeat (RS1) (10). Although as yet not consistently replicated, previous studies have revealed associations between AVPR1A repeat polymorphisms and autism (11)(12)(13), age at first sexual intercourse (14), and altruism (15), suggesting that these repetitive sequences may have an impact on human social behavior.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Genetic variation in the vasopressin receptor 1a gene ( AVPR1A ) associates with pair-bonding behavior in humans

Walum

Westberg

Henningsson

et al. 2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

408

335

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pair-bonding has been suggested to be a critical factor in the evolutionary development of the social brain. The brain neuropeptide arginine vasopressin (AVP) exerts an important influence on pair-bonding behavior in voles. There is a strong association between a polymorphic repeat sequence in the 5 flanking region of the gene (avpr1a) encoding one of the AVP receptor subtypes (V1aR), and proneness for monogamous behavior in males of this species. It is not yet known whether similar mechanisms are important also for human pair-bonding. Here, we report an association between one of the human AVPR1A repeat polymorphisms (RS3) and traits reflecting pair-bonding behavior in men, including partner bonding, perceived marital problems, and marital status, and show that the RS3 genotype of the males also affects marital quality as perceived by their spouses. These results suggest an association between a single gene and pair-bonding behavior in humans, and indicate that the well characterized influence of AVP on pair-bonding in voles may be of relevance also for humans.monogamy ͉ neuropeptide ͉ polymorphism ͉ social behavior P rimate social organization is often characterized by bonded relationships, and recent analyses suggest that it may have been the particular demands for pair-bonding behavior that triggered the evolutionary development of the primate social brain (1). The brain neuropeptide arginine vasopressin (AVP), acting through the receptor subtype V1aR, plays a key role in the regulation of pairbonding behavior in male rodents, as revealed by a series of elegant studies on closely related vole species, i.e., montane voles (Microtus montanus), meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus), and prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) (2). In prairie voles, which in contrast to montane and meadow voles are socially monogamous and highly social, pair-bond formation and related behaviors are facilitated by AVP and prevented by a V1aR antagonist (3). Supporting the theory that the striking difference in pair-bonding between monogamous and nonmonogamous voles is related to the influence of AVP on this behavior, the neuroanatomical distribution of V1aR differs considerably between these vole species (4) and is associated with sexual and social fidelity among prairie voles (5). Moreover, partner preference is enhanced in the nonmonogamous meadow vole when the V1aR density is increased in relevant brain areas by using viral vector gene transfer (6). Although there are no major differences in the coding sequence of the gene encoding V1aR (avpr1a) between prairie, montane or meadow voles, the former species displays a 428-base pair sequence in the 5Ј flanking region that is not found in the latter two species. When the avpr1a of the prairie vole, including the sequence in the 5Ј region, is transgenically inserted into the nonmonogamous species mouse (7), more pronounced social behavior, similar to that displayed by prairie voles, is generated. Furthermore, variation in the 5Ј flanking region of prairie vole avpr1a affects brain ex...

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 67%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetic variation in the vasopressin receptor 1a gene ( AVPR1A ) associates with pair-bonding behavior in humans

Walum

Westberg

Henningsson

et al. 2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

408

335

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Informational inputs relevant to relationship maintenance include the existence of offspring, availability of resources to both parents, presence and attractiveness of same-sex interlopers on the social horizon, and the sex ratio in the remainder of the mating pool (Dijkstra & Buunk, 1998;Guttentag & Secord, 1983;Kenrick & Trost, 1987). If a couple has offspring, for example, that raises the threshold for decisions to leave a relationship for an alternative (Essock-Vitale & McGuire, 1989;Hoffman & Manis, 1978;Rasmussen, 1981). Local availability of attractive alternatives, on the other hand, lowers the decision threshold (Guttentag & Secord, 1983;Kenrick et al, 1994).…”

Section: Relationship Maintenancementioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamical evolutionary psychology: Individual decision rules and emergent social norms.

Kenrick

Butner

2003

Psychological Review

320

259

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new theory integrating evolutionary and dynamical approaches is proposed. Following evolutionary models, psychological mechanisms are conceived as conditional decision rules designed to address fundamental problems confronted by human ancestors, with qualitatively different decision rules serving different problem domains and individual differences in decision rules as a function of adaptive and random variation. Following dynamical models, decision mechanisms within individuals are assumed to unfold in dynamic interplay with decision mechanisms of others in social networks. Decision mechanisms in different domains have different dynamic outcomes and lead to different sociospatial geometries. Three series of simulations examining trade-offs in cooperation and mating decisions illustrate how individual decision mechanisms and group dynamics mutually constrain one another, and offer insights about gene-culture interactions.Evolutionary psychology and dynamical systems theory have both been proposed as antidotes to the theoretical fragmentation that long characterized the field of psychology. Evolutionary psychologists have proposed that isolated psychological research topics such as aggression, taste aversion, language acquisition, mate selection, and spatial cognition can be connected to research on cultural anthropology, ecology, zoology, genetics, and physiology via principles of modern Darwinian theory (e.g

show abstract

“…8 As monogamy is therefore beneficial to both adults, we might expect pairs to co-operate, working together to optimize a number of common objectives. 9' 10 A pair can deal with the need to both forage and defend by partitioning necessary tasks on the basis of differing competencies and predilections.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactions between parents and non-residential intruders at a breeding colony of Herring GullsLarus argentatus

1990

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pair-bond strength and stability and reproductive success.

Cited by 57 publications

References 149 publications

Genetic variation in the vasopressin receptor 1a gene ( AVPR1A ) associates with pair-bonding behavior in humans

Genetic variation in the vasopressin receptor 1a gene ( AVPR1A ) associates with pair-bonding behavior in humans

Dynamical evolutionary psychology: Individual decision rules and emergent social norms.

Interactions between parents and non-residential intruders at a breeding colony of Herring GullsLarus argentatus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About