Abstract
Selecting formidable male coalitions to navigate intergroup threats and resource acquisition evolved to enhance survival through group living, given men's enhanced ability to extract and protect resources through physical aggression. Though advantageous in certain contexts, formidable men can nonetheless inflict intragroup costs, suggesting preferences for this trait varies with resource availability in local ecologies. This study tasked participants (477 women, 140 men; MAge = 19.98, SD = 4.22) with building coalitions from arrays of physically strong and weak men to acquire resources in hopeful and desperate ecologies before assessing endorsement of several aspects of conservatism. Individuals high in social dominance orientation reported greater aversion to physically strong men in desperate ecologies, although strength was generally preferred independent of ideological differences. Results suggest a tradeoffs framework in coalition-building based on the inferred costs and benefits of physically strong allies.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
