Abstract
From an evolutionary perspective, phenotypic, social, and environmental factors help to shape the different costs and benefits of pursuing different reproductive strategies (or a mixture of them) from one individual to another. Since men’s reproductive success is mainly constrained to women’s availability, their mating orientations should be partially calibrated by features that women prefer in a potential partner. For long-term relationships, women prefer traits that signal access to resources, protection skills, and the willingness to share them. Using generalized linear models with laboratory data taken from a Chilean population (N = 197), this study aimed to test whether real and potential resources (measured as self-reported socioeconomic status), protection skills (measured as handgrip strength), and the willingness to provide resources and protection (measured as their disposition toward parenthood) are related to mating orientation in men. Our predictions were: (1) socioeconomic status would be positively associated with long-term and short-term mating orientation but for long-term-oriented individuals, this would be enhanced by having a more favorable parenthood disposition and (2) strength would be positively related to long-term mating orientation in men with higher socioeconomic status and a favorable disposition toward parenthood and it would have a positive and direct association with short-term mating orientation. Our results partially supported the first hypothesis, since men with higher socioeconomic status were more long-term oriented, but parenting disposition did not moderate this effect. Contrary to our expectations, socioeconomic status was not related to short-term mating orientation. Strength appeared not to be significant for long-term mating orientation, even interacting with other traits. However, strength by itself was powerfully linked with a short-term mating orientation. Our results suggest that only some individuals that are attractive for long-term relationships are indeed long-term oriented and may reflect the overall conflict of interests between mating strategies among sexes.
Highlights
In sexually reproducing species, individuals can allocate time and energy toward different reproductive activities such as finding and selecting mates, maintaining a pair-bonded relationship, or investing in parental care
This study aims to test if resources—measured as self-reported socioeconomic status, protection skills—signaled by handgrip strength—and the willingness to share resources and protection—measured indirectly through a parenthood disposition measure from the Components of Mate Value Survey (Fisher et al, 2008)—are related to long-term mating orientation in men, using generalized linear models with laboratory data taken from a Chilean population
We found a significant effect of socioeconomic status (β = 0.33, t = 3.24, p = 0.001) on the expression of long-term mating orientation
Summary
Individuals can allocate time and energy toward different reproductive activities such as finding and selecting mates, maintaining a pair-bonded relationship, or investing in parental care. One important reproductive trade-off is between mating and parenting In this regard, humans show a wide variety of mating strategies, from the establishment and maintenance of long-lasting pair-bonds (long-term strategies)—with different degrees of parental investment from men and women—to promiscuous mating (short-term strategies; Buss and Schmitt, 1993; Schmitt, 2015) that can be measured through differences in sociosexuality (individual differences in the willingness to engage in uncommitted sex; Simpson and Gangestad, 1991). Humans show a wide variety of mating strategies, from the establishment and maintenance of long-lasting pair-bonds (long-term strategies)—with different degrees of parental investment from men and women—to promiscuous mating (short-term strategies; Buss and Schmitt, 1993; Schmitt, 2015) that can be measured through differences in sociosexuality (individual differences in the willingness to engage in uncommitted sex; Simpson and Gangestad, 1991) This trade-off was shaped differently between the sexes since they faced divergent adaptative problems (Buss and Schmitt, 2019). From an evolutionary perspective and following the strategic pluralism hypothesis (SPH), this variation can be partially explained by phenotypic, social, and environmental factors, including physical features, social status, and mating opportunities that shape different costs and benefits in terms of pursuing different reproductive strategies—or a mixture of them—from one individual to another (Gangestad and Simpson, 2000)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
