Sex differences in detecting sexual infidelity : RRResults of a maximum likelihood method for analyzing the sensitivity of sex differences to underreporting

34Citations
Citations of this article
36Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Despite the importance of extrapair copulation (EPC) in human evolution, almost nothing is known about the design features of EPC detection mechanisms. We tested for sex differences in EPC inference-making mechanisms in a sample of 203 young couples. Men made more accurate inferences (φmen∈= ∈0.66, φwomen∈=∈0.46), and the ratio of positive errors to negative errors was higher for men than for women (1.22 vs. 0.18). Since some may have been reluctant to admit EPC behavior, we modeled how underreporting could have influenced these results. These analyses indicated that it would take highly sex-differentiated levels of underreporting by subjects with trusting partners for there to be no real sex difference. Further analyses indicated that men may be less willing to harbor unresolved suspicions about their partners' EPC behavior, which may explain the sex difference in accuracy. Finally, we estimated that women underreported their own EPC behavior (10%) more than men (0%).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Andrews, P. W., Gangestad, S. W., Miller, G. F., Haselton, M. G., Thornhill, R., & Neale, M. C. (2008). Sex differences in detecting sexual infidelity : RRResults of a maximum likelihood method for analyzing the sensitivity of sex differences to underreporting. Human Nature, 19(4), 347–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-008-9051-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free