Sample 3

An evolutionary argument that can explain human mating behaviour, is sexual selection. Evolution is the change over time in living organisms of heritable characteristics of a species. The theory of evolution states that by natural selection, organisms that adapt better to environmental changes are more likely to survive, reproduce, and thus pass on their genes. Sexual selection, a particular aspect of natural selection, states that in order to produce and protect the most healthy offspring, the perfect mating partner is found. Because the evolutionary argument states this, the way humans find mating partners must be beneficial to human survival and reproduction, and thus an adaptive behaviour. Three studies that looked at the human mating behaviour were Ronay and von Hipper, Wedekind, and Buss.

The aim of the study by Ronay and von Hippel (2010) was to determine if males would take greater risks in the presence of an attractive female. To do this, the levels of testosterone were also tested. The researchers had a sample of young Australian male skateboarders that were recruited at skateboard parks. The study took place in the afternoon. They were assigned to one of two conditions, the male-researcher condition and the female-researcher condition. They were asked to do two different tricks, ten times each. One trick that was easy, and the other difficult. Each attempt at the trick was marked as a success, an aborted attempt or a crash landing. To measure testosterone, saliva samples were collected. The researchers found that when the participants did their tricks in front of the female researcher, they took greater risks on the difficult tricks. They aborted tricks less and their testosterone levels were higher. From this study, it can be seen that testosterone may cause men to take greater physical risks when in the presence of a woman. This study may support evolutionary theory as risk-taking is used as a sign for potential mates to show that the male is healthy and strong.  In other words, he is able to produce and protect his offspring. A limitation of the study would be the ethical issue of deception, as the participants did not know they were being tested for their human mating behaviour. It is possible that if they had known this was the case, they would be embarrassed.

Another study that looks at the evolutionary argument for the human mating behaviour is by Wedekind (1995). The aim of this study was to see if women are attracted to men based on his MHC (major histocompatibility complex). The MHC is a group of proteins that let the immune system recognize different pathogens. It is argued that when the MHC genes of parents are diverse, the offspring will have a stronger immune system and that the way we smell is a sign of our MHC. The researchers took a sample of female and male students, and each of their MHC was found. The men were asked to wear a T-shirt for two nights, have their everyday clothes and bed sheets washed in perfume free detergents and shower with perfume-free soap.  After the two days, the women in the study were asked to rank the smell of 7 t-shirts, three of which contained t-shirts from men with similar MHC as the woman, three that were different, and one that was unworn. They ranked the smell for intensity, and ‘sexiness’ (on a scale of 0-10). The researchers found that the women scored the t-shirt of a male with a different MHC than their own higher than when the MHC was similar. The study shows that MHC may influence human mate choice, which can support the argument of sexual selection as we are looking to produce the most healthy offspring. A strength of this study is that the variable of MHC was isolated completely. There were extensive measures taken to ensure that the only the only variable tested was the smell of the MHC on the t-shirt. This means that the study has high internal validity. A limitation would be that while the variable was isolated, it is not a good representation of how a mate is found - women do not go around smelling shirts in boxes. 

The aim of  Buss (1989) was to support the idea that men look for fertile women, and women look for men that can support their offspring. To do this, the researchers had a sample of 10,000 participants from 37 different cultures and gave them a questionnaire. They found that men thought youth was highly important in a mate, and for women, maturity and higher social status was important. This can show that men want to maximize the potential for fertilization, which can come from younger women. And women want to ensure the likelihood of reproduction and having a healthy offspring through financial help and resources that can come from a higher social status. The results of this study explain the human mating behaviour as looking for the most optimal mating partner to reproduce a healthy offspring, which can be argued to be sexual selection. A strength of this study is the huge sample size of 10,000, this can ensure more reliability in the findings. In addition, the study was cross-cultural. A limitation would be that it was in the form of a questionnaire, meaning that the participants could have displayed demand characteristics in order to look better in front of the researchers.

The argument of sexual selection for the human mating behaviour can be supported through the studies by Ronay and von Hipper, Wedekind, and Buss. This evolutionary argument, however, does have its limitations. The evolutionary theory of sexual selection is based on the assumption that behaviours are genetically inherited. In actuality, it is not yet know to what extent human behaviours are actually inherited. In addition, it is hard to test human mating behaviour as there may be cultural influences or different ways humans have learned to find mates. The sexual selection theory assumes that a sexual partner is found for the sole reason of reproducing. Research in this theory also lacks ecological validity. As mentioned before with the study by Wedekind, it is highly unlikely a woman will find a mate through the act of smelling shirts and rating their smell. Also, the study by Buss can be seen as lacking ecological validity as the participants were given questionnaires which may be more what the person "thinks" they would do, rather than their actual behaviour. Experiments in this theory also may cause researchers to be susceptible to confirmation bias, as they see what they expect to see. An example of this would be in the study by Buss as it’s original aim was to support an already developed claim. A strength of this theory, however, would be its generalizability. Through these studies, it is clear that the sexual selection evolution argument can explain human mating behaviour, as humans look for mates that will allow for reproduction and healthy offsprings