Search results for 'Sex differences' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  23
    Jacob Miguel Vigil (2009). A Socio-Relational Framework of Sex Differences in the Expression of Emotion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (5):375.
    Despite a staggering body of research demonstrating sex differences in expressed emotion, very few theoretical models (evolutionary or non-evolutionary) offer a critical examination of the adaptive nature of such differences. From the perspective of a socio-relational framework, emotive behaviors evolved to promote the attraction and aversion of different types of relationships by advertising the two most parsimonious properties of reciprocity potential, or perceived attractiveness as a prospective social partner. These are the individual's (a) perceived capacity or ability to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   13 citations  
  2.  42
    David M. Buss (1989). Sex Differences in Human Mate Preferences: Evolutionary Hypotheses Tested in 37 Cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12 (1):1.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   185 citations  
  3.  10
    Daniel J. Kruger & Randolph M. Nesse (2006). An Evolutionary Life-History Framework for Understanding Sex Differences in Human Mortality Rates. Human Nature 17 (1):74-97.
    Sex differences in mortality rates stem from genetic, physiological, behavioral, and social causes that are best understood when integrated in an evolutionary life history framework. This paper investigates the Male-to-Female Mortality Ratio (M:F MR) from external and internal causes and across contexts to illustrate how sex differences shaped by sexual selection interact with the environment to yield a pattern with some consistency, but also with expected variations due to socioeconomic and other factors.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  4.  12
    John Archer (2009). Does Sexual Selection Explain Human Sex Differences in Aggression? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):249-266.
    I argue that the magnitude and nature of sex differences in aggression, their development, causation, and variability, can be better explained by sexual selection than by the alternative biosocial version of social role theory. Thus, sex differences in physical aggression increase with the degree of risk, occur early in life, peak in young adulthood, and are likely to be mediated by greater male impulsiveness, and greater female fear of physical danger. Male variability in physical aggression is consistent with (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  5.  24
    Dario Maestripieri & Suzanne Pelka (2002). Sex Differences in Interest in Infants Across the Lifespan. Human Nature 13 (3):327-344.
    This study investigated sex differences in interest in infants among children, adolescents, young adults, and older individuals. Interest in infants was assessed with responses to images depicting animal and human infants versus adults, and with verbal responses to questionnaires. Clear sex differences, irrespective of age, emerged in all visual and verbal tests, with females being more interested in infants than males. Male interest in infants remained fairly stable across the four age groups, whereas female interest in infants was (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  13
    Judith A. Easton & Todd K. Shackelford (2009). Morbid Jealousy and Sex Differences in Partner-Directed Violence. Human Nature 20 (3):342-350.
    Previous research suggests that individuals diagnosed with morbid jealousy have jealousy mechanisms that are activated at lower thresholds than individuals with normal jealousy, but that these mechanisms produce behavior that is similar to individuals with normal jealousy. We extended previous research documenting these similarities by investigating sex differences in partner-directed violence committed by individuals diagnosed with morbid jealousy. The results support some of our predictions. For example, a greater percentage of men than women diagnosed with morbid jealousy used physical (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  17
    Paul W. Andrews, Steven W. Gangestad, Geoffrey F. Miller, Martie G. Haselton, Randy Thornhill & Michael C. Neale (2008). Sex Differences in Detecting Sexual Infidelity. Human Nature 19 (4):347-373.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  4
    Deborah S. Mower (2009). Sex Differences in Moral Interests: The Role of Kinship and the Nature of Reciprocity. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 39 (1):111-119.
    Although moral psychologists and feminist moral theorists emphasize males’ interest in justice or fairness and females’ interest in care or empathy, recent work in evolutionary psychology links females’ interests in care and empathy for others with interests in fairness and equality. In an important work on sex differences in cognitive abilities, David Geary (1998) argues that the evolutionary mechanism of sexual selection drives the evolution of particular cognitive abilities and selection for particular interests. I mount two main challenges to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  20
    Jeannette McGlone (1980). Sex Differences in Human Brain Asymmetry: A Critical Survey. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (2):215.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   186 citations  
  10.  44
    David I. Miller & Diane F. Halpern (2014). The New Science of Cognitive Sex Differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 18 (1):37-45.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  11.  10
    Camilla Persson Benbow (1988). Sex Differences in Mathematical Reasoning Ability in Intellectually Talented Preadolescents: Their Nature, Effects, and Possible Causes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 11 (2):169.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   39 citations  
  12.  3
    Joyce F. Benenson, Tamara Morganstein & Rosanne Roy (1998). Sex Differences in Children's Investment in Peers. Human Nature 9 (4):369-390.
    It is hypothesized from within an evolutionary framework that females should be less invested in peer relations than males. Investment was operationalized as enjoyment in Study 1 and as preference for interaction in Study 2. In the first study, four- and six-year-old children’s enjoyment of peer interaction was observed in 26 groups of same-sex peers. Girls were rated as enjoying their interactions significantly less than boys. In the second study, six- and nine-year-old children were interviewed about the individuals with whom (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  13.  24
    Sascha Schwarz & Manfred Hassebrauck (2012). Sex and Age Differences in Mate-Selection Preferences. Human Nature 23 (4):447-466.
    For nearly 70 years, studies have shown large sex differences in human mate selection preferences. However, most of the studies were restricted to a limited set of mate selection criteria and to college students, and neglecting relationship status. In this study, 21,245 heterosexual participants between 18 and 65 years of age (mean age 41) who at the time were not involved in a close relationship rated the importance of 82 mate selection criteria adapted from previous studies, reported age ranges (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  14.  7
    David C. Geary (1996). Sexual Selection and Sex Differences in Mathematical Abilities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19 (2):229.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  15.  2
    Jeffrey M. Gredlein & David F. Bjorklund (2005). Sex Differences in Young Children's Use of Tools in a Problem-Solving Task. Human Nature 16 (2):211-232.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  16.  12
    Frank Salter, Karl Grammer & Anja Rikowski (2005). Sex Differences in Negotiating with Powerful Males. Human Nature 16 (3):306-321.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  2
    C. E. Buxton & D. A. Grant (1939). Retroaction and Gains in Motor Learning: II. Sex Differences, and a Further Analysis of Gains. Journal of Experimental Psychology 25 (2):198.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  18.  7
    H. D. Kimmel & E. Kimmel (1965). Sex Differences in Adaptation of the GSR Under Repeated Applications of a Visual Stimulus. Journal of Experimental Psychology 70 (5):536.
  19.  2
    R. W. Husband & M. J. Ludden (1931). Sex Differences in Motor Skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology 14 (4):414.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20.  4
    Henryk Misiak (1947). Age and Sex Differences in Critical Flicker Frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology 37 (4):318.
  21.  2
    Toine Lagro‐Janssen & Janja Grosicar (2010). Morbidity Figures From General Practice: Sex Differences in Traumatology. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16 (4):673-677.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  2
    Betsy Worth Estes, Louise Brightwell Miller & Mary Ellen Curtin (1962). Supplementary Report: Monetary Incentive and Motivation in Discrimination Learning--Sex Differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology 63 (3):320.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  1
    H. E. Burtt (1920). Sex Differences in the Effect of Discussion. Journal of Experimental Psychology 3 (5):390.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24.  65
    Robyn Bluhm (2013). New Research, Old Problems: Methodological and Ethical Issues in fMRI Research Examining Sex/Gender Differences in Emotion Processing. Neuroethics 6 (2):319-330.
    Neuroscience research examining sex/gender differences aims to explain behavioral differences between men and women in terms of differences in their brains. Historically, this research has used ad hoc methods and has been conducted explicitly in order to show that prevailing gender roles were dictated by biology. I examine contemporary fMRI research on sex/gender differences in emotion processing and argue that it, too, both uses problematic methods and, in doing so, reinforces gender stereotypes.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  25.  32
    Cordelia Fine (2013). Is There Neurosexism in Functional Neuroimaging Investigations of Sex Differences? Neuroethics 6 (2):369-409.
    The neuroscientific investigation of sex differences has an unsavoury past, in which scientific claims reinforced and legitimated gender roles in ways that were not scientifically justified. Feminist critics have recently argued that the current use of functional neuroimaging technology in sex differences research largely follows that tradition. These charges of ‘neurosexism’ have been countered with arguments that the research being done is informative and valuable and that an over-emphasis on the perils, rather than the promise, of such research (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  26.  16
    Karen J. Berkley (1997). Sex Differences in Pain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (3):371-380.
    Are there sex differences in pain? For experimentally delivered somatic stimuli, females have lower thresholds, greater ability to discriminate, higher pain ratings, and less tolerance of noxious stimuli than males. These differences, however, are small, exist only for certain forms of stimulation and are affected by many situational variables such as presence of disease, experimental setting, and even nutritive status. For endogenous pains, women report more multiple pains in more body regions than men. With no obvious underlying rationale, (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  27.  85
    Cordelia Fine (2012). Explaining, or Sustaining, the Status Quo? The Potentially Self-Fulfilling Effects of 'Hardwired' Accounts of Sex Differences. Neuroethics 5 (3):285-294.
    In this article I flesh out support for observations that scientific accounts of social groups can influence the very groups and mental phenomena under investigation. The controversial hypothesis that there are hardwired differences between the brains of males and females that contribute to sex differences in gender-typed behaviour is common in both the scientific and popular media. Here I present evidence that such claims, quite independently of their scientific validity, have scope to sustain the very sex differences (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  28.  39
    Peggy DesAutels (2010). Sex Differences and Neuroethics. Philosophical Psychology 23 (1):95-111.
    Discussions in neuroethics to date have ignored an ever-increasing neuroscientific lilterature on sex differences in brains. If, indeed, there are significant differences in the brains of men versus women and in the brains of boys versus girls, the ethical and social implications loom very large. I argue that recent neuroscientific findings on sex-based brain differences have significant implications for theories of morality and for our understandings of the neuroscience of moral cognition and behavior.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  29.  16
    Nicholas Pound, Martin Daly & Margo Wilson (2009). There's No Contest: Human Sex Differences Are Sexually Selected. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):286-287.
    An evolutionary psychological perspective drawing on sexual selection theory can better explain sex differences in aggression and violence than can social constructionist theories. Moreover, there is accumulating evidence that, in accordance with predictions derived from sexual selection theory, men modulate their willingness to engage in risky and violent confrontations in response to cues to fitness variance and future prospects.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  20
    Eli J. Finkel & Erica B. Slotter (2009). An I3 Theory Analysis of Human Sex Differences in Aggression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):279-279.
    According to I3 Theory, individuals enact aggressive behaviors when (a) instigating triggers are severe, (b) impelling forces are strong, and/or (c) inhibiting forces are weak. Archer's analysis of human sex differences in aggression could be bolstered by a careful analysis of male-female discrepancies in reactivity (or exposure) to instigating triggers, proneness toward impelling forces, and/or proneness toward inhibiting forces.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  5
    Michael J. Boulton, Mark Trueman & Ian Flemington (2002). Associations Between Secondary School Pupils' Definitions of Bullying, Attitudes Towards Bullying, and Tendencies to Engage in Bullying: Age and Sex Differences. Educational Studies 28 (4):353-370.
    A self-report questionnaire about involvement in different types of bullying, what behaviours were regarded as bullying, and attitudes towards bullying, bullies and victims was completed by pupils in Year 7 (aged 11/12) through to Year 10 (aged 14/15) ( n = 170). Overall, direct verbal assault was the most commonly reported, and stealing the least frequently reported, type of bullying. For six specific types of bullying investigated, and for a composite measure of all types of bullying, significantly fewer Year 9 (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  32.  10
    Dominic Dp Johnson & Mark van Vugt (2009). A History of War: The Role of Inter-Group Conflict in Sex Differences in Aggression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):280 - 281.
    Human aggression has two important dimensions: within-group aggression and between-group aggression. Archer offers an excellent treatment of the former only. A full explanation of sex differences in aggression will fail without accounting for our history of inter-group aggression, which has deep evolutionary roots and specific psychological adaptations. The causes and consequences of inter-group aggression are dramatically different for males and females.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33.  12
    Aaron Sell & John Archer (2009). Standards of Evidence for Designed Sex Differences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3):289.
    At the heart of the debate between social role theorists and evolutionary psychologists is whether natural selection has designed the minds of the sexes differently to some interesting extent. In this commentary I describe the standards of evidence for both the positive and negative claims. In my opinion, Archer has met the standard for designed sex differences in intrasexual conflict.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  19
    April L. Bleske & David M. Buss (2000). A Comprehensive Theory of Human Mating Must Explain Between-Sex and Within-Sex Differences in Mating Strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):593-594.
    Gangestad & Simpson make a major contribution by highlighting the importance of mate choice for good genes, the costs of alternative strategies, and tradeoffs inherent in human mating. By downplaying sex differences and ignoring the nongenetic adaptive benefits of short term mating, however, they undermine their goal of “strategic pluralism” by presenting a theory devoid of many documented complexities of human mating.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  35.  12
    J. Colette Berbesque, Frank W. Marlowe, Ian Pawn, Peter Thompson, Guy Johnson & Audax Mabulla (2012). Sex Differences in Hadza Dental Wear Patterns. Human Nature 23 (3):270-282.
    Among hunter-gatherers, the sharing of male and female foods is often assumed to result in virtually the same diet for males and females. Although food sharing is widespread among the hunting and gathering Hadza of Tanzania, women were observed eating significantly more tubers than men. This study investigates the relationship between patterns of dental wear, diet, and extramasticatory use of teeth among the Hadza. Casts of the upper dentitions were made from molds taken from 126 adults and scored (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  44
    Alice H. Eagly & Wendy Wood (2005). Universal Sex Differences Across Patriarchal Cultures [Not Equal] Evolved Psychological Dispositions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (2):281-283.
    Schmitt's findings provide little evidence that sex differences in sociosexuality are explained by evolved dispositions. These sex differences are better explained by an evolutionary account that treats the psychological attributes of women and men as emergent, given the biological attributes of the sexes, especially female reproductive capacity, and the economic and social structural aspects of societies.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37.  13
    David C. Geary (1998). Sexual Selection, the Division of Labor, and the Evolution of Sex Differences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):444-447.
    Sexual selection traditionally involves male-male competition and female choice, but in some species, including humans, sexual selection can also involve female-female competition and male choice. The degree to which one aspect of sexual selection or another is manifest in human populations will be influenced by a host of social and ecological variables, including the operational sex ratio. These variables are discussed in connection with the relative contribution of sexual selection and the division of labor to the evolution of human sex (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  38.  4
    Drew H. Bailey, Jonathan K. Oxford & David C. Geary (2009). Ultimate and Proximate Influences on Human Sex Differences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):266-267.
    We agree with Archer that human sex differences in aggression are well explained by sexual selection, but note that explanations of human behaviors are not logically mutually exclusive from explanations and therefore should not be framed as such. We discuss why this type of framing hinders the development of both social learning and evolutionary theories of human behavior.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  4
    Richard E. Tremblay & Sylvana M. Cote (2009). Development of Sex Differences in Physical Aggression: The Maternal Link to Epigenetic Mechanisms. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):290-291.
    As Archer argues, recent developmental data on human physical aggression support the sexual selection hypothesis. However, sex differences are largely due to males on a chronic trajectory of aggression. Maternal characteristics of these males suggest that, in societies with low levels of physical violence, females with a history of behavior problems largely contribute to maintenance of physical aggression sex differences.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  35
    Alice H. Eagly & Wendy Wood (1999). The Origins of Aggression Sex Differences: Evolved Dispositions Versus Social Roles. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (2):223-224.
    The ultimate causes of sex differences in human aggressive behavior can lie mainly in evolved, inherited mechanisms that differ by sex or mainly in the differing placement of women and men in the social structure. The present commentary contrasts Campbell's evolutionary interpretation of aggression sex differences with a social structural interpretation that encompasses a wider range of phenomena.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  4
    Philip J. Corr & Adam M. Perkins (2009). Differentiating Defensive and Predatory Aggression: Neuropsychological Systems and Personality in Sex Differences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):274-275.
    We draw a distinction between defensive and predatory forms of aggression, and how these forms relate to basic neuropsychological systems, especially the Fight-Flight-Freeze-System (FFFS; putatively related to defensive aggression), and the Behavioural Approach System (BAS; putatively related to predatory aggression). These systems may help further to account for proximal brain processes and personality influences in the context of sex differences.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42.  3
    Kingsley R. Browne (2009). Sex Differences in Aggression: Origins and Implications for Sexual Integration of Combat Forces. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):270-271.
    Sex differences in aggressive and risk-taking behaviors have practical implications for sexual integration of military combat units. The social-role theory implies that female soldiers will adapt to their role and display the same aggressive and risk-taking propensities as their male comrades. If sex differences reflect evolved propensities, however, adoption of the soldier's role is unlikely to eliminate those differences.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  3
    David Terburg, Jiska S. Peper, Barak Morgan & Jack van Honk (2009). Sex Differences in Human Aggression: The Interaction Between Early Developmental and Later Activational Testosterone. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):290 - 290.
    The relation between testosterone levels and aggressive behavior is well established. From an evolutionary viewpoint, testosterone can explain at least part of the sex differences found in aggressive behavior. This explanation, however, is mediated by factors such as prenatal testosterone levels and basal levels of cortisol. Especially regarding sex differences in aggression during adolescence, these mediators have great influence. Based on developmental brain structure research we argue that sex differences in aggression have a pre-pubertal origin and are (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  5
    Alice H. Eagly & Wendy Wood (2009). Sexual Selection Does Not Provide an Adequate Theory of Sex Differences in Aggression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):276-277.
    Our social role/biosocial theory provides a more adequate account of aggression sex differences than does Archer's sexual selection theory. In our theory, these sex differences arise flexibly from sociocultural and ecological forces in interaction with humans' biology, as defined by female and male physical attributes and reproductive activities. Our comments elaborate our theory's explanations for the varied phenomena that Archer presents.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  5
    Anthony D. Pellegrini (2009). Moderators of Sex Differences in Sexual Selection Theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):285 - 286.
    Archer recognizes that sexual selection theory is sensitive to the effects of ecologies on sex differences, yet he does not explain the impact of such variation. For example, to what degree are there sex differences in aggression in polygynous and monogamous societies? I demonstrate how differences in mating perceptions affect the traditional dichotomy that males compete for and females choose mates.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46.  10
    Ann Searle (1971). A Study of 'Admired People' Among Adolescents in Relation to Aggression and Sex Differences. Journal of Moral Education 1 (1):61-66.
    (1971). A study of ‘admired people’ among adolescents in relation to aggression and sex differences. Journal of Moral Education: Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 61-66.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  47.  5
    Elizabeth Cashdan (2009). Sex Differences in Aggression: What Does Evolutionary Theory Predict? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):273-274.
    The target article claims that evolutionary theory predicts the emergence of sex differences in aggression in early childhood, and that there will be no sex difference in anger. It also finds an absence of sex differences in spousal abuse in Western societies. All three are puzzling from an evolutionary perspective and warrant further discussion.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  7
    Carlos Gil-Burmann, Fernando Peláez & Susana Sánchez (2002). Mate Choice Differences According to Sex and Age. Human Nature 13 (4):493-508.
    We used 7,415 advertisements published in Spain to analyze traits sought/offered by men and women from different age groups. Findings regarding age, socioeconomic status, and physical attractiveness requirements support evolutionary predictions about mate preferences. However, changes in trait preferences among women under 40 appear to be contingent on Spain’s socioeconomic transformation. Women under 40 seek mainly physical attractiveness in men, whereas those over 40 seek mainly socioeconomic status. The trait most sought by men in all age groups is physical attractiveness. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49.  6
    Michael Schredl (2009). Sex Differences in Dream Aggression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):287-288.
    Dream research shows sex differences in dream aggression that fit very well with the findings for waking-life aggressive behaviour. Dream studies are a valuable tool for investigating variables underlying the sex difference in aggression. One might argue that studying dream aggression might be even more promising because aggression in dreams is not socially labelled, as being aggressive in waking life is.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  6
    Joseph M. Boden (2009). Sex Differences in the Developmental Antecedents of Aggression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):269-270.
    Archer examines sex differences in aggression, and argues that these differences may be better explained by sexual selection theory than by social role theory. This commentary examines sex differences in the developmental antecedents of aggression and violence, and presents a preliminary framework for examining whether the observed sex differences amongst these developmental antecedents can also be accounted for by sexual selection theory.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 1000