No Cover Image

Journal article 59 views 25 downloads

Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample

Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair Orcid Logo, Andrew Thomas Orcid Logo, David M. Buss, Mons Bendixen Orcid Logo

Evolutionary Psychology, Volume: 21, Issue: 1, Start page: 147470492311656

Swansea University Author: Andrew Thomas Orcid Logo

  • kennair-et-al-2023-examining-the-sexual-double-standards-and-hypocrisy-in-partner-suitability-appraisals-within-a.pdf

    PDF | Version of Record

    © The Author(s) 2023. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

    Download (825.49KB)

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1177/14747049231165687

Abstract

Sexual double standards are social norms that impose greater social opprobrium on women versus men or that permit one sex greater sexual freedom than the other. This study examined sexual double standards when choosing a mate based on their sexual history. Using a novel approach, participants (N = 9...

Full description

Published in: Evolutionary Psychology
ISSN: 1474-7049 1474-7049
Published: SAGE Publications 2023
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa66230
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2024-05-02T09:06:17Z
last_indexed 2024-05-02T09:06:17Z
id cronfa66230
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rfc1807 xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>66230</id><entry>2024-05-02</entry><title>Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>a43308ae6d7f5b8d5ab0daff5b832a96</sid><ORCID>0000-0001-5251-7923</ORCID><firstname>Andrew</firstname><surname>Thomas</surname><name>Andrew Thomas</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2024-05-02</date><deptcode>PSYS</deptcode><abstract>Sexual double standards are social norms that impose greater social opprobrium on women versus men or that permit one sex greater sexual freedom than the other. This study examined sexual double standards when choosing a mate based on their sexual history. Using a novel approach, participants (N = 923, 64% women) were randomly assigned to make evaluations in long-term or short-term mating contexts and asked how a prospective partner's sexual history would influence their own likelihood of having sex (short-term) or entering a relationship (long-term) with them. They were then asked how the same factors would influence the appraisal they would make of male and female friends in a similar position. We found no evidence of traditional sexual double standards for promiscuous or sexually undesirable behavior. There was some evidence for small sexual double standard for self-stimulation, but this was in the opposite direction to that predicted. There was greater evidence for sexual hypocrisy as sexual history tended to have a greater negative impact on suitor assessments for the self rather than for same-sex friends. Sexual hypocrisy effects were more prominent in women, though the direction of the effects was the same for both sexes. Overall, men were more positive about women's self-stimulation than women were, particularly in short-term contexts. Socially undesirable sexual behavior (unfaithfulness, mate poaching, and jealous/controlling) had a large negative impact on appraisals of a potential suitor across all contexts and for both sexes. Effects of religiosity, disgust, sociosexuality, and question order effects are considered.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Evolutionary Psychology</journal><volume>21</volume><journalNumber>1</journalNumber><paginationStart>147470492311656</paginationStart><paginationEnd/><publisher>SAGE Publications</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>1474-7049</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1474-7049</issnElectronic><keywords>sexual double standards, sexual strategies theory, hypocrisy, short-term sex, sex differences, long-term relationships</keywords><publishedDay>27</publishedDay><publishedMonth>3</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2023</publishedYear><publishedDate>2023-03-27</publishedDate><doi>10.1177/14747049231165687</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Psychology School</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>PSYS</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm>Another institution paid the OA fee</apcterm><funders>The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</funders><projectreference/><lastEdited>2024-06-19T15:45:03.1312507</lastEdited><Created>2024-05-02T09:47:47.0900668</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">School of Psychology</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Leif Edward Ottesen</firstname><surname>Kennair</surname><orcid>0000-0002-2713-7096</orcid><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Andrew</firstname><surname>Thomas</surname><orcid>0000-0001-5251-7923</orcid><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>David M.</firstname><surname>Buss</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Mons</firstname><surname>Bendixen</surname><orcid>0000-0002-5064-6956</orcid><order>4</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>66230__30223__c1e967459f7e4f8199063ed8459ab4a9.pdf</filename><originalFilename>kennair-et-al-2023-examining-the-sexual-double-standards-and-hypocrisy-in-partner-suitability-appraisals-within-a.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2024-05-02T10:05:36.9393794</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>845299</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Version of Record</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><documentNotes>© The Author(s) 2023. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</documentNotes><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language><licence>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</licence></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling v2 66230 2024-05-02 Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample a43308ae6d7f5b8d5ab0daff5b832a96 0000-0001-5251-7923 Andrew Thomas Andrew Thomas true false 2024-05-02 PSYS Sexual double standards are social norms that impose greater social opprobrium on women versus men or that permit one sex greater sexual freedom than the other. This study examined sexual double standards when choosing a mate based on their sexual history. Using a novel approach, participants (N = 923, 64% women) were randomly assigned to make evaluations in long-term or short-term mating contexts and asked how a prospective partner's sexual history would influence their own likelihood of having sex (short-term) or entering a relationship (long-term) with them. They were then asked how the same factors would influence the appraisal they would make of male and female friends in a similar position. We found no evidence of traditional sexual double standards for promiscuous or sexually undesirable behavior. There was some evidence for small sexual double standard for self-stimulation, but this was in the opposite direction to that predicted. There was greater evidence for sexual hypocrisy as sexual history tended to have a greater negative impact on suitor assessments for the self rather than for same-sex friends. Sexual hypocrisy effects were more prominent in women, though the direction of the effects was the same for both sexes. Overall, men were more positive about women's self-stimulation than women were, particularly in short-term contexts. Socially undesirable sexual behavior (unfaithfulness, mate poaching, and jealous/controlling) had a large negative impact on appraisals of a potential suitor across all contexts and for both sexes. Effects of religiosity, disgust, sociosexuality, and question order effects are considered. Journal Article Evolutionary Psychology 21 1 147470492311656 SAGE Publications 1474-7049 1474-7049 sexual double standards, sexual strategies theory, hypocrisy, short-term sex, sex differences, long-term relationships 27 3 2023 2023-03-27 10.1177/14747049231165687 COLLEGE NANME Psychology School COLLEGE CODE PSYS Swansea University Another institution paid the OA fee The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. 2024-06-19T15:45:03.1312507 2024-05-02T09:47:47.0900668 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences School of Psychology Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair 0000-0002-2713-7096 1 Andrew Thomas 0000-0001-5251-7923 2 David M. Buss 3 Mons Bendixen 0000-0002-5064-6956 4 66230__30223__c1e967459f7e4f8199063ed8459ab4a9.pdf kennair-et-al-2023-examining-the-sexual-double-standards-and-hypocrisy-in-partner-suitability-appraisals-within-a.pdf 2024-05-02T10:05:36.9393794 Output 845299 application/pdf Version of Record true © The Author(s) 2023. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. true eng https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
title Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample
spellingShingle Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample
Andrew Thomas
title_short Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample
title_full Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample
title_fullStr Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample
title_full_unstemmed Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample
title_sort Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample
author_id_str_mv a43308ae6d7f5b8d5ab0daff5b832a96
author_id_fullname_str_mv a43308ae6d7f5b8d5ab0daff5b832a96_***_Andrew Thomas
author Andrew Thomas
author2 Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair
Andrew Thomas
David M. Buss
Mons Bendixen
format Journal article
container_title Evolutionary Psychology
container_volume 21
container_issue 1
container_start_page 147470492311656
publishDate 2023
institution Swansea University
issn 1474-7049
1474-7049
doi_str_mv 10.1177/14747049231165687
publisher SAGE Publications
college_str Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
department_str School of Psychology{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}School of Psychology
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description Sexual double standards are social norms that impose greater social opprobrium on women versus men or that permit one sex greater sexual freedom than the other. This study examined sexual double standards when choosing a mate based on their sexual history. Using a novel approach, participants (N = 923, 64% women) were randomly assigned to make evaluations in long-term or short-term mating contexts and asked how a prospective partner's sexual history would influence their own likelihood of having sex (short-term) or entering a relationship (long-term) with them. They were then asked how the same factors would influence the appraisal they would make of male and female friends in a similar position. We found no evidence of traditional sexual double standards for promiscuous or sexually undesirable behavior. There was some evidence for small sexual double standard for self-stimulation, but this was in the opposite direction to that predicted. There was greater evidence for sexual hypocrisy as sexual history tended to have a greater negative impact on suitor assessments for the self rather than for same-sex friends. Sexual hypocrisy effects were more prominent in women, though the direction of the effects was the same for both sexes. Overall, men were more positive about women's self-stimulation than women were, particularly in short-term contexts. Socially undesirable sexual behavior (unfaithfulness, mate poaching, and jealous/controlling) had a large negative impact on appraisals of a potential suitor across all contexts and for both sexes. Effects of religiosity, disgust, sociosexuality, and question order effects are considered.
published_date 2023-03-27T15:45:01Z
_version_ 1802301134043348992
score 11.01409

Similar Items