Can the results be used to answer the research questions? How? Do the results bring up more questions? What?

Back to Reading the Research

 Hi group! Have a great weekend, and don't worry about the summaries. I'll do them both this week! Happy Thanksgiving!

Jema

 If the reasearch question we are supposed to be considering is whether the research supports an evolutionary or cultural model, then here is my take on it.

The most driving result to prove the dating preferences as being evolutionary is that the younger males thought the older women were where it's at... while the older women preferred their wealthy, high status, older males. That says that the younger males are going after the more fertile, healthy women; the women pursue their best interests with the men that can provide for their children.

Kenrick and company say that their results can't be explained using "traditional theories of sex-role socialization" -- this taken to mean that the young ones don't neccesarily go for the young ones, and likewise for the older subjects. Their research shows that it's a 'best interests for breeding' thing, as opposed to a culturally imposed thing.

Another HUGE support that answers the question is that the male's preferences for partners changes as he ages. Ooo! Point for evolutionary model. As the man grows up, he always looks for the best bred mate, which is a strong, healthy female around 20 yrs. Thus, when he's 15, he likes them older... and when he's 30, he likes them young. Ah yes. We're so primal. 

 I could be wrong here, but again I agree with you, Dasj, and here's why ...

As I understand it, Kenrick et al were asking the questions: will teenage males prefer younger females (cultural) or older females (evolutionary)? Now, I know they studied teenage females, too, but who really cares? There's no controversy there, is there. So the results tended to support the evolutionary hypothesis. Yes, I do think that the results answer the questions. Not only that, but I also think that the results can be generalized.

A part of the setup of the research question was a description of how dating preferences seem to be fairly consistent across several cultures. So, already the authors are setting up a Correlation, if you will, between American dating practices and dating practices elsewhere in the world. Right?

Well, I got the impression that the study was conducted more to discredit the cultural hypothesis with regard to this aspect (and only this aspect!) of human behaviour, and not so much to actually prove that all males want fertile female mates. That being the case, all Kenrick et al had to do was to get some results which showed an inconsistency with the cultural theory's predicted results and actual results. I think they did this. It is true that the cultural hypothesis predicts that all males, regardless of their age, will prefer younger mates. Since that is not the case, the cultural hypothesis cannot be entirely correct. Since we already know that dating practices tend to be similar in most cultures, we can assume that results from other cultures will also be similar.

Of course, if the authors intend to prove that the evolutionary hypothesis is the one and only answer, they will have to conduct a lot more research, ensuring that they cover all of the following:

1. studies of several cultures
2. greater numbers of subjects
3. more objective gathering of data than self-report

Anyway, I could be way off base here, but that's what I think. As for whether the results raise any more questions, I don't really think so. I can't say that I have any more questions, but I can say that I'd like more evidence that the results presented will stand up to greater testing. 

 Yes, it would be absolutely great if the evidence given could stand up to greater testing. I think they can, and the article gave a few indications that it did.

I don't have the article on my person right now, but didn't they talk about some of the reasons different cultures exhibited different results? For instance, older men, as said in the article, prefer younger females.... BUT in many cultures, this is a HUGE taboo, and is not even considered an option. It doesn't matter what the people feel they want to do, it's a matter of law and custom.
The fact that they explained that glitch in the data shows even more convincingly that the model is an evolutionary one. There exist, though, certain cultural influences that people follow (our instincts don't get the better of us). 

 One can argue that results cannot be used to answer the research question conclusively due to the misapproximation of the cultural model (as mentioned on the other discussion board). Therefore, the results do not clearly falsify the cultural hypothesis.

If one accepts Kís cultural hypothesis, the results do, however, verify the evolutionary hypothesis that "teenage males should violate the normative pattern shown in adult males and express interest in females older then themselves" (K et.al). As K et al writes, "males expressed an interest in females substantially older than themselves, despite the fact that older femalesí age preferences showed no evidence of a reciprocal interest in younger males."

The results also confer with background information. According to an evolutionary perspective, "males changed their preferences in a systematic fashion as their own age increased." While young men are attracted to females closer to their own ages, males in their twenties are attracted to women above and below their own age.

The results bring up more questions in other areas of research concerning genetic foundations for behavior. Example: if humans evolved from a polygnous species, do men have a higher sexual appetite then women? In turn, are men more apt to cheat on their wives to fulfill the need for "variation?" 

 About your last questions, Miva, this is what I think:

If in fact men do have a higher sexual appetite than women, and if they are truly more apt to cheat to fulfill a need for variation, that can also be supported with biological (read: evolutionary) logic. AFter all, when a female produces a child, there can be no doubt in her mind that the child is biologically hers. Males, however, can not be 100% certain. So it is possible that, if males are mating with several females, it is merely their way of ensuring that SOME offspring is actually theirs.

NOTE: I am not condoning cheating!! I'm just saying that, anecdotally, men are suspected to cheat more. Maybe that's why ... 

 Maybe I'm being to much of an optimist but I tend to believe (as I tried to express in the other discussion board) that Homo sapiens have been evolving past the point of being primarily motivated by reproduction alone, that possibly other motivations may be behind our actions in our choice of companion. I don't know what it is but I find this empirical report a bit pessimistic towards our species, but that's just my opinion.

Any how back to the question being addressed. I agree that this report has been successful in supporting the evolutionary hypothesis applying to the younger generations through the questions asked of the 10-19 year old students at the state's junior/high school as ,jema's input was quite thorough on explaining. Though the margin of error can be reduced through a more vast study (i.e. random schools from rural/urban areas all over North America).

In addition, the report sufficiently disproved the cultural hypothesis directly through the results of the study conducted on the teens. The report supported the notion that adolescent boy's do in fact prefer older girls, whereas the cultural hypothesis believed that the young men would prefer younger females.

Just for a bit of clarification what is ontogeny? Thanks! 

 Jema, I agree with your response to the question although I was just suggesting a possible question that might come out of the research...

As Iala writes, "Homo sapiens have been evolving past the point of being primarily motivated by reproduction." All the new forms of birth control suggest that humans are motivated by the act of copulation not reproduction.

ontogeny - the course of development of an individual organism

vs.

phylogeny - the course of development of a group of organisms (eg., tribe or species)
 

Jema what time do you want us to finish discussion? 

 Miva et al.

I plan to do the summaries tomorrow when I get home from school, so if you could all finish discussing by about 5:00ish that would be great. I will finish the summaries by 7:00 or so, which will give y'all about 4 hrs to critique. I never have time to do much in the mornings, so my final revisions will be tomorrow night by about 11:00. 

 Exactly miva, i was waiting to see if anyone would pick up birth control. Thats kool! Anyways, thanks for the clarification, this will be my last posting for this week, buisy week ahead, ill do my best to be an early brid in next weeks discusion!

 Talking about the cultural proof vs. the evolutionary proof is definetly quite interesting.... Since the two are so intertwined, it's hard to say where the influence for each of them starts and finishes.

I think that this study DOES support the evolutionary model, though. They explain their cultural influence through laws and customs, and clarify the results in terms of our survival and propogation instincts..... i.e. "my genes must survive" being in the subconcious.

A bit off topic, but I found Robert Bakker's book 'Raptor Red' something like this. He's a paleontologist, and wrote this book about dinosaurs (geeky i know, but ah well!) from the dinosaurs point of view. It goes into the biology of why they do what they do, and how the genes affect the choices they make... it's incredible. Reminded me of the reasons Kenrick et al. mentioned in respect to our mate choices. Pretty interesting book. 

 I think that Iala brings up a very relevant. point about our lives no longer being solely motivated by reproduction.

I agree with what the majority of you have posted: the results do in fact support the evolutionary model being emphasized by the research.

Athough, tying to Iala's point, the cultural model was largely ignored . Since we are overcoming the process of physical evolution, or so I've read, the more important questions or motives of society today lie more within culture than biology. 

SUMMARY FOR WEEK 4

Our group mostly thinks that the research does tend to answer the questions, but with the following caveat. As mentioned in the other discussion, the authors do not fully explain the cultural model, which undermines the conclusions drawn from the research.

Having said that, if we accept the explanation offered of the cultural model, then the questions are somewhat answered. By indicating that partner preference relative to age change as males age, which is to say that young or old males do not prefer young or old females respectively, the authors provide compelling evidence that mates are selected in the best interests for breeding.

However, no one is convinced that the research positively proves the evolutionary model so much as it discredits the cultural model. In order for our group to be fully convinced, more research is needed with the following conditions: study of several cultures; greater numbers of subjects, and; more objective data-gathering method than only self-report.

Many questions stem from this article. The issue is rather political, in that it reduces human behaviour to a level with which some of us are uncomfortable. What about the importance of culture? What does this say about the sexual appetites of males vs that of females? How does the wide-spread use of birth-control affect the conclusions drawn from this research?

Again, we do not feel confident saying that this research positively answers any questions, and we all think that much more research is needed.

 Group 3. Very good summary. Nicely summarizes the groupís posts, answers the questions at hand. You get a 4.