Commentary:

Evidence for menstrual cycle shifts in women’s preferences for masculinity

Evolutionary Psychology 8(4): 768-775 Lisa DeBruine, School of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK, l.debruine@abdn.ac.ukBenedict C. Jones, School of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UKDavid A. Frederick, Department of Psychology and FPR-UCLA Center for Culture, Brain, and Development, and UCLA Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture, UCLA, Los Angeles, USAMartie G. Haselton, Departments of Communication Studies and Psychology and UCLA Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture, UCLA, Los Angeles, USAIan S. Penton-Voak, School of Psychology, University of Bristol, UKDavid I. Perrett, School of Psychology, University of St. Andrews, UK

Abstract

Over the last decade, a growing literature has shown that women in the fertile phase of the menstrual cycle demonstrate stronger preferences for men with masculine traits than they do when in the non-fertile phases of the cycle (see Gangestad and Thornhill, 2008 and Jones et al., 2008 for recent reviews). In a recent article, Harris (in press; Sex Roles) failed to replicate this increase in women’s preferences for masculine faces when women are near ovulation. Harris represented her study as one of only three studies on the topic, and as the largest of the existing studies. There are, however, many more studies on menstrual cycle shifts in preferences for facial masculinity in the published literature, including one that is 2.5 times larger in size than the Harris study. In this article, we review the evidence for cyclic shifts in mate preferences and related behaviors and discuss weaknesses of Harris’s methods. Considered as a whole, the evidence for menstrual cycle shifts in women’s preferences and behaviors is compelling, despite the failure of replication reported by Harris.

Keywords

menstrual cycle, masculinity, hormones, mate preferences, review.

Full article

Download PDF (free)

Evolutionary Psychology - An open access peer-reviewed journal - ISSN 1474-7049 © Ian Pitchford and Robert M. Young; individual articles © the author(s)
Close


You're in!