Women's sexual strategies: the hidden dimension of extra-pair mating

By Heidi Greiling, David M. Buss. 2000

377 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5bd500de9404a59143799027ca28b5a48fba55c5

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. P. Jonason
2. David M. Buss
3. D. Schmitt
4. T. Shackelford
5. Norman P. Li
6. D. Puts
7. Jon K. Maner
8. M. Haselton

In Sociology and Political Science

1. David M. Buss
2. D. Schmitt
3. T. Shackelford
4. P. Jonason
5. Jon K. Maner
6. D. Puts
7. Norman P. Li
8. M. Haselton

Citations in the corpus

• Attractive Women Want it All: Good Genes, Economic Investment, Parenting Proclivities, and Emotional Commitment1 (2008, background): “Humans possess a menu of mating strategies that includes long-term mating, shortterm opportunistic copulations, extra-pair copulations, and serial mating (Buss, 1994/2003; 2007; Buss and Schmitt, 1993; Gangestad and Simpson, 2000; Greiling and Buss, 2000; Symons, 1979).”
• Avoiding entangling commitments: Tactics for implementing a short-term mating strategy (2012, background): “Much is known about why individuals engage in short-term mateships (Greiling & Buss, 2000).”
• Different routes to limited empathy in the sexes: Examining the links between the Dark Triad and empathy (2013, background): “The route for women may be one of parasitism and strategic-manipulation (viz., social exploitiveness) as evidenced in the range of tactics used to minimize unwanted commitments (Jonason & Buss, 2012) and reasons to engage in casual sex relationships (Greiling & Buss, 2000).”
• The implicit cognition of relationship maintenance: Inattention to attractive alternatives. (2009, neutral): “This is especially true for relationship alternatives that are physically attractive (e.g., Gangestad & Thornhill, 1997; Greiling & Buss, 2000; Haselton & Gangestad, 2006).”
• The desire for sexual variety as a key to understanding basic human mating strategies (2001, background): “Women may gain significant adaptive advantages by pursuing situationally contingent short-term mateships (Greiling & Buss, 2000; Lancaster, 1989).”
• Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating (2005, background): “A woman who engages in multiple mating can also obtain immediate resources, secure a child if her current long-term mate is infertile, and gain access to high-quality genes by shortterm mating with a man who is not her husband (Fedorka & Mousseau 2002; Greiling & Buss 2000; Smith 1984).”
• Beauty and the beast: mechanisms of sexual selection in humans (2010, background): “However, women may also extract male investment from short-term mating (Buss & Schmitt, 1993; Greiling & Buss, 2000; Hawkes, 1990, 1991).”
• Women's Sexual Strategies: The Evolution of Long-Term Bonds and Extrapair Sex (2006, background): “…by forming a social partnership with a man she judged to be a reliable investing partner, while surreptitiously seeking good genes from another man through extrapair sexual encounters (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000; Gangestad & Thornhill, 1997; Greiling & Buss, 2000; Pillsworth & Haselton, 2006).”
• The mate switching hypothesis (2017, background): “…about paternity to prevent infanticide or to elicit resources from multiple mates (Hrdy, 1979); securing a fertility backup in the event that the regular mate proves infertile (Smith, 1984); or seeking revenge on a current mate as a means of deterring his future infidelity (Greiling & Buss, 2000).”
• The evolution of human mating. (2007, background): “Greiling and Buss (2000) conducted a series of four empirical studies to identify which hypotheses appeared promising and which did not.”
• Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, and Contextual Factors in Engaging in and Responding to Extramarital Involvement (2006, background): “Evolutionary theory posits greater instinctual pressures for men to have multiple sexual partners (e.g., Wright, 1994), although there are evolutionary functions to this for both genders (Barash & Lipton, 2001; Greiling & Buss, 2000).”
• Are men universally more dismissing than women? Gender differences in romantic attachment across 62 cultural regions (2003, background): “Thus, women’s dismissing romantic attachment levels may be culturally contingent, adaptively shifting in accord with the harsh physical environments (Belsky et al., 1991) and high fertility trends (Chisholm, 1996) of their local ecologies (see also Greiling & Buss, 2000).”
• Automatic inattention to attractive alternatives: the evolved psychology of relationship maintenance (2008, positive): “Although there can be reproductive benefits to engaging in extrapair partnerships (e.g., Gangestad & Thornhill, 1997; Greiling & Buss, 2000), there are also benefits to maintain- Because this paper may positively impact the financial success of eHarmony.com the reader should know the third author…”