Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×

Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.

Hostname: page-component-669899f699-g7b4s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T00:47:07.097Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Introduction to theory and research on anti-cuckoldry tactics: overview of current volume

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2010

By
Steven M. Platek  and
Todd K. Shackelford
Edited by
Steven M. Platek  and
Todd K. Shackelford
Steven M. Platek
Affiliation:
Drexel University
Todd K. Shackelford
Affiliation:
Florida Atlantic University
Steven M. Platek
Affiliation:
Drexel University, Philadelphia
Todd K. Shackelford
Affiliation:
Florida Atlantic University
Get access

Summary

Female infidelity

In most cultures, marriage vows entail the promise of fidelity and lifelong commitment. In principle, marriage vows are a contract – a reproductive contract – between two individuals to maintain both emotional and sexual fidelity to one another ‘til death do them part.’ Monogamy. There are few species that maintain monogamous relationships between the sexes. It is commonly believed that males are more promiscuous, but new research is shedding light on the prominence of female infidelity as well as the consequences of such behavior.

Female infidelity is common in the animal kingdom as well as among humans. According to an analysis of 280 000 paternity tests conducted in 1999 by the American Association of Blood Banks, approximately 30% of children are fathered by extra-pair copulations; that is, 30% of children in this sample were fathered by someone other than the woman's long-term romantic partner. Several case studies exemplify this phenomenon and the associated psychological and social consequences. The New York Times reported a case of a Texas man who was faced with the unnerving news that not one, but several, of his children were the product of extra-pair paternity. The bittersweet news came when the man was being tested as a carrier for a debilitating genetic disorder that his youngest daughter had suffered with since birth. When the genetic test came back negative he should have been elated, but knowing that both parents must be carriers for any child to be inflicted with the disorder raised obvious concerns.

Type
Chapter
Information
Female Infidelity and Paternal Uncertainty
Evolutionary Perspectives on Male Anti-Cuckoldry Tactics
 , pp. 3 - 13
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, K., Kaplan, H., Lam, D., and Lancaster, J. (1999). Paternal care of genetic fathers and stepfathers II: reports by Xhosa high school students. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 433–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, R. R. and Bellis, M. A. (1988). “Kamikaze” sperm in mammals? Animal Behaviour, 36, 936–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, R. R. and Bellis, M. A. (1989a). Number of sperm in human ejaculates varies in accordance with sperm competition theory. Animal Behaviour, 37, 867–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, R. R. and Bellis, M. A. (1989b). Elaboration of the kamikaze sperm hypothesis: a reply to Harcourt. Animal Behaviour, 37, 865–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, R. R. and Bellis, M. A. (1993a). Human sperm competition: ejaculate adjustment by males and the function of masturbation. Animal Behaviour, 46, 861–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, R. R. and Bellis, M. A. (1993b). Human sperm competition: ejaculate manipulation by females and a function for the female orgasm. Animal Behaviour, 46, 887–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, R. R. and Bellis, M. A. (1995). Human Sperm Competition: Copulation, Masturbation, and Infidelity. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Barbaro, A., Cormaci, P., Barbaro, A., and Louahlia, S. (2004). DNA analysis in a case of serial murders. International Congress Series, 1261, 465–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellis, M. A. and Baker, R. R. (1990). Do females promote sperm competition: data for humans. Animal Behavior, 40, 197–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkhead, T. R. and Møller, A. P. (1992). Sperm Competition in Birds. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bjorklund, D. F. and Shackelford, T. K. (1999). Differences in parental investment contribute to important differences between men and women. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(3), 86–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brédart, S. and French, R. (1999). Do babies resemble their fathers more than their mothers? A failure to replicate Christenfeld and Hill. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 129–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, W. and Moore, C. (2003) Fluctuating asymmetry and romantic jealousy. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 113–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchan, J. C., Alberts, S. C., Silk, J. B., and Altmann, J. (2003). True paternal care in a multi-male primate society. Nature, 425, 179–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burch, R. L. and Gallup, G. G. Jr. (2000). Perceptions of paternal resemblance predict family violence. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21(6), 429–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buss, D. M. (1988). From vigilance to violence: tactics of mate retention in American undergraduates. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 291–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1994). The Evolution of Desire. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1999). Evolutionary Psychology. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2000). The Dangerous Passion. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. and Shackelford, T. K. (1997). From vigilance to violence: mate retention tactics in married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 346–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Choe, J., Buunk, B. P., and Dijkstra, P. (2000). Distress about mating rivals. Personal Relationships, 7, 235–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerda-Flores, R. M., Barton, S. A., Marty-Gonzales, L. F., Rivas, F., and Chakraborty, R. (1999). Estimation of nonpaternity in the Mexican population of Nuevo Leon: a validation study with blood group markers. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 109, 281–93.3.0.CO;2-3>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christenfeld, N. and Hill, E. (1995). Whose baby are you? Nature, 378, 669.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooke, P. A. and Gage, M. J. G. (1995) Effects of different risks of sperm competition upon eupyrene and apyrene sperm numbers in the moth Plodia interpunctella. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 36, 261–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, M. and Wilson, M. (1982). Whom are newborn babies said to resemble? Ethology and Sociobiology, 3, 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, M. and Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. New York: Adeline de Gruyter.Google ScholarPubMed
Daly, M. and Wilson, M. I. (1996). Violence against stepchildren. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5, 77–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, M. and Wilson, M. (1998). The Truth about Cinderella: a Darwinian View of Parental Love. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Daly, M., Wilson, M., and Weghorst, S. J. (1982). Male sexual jealousy. Ethology and Sociobiology, 3(1), 11–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, R. (1976). The Selfish Gene. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flinn, M. (1988). Mate guarding in a Caribbean village. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gage, M. J. G. (1991) Sperm competition risk directly affects ejaculate size in the Mediterranean fruit fly. Animal Behaviour, 42, 1036–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallup, G. G. and Burch, R. L. (2004). Semen displacement as a sperm competition strategy in humans. Evolutionary Psychology, 2, 12–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gangestad, S. W. and Thornhill, R. (1997). The evolutionary psychology of extra-pair sex: the role of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18, 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gangestad, S. W. and Thornhill, R. (1998). Menstrual cycle variation in women's preferences for the scent of symmetrical men. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 265, 927–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., and Garver, C. E. (2002). Changes in women's sexual interests and their partners' mate retention tactics across the menstrual cycle: evidence for shifting conflicts of interest. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 269, 975–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geary, D. C. (2000). Evolution and proximate expression of human paternal investment. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 55–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hrdy, S. (1974). Male-male competition and infanticide among the langurs (Presbytis entellus) of Abu, Folia Rajasthan. Primatologica, 22, 19–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lacy, R. C. and Sherman, P. W. (1983). Kin recognition by phenotype matching. American Naturalist, 121, 489–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neale, M. C., Neale, B. M., and Sullivan, P. F. (2002). Nonpaternity in linkage studies of extremely discordant sib pairs. American Journal of Human Genetics, 70, 526–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nesse, R., Silverman, A., and Bortz, A. (1990) Sex differences in ability to recognize family resemblance. Ethology and Sociobiology, 11, 11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, G. A. (1970). Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biological Review, 45, 525–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, G. A. (1984). Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating strategies. In Smith, R. L., ed., Sperm Competition and the Evolution of Animal Mating Systems. NY: Academic Press, pp. 1–60.Google Scholar
Platek, S. M. (2002). Unconscious reactions to children's faces: the effect of resemblance. Evolution and Cognition, 8, 207–14.Google Scholar
Platek, S. M., Burch, R. L., Panyavin, I. S., Wasserman, B. H., and Gallup, G. G. Jr. (2002). Reactions to children's faces: resemblance affects males more than females. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23(3), 159–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platek, S. M., Critton, S. R., Burch, R. L., Frederick, D. A., Myers, T. S. and Gallup, G. G. Jr. (2003) How much resemblance is enough? Determination of a just noticeable difference at which male reactions towards children's faces change from indifferent to positive. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 81–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pound, N. (2002). Male interest in visual cues of sperm competition risk. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 443–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regalski, J. and Gaulin, S. (1993). Whom are Mexican infants said to resemble? Monitoring and fostering paternal confidence in the Yucatan. Ethology and Sociobiology, 14, 97–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasse, G., Muller, H., Chakraborty, R., and Ott, J. (1994). Estimating the frequency of nonpaternity in Switzerland. Human Heredity, 44, 337–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shackelford, T. K. and LeBlanc, G. J. (2001). Sperm competition in insects, birds, and humans: insights from a comparative evolutionary perspective. Evolution and Cognition, 7, 194–202.Google Scholar
Shackelford, T. K., Weekes, V. A., LeBlanc, G. J., Bleske, A. L., Euler, H. A., and Hoier, S. (2000). Female coital orgasm and male attractiveness. Human Nature, 11, 299–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shackelford, T. K., LeBlanc, G. J., Weekes-Shackelford, V. A., et al. (2002). Psychological adaptation to human sperm competition. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 123–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, D., Meyer, W., Zambarano, R., and Hurlbert, D. (1998). Frequency and timing coital orgasm in women desirous of becoming pregnant. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27(1), 15–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, R. L. (1984). Human sperm competition. In Smith, R. L., ed., Sperm Competition and the Evolution of Animal Mating Systems. New York: Academic Press, pp. 601–60.Google Scholar
Sykes, B. and Irven, C. (2000). Surnames and the Y chromosome. American Journal of Human Genetics, 66, 1417–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thornhill, R. and Alcock, J. (1983). The Evolution of Insect Mating Systems. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thornhill, R., Gangestad, S. W., and Comer, R. (1995). Human female orgasm and mate fluctuating asymmetry. Animal Behaviour, 50, 1601–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1974). Parent-offspring conflict. American Zoologist, 14, 249–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×