Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Feminism and Evolutionary Psychology: Moving Forward

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Special Issue on feminism and evolutionary psychology published by Sex Roles (Smith and Konik 2011) has elicited responses that advance understanding of the debate between evolutionary psychology and feminist perspectives concerning the origins of similarities and differences in the behavior of women and men (Smith and Konik 2013). The further challenges to evolutionary psychology mounted in these responses suggest that the Special Issue has intensified the debate more that it has resolved it. Moving forward requires that feminist psychologists not only add to the considerable body of empirical evidence that challenges evolutionary psychology but also produce alternative evolutionary theories that transcend the nature-nurture controversy that underlies the current debate. To this end, we refer readers to our biosocial constructionist theory in which culture and biology are intertwined in both distal evolutionary processes that shaped human psychology and proximal mechanisms that underlie differences and similarities in male and female behavior (Wood and Eagly 2012).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander, M. G., & Fisher, T. D. (2003). Truth and consequences: Using the bogus pipeline to examine sex differences in self-reported sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 27–35. doi:10.1080/00224490309552164.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bastardi, A., Uhlmann, E. L., & Ross, L. (2011). Wishful thinking: Belief, desire, and the motivated evaluation of scientific evidence. Psychological Science, 22, 731–732. doi:10.1177/0956707611406447.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R., Richerson, P. J., & Henrich, J. (2011). The cultural niche: Why social learning is essential for human adaptation. PNAS, 108(Supplement 2), 10918–10925. doi:10.1073/pnas.1100290108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R., Scott, I. M., Maklakov, A. A., Kasumovic, M. M., Clair, A. P., & Penton-Voak, I. S. (2011). National income inequality predicts women’s preferences for masculinized faces better than health does. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 278, 810–812. doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.0964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broude, G. J., & Greene, S. J. (1976). Cross-cultural codes on twenty sexual attitudes and practices. Ethnology, 15, 409–429. doi:10.2307/3773308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. R., Laland, K., & Borgerhoff Mulder, M. (2009). Bateman’s principles and human sex roles. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24, 297–304. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.02.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. R., Dickins, T. E., Sear, R., & Laland, K. N. (2011). Evolutionary accounts of human behavioural diversity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 366, 313–324. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, K. R. (1998). An evolutionary account of women's workplace status. Managerial and Decision Economics, 19, 427–440. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1468(199811/12)19:7/8<427::AID-MDE898>3.0.CO;2-H.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00023992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2011). Evolutionary psychology and feminism. Sex Roles, 64, 768–787. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9987-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., Larsen, R. J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, J. (1992). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psychology. Psychological Science, 3, 251–255. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00038.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deaux, K., & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 369–389. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., Crawford, J. R., Welling, L. L., & Little, A. C. (2010). The health of a nation predicts their mate preferences: Cross-cultural variation in women's preferences for masculinized male faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 277, 2405–2410. doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.2184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Crawford, J. R., & Welling, L. L. M. (2011). Further evidence for regional variation in women’s masculinity preferences. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 278, 813–814. doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.2200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408–423. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.54.6.408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2011). Feminism and the evolution of sex differences and similarities. Sex Roles, 64, 758–767. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9949-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. van Lange, A. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories in social psychology (pp. 458–476). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2013). The nature–nurture debates: 25 years of challenges in understanding the psychology of gender. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 340–357. doi:10.1177/1745691613484767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Eaton, A., Rose, S. M., Riger, S., & McHugh, M. C. (2012). Feminism and psychology: Analysis of a half-century of research on women and gender. American Psychologist, 67, 211–230. doi:10.1037/a0027260.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2007). Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 245–264. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eastwick, P. W., Eagly, A. H., Finkel, E. J., & Johnson, S. E. (2011). Implicit and explicit preferences for physical attractiveness in a romantic partner: A double dissociation in predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 993–1011. doi:10.1037/a0024061.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eastwick, P. W., Luchies, L. B., Finkel, E. J., Hunt, L. L. (2013). The predictive validity of ideal partner preferences: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/a0032432.

  • Eaton, A. A., & Rose, S. M. (2013). The application of biological, evolutionary, and sociocultural frameworks to issues of gender in introductory psychology textbooks. Sex Roles, this issue. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0289-9.

  • Farris, C. A., Treat, T. A., Viken, R. J., & McFall, R. M. (2008). Perceptual mechanisms that characterize gender differences in decoding women's sexual intent. Psychological Science, 19, 348–354. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02092.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Felson, R. B. (1997). Anger, aggression, and violence in love triangles. Violence and Victims, 12, 345–362.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, T. D. (2013). Gender roles and pressure to be truthful: The bogus pipeline modifies gender differences in sexual but not non-sexual behavior. Sex Roles, 68, 1–14. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0266-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frieze, I. H., & Chrisler, J. C. (2011). Editorial policy on the use of the terms “sex” and “gender”. Sex Roles, 64, 789–790. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9988-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frisby, B. N., Dillow, M. R., Gaughan, S., & Nordlund, J. (2011). Flirtatious communication: An experimental examination of perceptions of social-sexual communication motivated by evolutionary forces. Sex Roles, 64, 682–694. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9864-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2006). Evolutionary foundations of cultural variation: Evoked culture and mate preferences. Psychological Inquiry, 17, 75–95. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1702_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gildersleeve, K., DeBruine, L., Haselton, M. G., Frederick, D. A., Penton-Voak, I. S., Jones, B. C., Perrett, D. I. (2013). Shifts in women’s mate preferences across the ovulatory cycle: A critique of Harris (2011) and Harris (2012). Sex Roles, this issue. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0273-4.

  • Glick, P., & Whitehead, J. (2010). Hostility toward men and the perceived stability of male dominance. Social Psychology, 41, 177–185. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gowaty, P. A. (2003). Sexual natures: How feminism changed evolutionary biology. Signs, 28, 901–921. doi:10.1086/345324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, B. (2010). 2009 Carolyn Wood Sherif Award Address: Riding Trojan horses from symbolism to structural change: In feminist psychology, context matters. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 443–457. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2010.01594.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, C. R. (2003). A review of sex differences in sexual jealousy, including self-report data, psychophysiological responses, interpersonal violence, and morbid jealousy. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 102–128. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0702_102-128.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, C. R. (2011). Menstrual cycle and facial preferences reconsidered. Sex Roles, 64, 669–681. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9772-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, C. R. (2012). Shifts in masculinity preferences across the menstrual cycle: Still not there. Sex Roles, this issue. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0229-0.

  • Harris, C. R., Chabot, A., Mickes, L. (2013). Shifts in methodology and theory in menstrual cycle research on attraction. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Hausmann, R., Tyson, L. D., Zahidi, S. (2011). Global gender gap report. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GenderGap_Report_2010.pdf.

  • Heatherton, T. F. (2011). Neuroscience of self and self-regulation. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 363–390. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131616.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hrdy, S. B. (2000), The optimal number of fathers: Evolution, demography, and history in the shaping of female mate preferences. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 907, 75–96. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb06617.x.

  • Huber, J. (2007). On the origins of gender inequality. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyde, J. S., Mezulis, A. H., & Abramson, L. Y. (2008). The ABCs of depression: Integrating affective, biological, and cognitive models to explain the emergence of the gender difference in depression. Psychological Review, 115, 291–313. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.291.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (in press). Meta-analysis of research in social and personality psychology. In C. M. Judd & H. T. Reis (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

  • Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–919. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. (2005). In genes we trust: The biological component of psychological essentialism and its relationship to mechanisms of motivated social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 686–702. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.686.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurzban, R., & Weeden, J. (2007). Do advertised preferences predict the behavior of speed daters? Personal Relationships, 14, 623–632. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2007.00175.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liesen, L. T. (2012). Feminists need to look beyond evolutionary psychology for insights into human reproductive strategies: A commentary. Sex Roles, this issue. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0153-3.

  • Mahoney, M. J. (1977). Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 2, 69–70. doi:10.1007/BF01173636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, T. A., Haslam, S. A., Postmes, T., & Ryan, M. K. (2006). We value what values us: The appeal of identity-affirming science. Political Psychology, 27, 823–838. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2006.00539.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, T. A., Postmes, T., Haslam, S. A., & Hornsey, M. J. (2009). Theorizing gender in the face of social change: Is there anything essential about essentialism? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 653–664. doi:10.1037/a0012966.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nier, J. A., & Campbell, S. D. (2012). Two outsiders’ view on feminism and evolutionary psychology: An opportune time for adversarial collaboration. Sex Roles, this issue. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0154-2.

  • Pedersen, W. C., Putcha-Bhagavatula, A., & Miller, L. C. (2011). Are men and women really that different? Examining some of Sexual Strategies Theory (SST)’s key assumptions about sex-distinct mating mechanisms. Sex Roles, 64, 629–643. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9811-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrin, P. B., Heesacker, M., Tiegs, T. J., Swan, L. K., Lawrence, A. W., Jr., Smith, M. B., . . . Mejia-Millan, C. M. (2011). Aligning mars and venus: The social construction and instability of gender differences in romantic relationships. Sex Roles, 64, 613–628. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9804-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993–2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 21–38. doi:10.1037/a0017504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L. J., Mullen, E., Griffin, T., Hutchinson, S., & Chamberlin, B. (2002). Dispositions, scripts, or motivated correction? Understanding ideological differences in explanations for social problems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 470–487. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.470.

  • Smith, C. A., & Konik, J. A. (Eds.) (2011). Feminist reappraisals of evolutionary psychology. [Special issue]. Sex Roles, 64(9–10).

  • Smith, C. A., & Konik, J. A. (Eds.) (2013). Commentaries on the special issue: Feminist reappraisals of evolutionary psychology [special issue]. Sex Roles.

  • Smith, C. A., Konik, J. A., & Tuve, M. V. (2011b). In search of looks, status, or something else? Partner preferences among butch and femme lesbians and heterosexual men and women. Sex Roles, 64, 658–668. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9861-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tate, C. C. (2011). The “problem of number” revisited: The relative contributions of psychosocial, experiential, and evolutionary factors to the desired number of sexual partners. Sex Roles, 64, 644–657. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9774-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tate, C. C. (2012). Addressing conceptual confusions about evolutionary theorizing: How and why evolutionary psychology and feminism do not oppose each other. Sex Roles, this issue. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0226-3.

  • Unger, R. K. (1979). Toward a redefinition of sex and gender. American Psychologist, 34, 1085–1094. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.34.11.1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt, M. (2012). The male warrior hypothesis: The evolutionary psychology of intergroup conflict, tribal aggression, and warfare. In T. K. Shackelford & V. A. Weekes-Shackelford (Eds.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of evolutionary perspectives on violence, homicide, and war (pp. 291–300). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504–535. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wagenmakers, E. J., Wetzels, R., Borsboom, D., van der Maas, H. L., & Kievit, R. A. (2012). An agenda for purely confirmatory research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 632–638. doi:10.1177/1745691612463078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisstein, N. (1968). Kinder, Kirche, Kuche as scientific law: Psychology constructs the female. Boston: New England Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisstein, N. (1971). Psychology constructs the female; or, the fantasy life of the male psychologist (with some attention to the fantasies of his friends, the male biologist and the male anthropologist). Journal of Social Education, 35, 362–373. doi:10.1177/0959353593032005.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125–151. doi:10.1177/0891243287001002002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, M. K. (1978). The status of women in preindustrial societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699–727. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.128.5.699.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2010). Gender. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 629–667). Hoboken: Wiley.

  • Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2012). Biosocial construction of sex differences and similarities in behavior. In J. M. Olson & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 46, pp. 55–123). London: Elsevier.

  • Wood, W., Kressel, L., Joshi, P., & Louie, B. (in press). Meta-analysis of menstrual cycle effects on women’s mate preferences. Emotion Review.

  • Yoder, J. D., & Kahn, A. S. (2003). Making gender comparisons more meaningful: A call for more attention to social context. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 281–290. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zentner, M., & Mitura, K. (2012). Stepping out of the caveman’s shadow: Nations’ gender gap predicts degree of sex differentiation in mate preferences. Psychological Science, 23, 1176–1185. doi:10.1177/0956797612441004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author Notes

The authors thank Christine Harris for her helpful contributions to an earlier draft of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA

    Alice H. Eagly

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA

    Wendy Wood

Authors
  1. Alice H. Eagly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wendy Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alice H. Eagly.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eagly, A.H., Wood, W. Feminism and Evolutionary Psychology: Moving Forward. Sex Roles 69, 549–556 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0315-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0315-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation