Predicting mate retention behaviors from five-factor personality traits: A dyadic approach

Highlights

• We examined the effects of five-factor personality traits on mate retention.

• A dyadic approach was used on heterosexual dating and cohabiting couples.

• We secured self-reports and partner-reports to control for common method variance.

• “Big Three”, especially neuroticism, predict own and a partner's mate retention.

• Several actor and partner effects were obtained across both data sources.

Abstract

Previous research investigated only the intrapersonal effects of personality traits on mate retention behaviors. The current study is the first to implement a dyadic perspective to explore interpersonal effects of personality traits on mate retention. We investigated actor and partner effects of the five-factor personality traits on mate retention using actor–partner interdependence modeling with data secured from both members of 190 heterosexual romantic couples. In a round-robin design, each participant rated their own and their partner's personality traits, and their own mate retention behaviors. Our results demonstrated the largest actor and partner effects of neuroticism on mate retention, particularly on cost-inflicting behaviors, showing that individuals higher on neuroticism reported their more frequent use. Smaller and opposite effects of agreeableness and conscientiousness were found, with higher levels of these traits related to less frequent use of cost-inflicting behaviors. Several effects of these “Big Three” personality traits generalized across self- and partner-reports, indicating that they were not the artifacts of common method variance. The effects of openness were much weaker and none generalized across both data sources. Extraversion did not demonstrate any significant effects. Discussion comments on limitations of the current research and suggests directions for future research.

Introduction

Mate retention (MR) behaviors are produced by evolved psychological adaptations designed to solve several adaptive mating problems such as maintaining a bond with a desirable partner, deterring a partner's infidelity, preventing defection from the relationship, and thwarting mate poachers (Buss & Shackelford, 1997). MR is important for both sexes, but for different evolutionary reasons. If unsuccessful in guarding their mates, men may be denied access to a partner's reproductive resources (e.g., cuckoldry), whereas women may lose their partners' economic and social resources (e.g., money, child protection), and both sexes risk losing the time, energy, and resources invested in attracting a partner (Buss, 1988). The majority of research addressing MR is based on data secured using the Mate Retention Inventory (MRI, Buss, 1988). The MRI includes 104 specific acts hierarchically organized into 19 tactics, five categories, two domains (inter-sexual and intra-sexual manipulation), and overall MR. Another conceptualization of MR domains identifies cost-inflicting and benefit-provisioning behaviors (Miner, Starratt, & Shackelford, 2009).

Personality traits, especially neuroticism, agreeableness, and conscientiousness predict the use of MR behaviors. Neuroticism is related to a wide range of relationship outcomes (Allen & Walter, 2018), probably through a cognitive mechanism of negative relationship-specific interpretations (Finn, Mitte, & Neyer, 2013). de Miguel and Buss (2011) hypothesized that neuroticism reflects individual differences in sensitivity to the adaptive problem of social exclusion and, therefore, individuals higher on neuroticism will be more vigilant in assessing the risk of a partner's infidelity. Accordingly, there is evidence that neuroticism positively correlates with both MR domains (de Miguel & Buss, 2011; Holden, Zeigler-Hill, Pham, & Shackelford, 2014; McKibbin, Miner, Shackelford, Ehrke, & Weekes-Shackelford, 2014). However, some studies have reported null relationships of neuroticism with MR (Atari, Barbaro, Sela, Shackelford, & Chegeni, 2017), notably for benefit-provisioning behaviors (Pham et al., 2015; Sela, Shackelford, Pham, & Zeigler-Hill, 2015).

Agreeableness in part signals cooperativeness, and some research has reported negative correlations of agreeableness with cost-inflicting behaviors (de Miguel & Buss, 2011; Holden et al., 2014;McKibbin et al., 2014; Sela et al., 2015). The relationship of agreeableness with benefit-provisioning behaviors is not consistent; some studies have reported positive associations (McKibbin et al., 2014; Pham et al., 2015), some negative (e.g., de Miguel & Buss, 2011), and some null associations (Atari et al., 2017; Sela et al., 2015).

Because conscientiousness reflects a long-term strategy of delayed gratification, resource acquisition, and successful hierarchy negotiation, researchers have hypothesized a positive relationship of conscientiousness with benefit-provisioning behaviors (de Miguel & Buss, 2011). Accordingly, some research reports positive correlations of conscientiousness with positive inducements, a category of benefit-provisioning behaviors (de Miguel & Buss, 2011) and with this domain in women (Sela et al., 2015), whereas other research reported null relationships (Atari et al., 2017; Holden et al., 2014; Pham et al., 2015). Additionally, in some studies, conscientiousness is negatively correlated with cost-inflicting behaviors (Atari et al., 2017; de Miguel & Buss, 2011; Holden et al., 2014), whereas in other this relationship is nonsignificant (McKibbin et al., 2014; Sela et al., 2015).

The relationship of openness with MR is weaker, but when obtained, it is negatively associated with cost-inflicting (Atari et al., 2017; Holden et al., 2014), and positively with benefit-provisioning behaviors (McKibbin et al., 2014; Pham et al., 2015; Sela et al., 2015). Extraversion is inconsistently associated with MR. Most research reports null relationships of extraversion with both MR domains (Atari et al., 2017; McKibbin et al., 2014; Sela et al., 2015). However, some research indicates a positive association of extraversion with the five MR categories subsumed under both domains (de Miguel & Buss, 2011), with public signals of possession (a category of the benefit-provisioning behaviors; Holden et al., 2014), and with men's benefit-provisioning behaviors (Pham et al., 2015), and a negative association with intersexual negative inducements (a category of cost-inflicting behaviors) (Holden et al., 2014).

Personality traits of a long-term partner are associated with a range of sexual behaviors, including casual sex, infidelity, sexual risk taking, sexual harassment, and sexual aggression (Allen & Walter, 2018); thus, an individual's personality might signal to their partner a need to intensify MR efforts. Most previous research has considered just one person's reports of the relationships of personality with MR. Romantic relationships are dyadic, however, and each partner's personality may be associated with the other partner's MR.

Although data were not collected from both members of a couple, in the first study that included both partners' perspectives, participants reported on their own and their partner's MR and personality (McKibbin et al., 2014). Along with investigating and identifying several intrapersonal associations, the results also documented several interpersonal associations between personality and MR. Men's reports of their partner's conscientiousness positively predicted men's self-reported benefit-provisioning behaviors. Women's reports of their partner's agreeableness and emotional stability negatively predicted women's reports of their partner's cost-inflicting behaviors. Women's reports of their partner's agreeableness positively predicted women's reports of their partner's benefit-provisioning behaviors, whereas women's reports of their partner's emotional stability negatively predicted women's reports of their partner's benefit-provisioning behaviors.

We extended previous research by using a dyadic paradigm and secured data about personality traits of both members of a couple rather than just one member of a couple. The aim of the current research was to investigate actor and partner effects of five-factor personality traits on cost-inflicting behaviors, benefit-provisioning behaviors and overall MR. As couple data are interdependent, we used the Actor–Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) to statistically control for nonindependence (Kenny, Kashy, & Cook, 2006). Because actor effects based on self-reported personality traits and partner effects based on partner-reported personality traits are biased by common method variance between the predictor and outcome variables (Kenny & Cook, 1999), we secured both self-reports and partner-reports of personality traits.

Based on previous research we hypothesized the largest positive actor effects of neuroticism on both MR domains, followed by negative actor effects of agreeableness and conscientiousness and weaker actor effects of openness and extraversion on both MR domains. Therefore, we hypothesized that higher level of neuroticism would predict more frequent use of both MR domains, whereas higher level of agreeableness and conscientiousness would predict less frequent use of both MR domains. Theoretical frameworks for interpreting partner effects can be found in social interdependence theory, postulating that relationship outcomes are affected by the actions of both partners (Johnson & Johnson, 2005). Although no previous research has investigated partner effects of personality traits on MR, research addressing other relationship outcomes such as quality, satisfaction, and stability, documents that neuroticism demonstrates the largest partner effects on these outcomes, followed by agreeableness and conscientiousness (Weidmann, Ledermann, & Grob, 2016). Therefore, we hypothesized that these “Big Three” traits will also demonstrate the largest partner effects on MR. Although other-reports are not redundant to self-reports (Vazire & Carlson, 2011), other-reports and self-reports may be similar in predicting behaviors and, therefore, we expected the largest actor and partner effects to generalize across both data sources. Additionally, we hypothesized larger actor effects for self-reports, and larger partner effects for partner-reports.