M Kandrik, CL Fincher, BC Jones & LM DeBruine (2014). Men's, but not women's, sociosexual orientation predicts couples' perceptions of sexually dimorphic cues in own-sex faces. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(5): 965-971. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0202-1

Previous research suggests that peoples' perceptions of own-sex individuals can change according to within-individual variation in their romantic partners' sexual strategies. For example, men are more likely to perceive other men's faces as looking particularly dominant during the fertile phase of their partner's menstrual cycle, when women tend to be more open to uncommitted sexual relationships. By contrast, little is known about how relatively stable between-individuals differences in partners' openness to uncommitted sexual relationships (i.e., their sociosexual orientation) predict perceptions of own-sex individuals. The revised Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI-R) assesses individualsí openness to uncommitted sexual relationships and shows high test-retest reliability over long periods of time. Consequently, we tested whether the SOI-R scores of men and women in heterosexual romantic couples predicted their perceptions of own-sex faces displaying exaggerated sex-typical cues. Menís, but not womenís, SOI-R was positively correlated with the extent to which both the man and woman within a couple ascribed high dominance and attractiveness to own-sex faces with exaggerated sex-typical cues. In other words, individuals in couples where the man reported being particularly open to uncommitted sexual relationships were more likely to ascribe dominance and attractiveness to own-sex individuals displaying a putative cue of good phenotypic condition. These findings suggest that both menís and womenís perceptions of potential competitors for mates are sensitive to the male partnerís sexual strategy. Such individual differences in perceptions may benefit menís ability to compete for extra-pair and/or replacement mates and benefit womenís mate guarding behaviors.

Disclaimer: The information found and the views expressed in these homepages are not the responsibility of the University of Glasgow nor do they reflect institutional policy.