Sex Differences in Sex Drive, Sociosexuality, and Height across 53 Nations: Testing Evolutionary and Social Structural Theories
- Richard A. Lippa
- … show all 1 hide
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
By analyzing cross-cultural patterns in five parameters—sex differences, male and female trait means, male and female trait standard deviations—researchers can better test evolutionary and social structural models of sex differences. Five models of biological and social structural influence are presented that illustrate this proposal. Using data from 53 nations and from over 200,000 participants surveyed in a recent BBC Internet survey, I examined cross-cultural patterns in these five parameters for two sexual traits—sex drive and sociosexuality—and for height, a physical trait with a biologically based sex difference. Sex drive, sociosexuality, and height all showed consistent sex differences across nations (mean ds = .62, .74, and 1.63). Women were consistently more variable than men in sex drive (mean female to male variance ratio = 1.64). Gender equality and economic development tended to predict, across nations, sex differences in sociosexuality, but not sex differences in sex drive or height. Parameters for sociosexuality tended to vary across nations more than parameters for sex drive and height did. The results for sociosexuality were most consistent with a hybrid model—that both biological and social structural influences contribute to sex differences, whereas the results for sex drive and height were most consistent with a biological model—that evolved biological factors are the primary cause of sex differences. The model testing proposed here encourages evolutionary and social structural theorists to make more precise and nuanced predictions about the patterning of sex differences across cultures.
- Archer, J., & Mehdikhani, M. (2003). Variability among males in sexually selected attributes. Review of General Psychology, 7, 219–236. CrossRef
- Baugh, F. (2002). Correcting effect sizes for score reliability: A reminder that measurement and substantive issues are linked inextricably. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 254–263. CrossRef
- Baumeister, R. F. (2000). Gender differences in erotic plasticity: The female sex drive as socially flexible and responsive. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 347–374 CrossRef
- Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Are there gender differences in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 242–273. CrossRef
- Bobko, P., Roth, P. L., & Bobko, C. (2001). Correcting the effect size of d for range restriction and unreliability. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 46–61. CrossRef
- Bond, N. W. (2005). Who’s zooming who? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 278. CrossRef
- Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49. CrossRef
- Buss, D. M. (2005). Sex differences in the design features of socially contingent mating adaptations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 278–279. CrossRef
- Deary, I. J., Thorpe, G., Wilson, V., Starr, J. M., & Whalley, L. J. (2003). Population sex differences in IQ at age 11: The Scottish mental survey 1932. Intelligence, 31, 533–542. CrossRef
- Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408–423. CrossRef
- Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2005). Universal sex differences across patriarchal cultures ≠ evolved psychological dispositions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 281–283. CrossRef
- Gaulin, S. J. C., & Boster, J. (1985). Cross-cultural differences in sexual dimorphism: Is there any variance to be explained? Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 219–225. CrossRef
- Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–644. CrossRef
- Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59, 93–104. CrossRef
- Guttentag, M., & Secord, P. (1983). Too many women? Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
- Lazarus, J. (2002). Human sex ratios: Adaptations and mechanisms, problems and prospects. In I. C. Hardy (Ed.), Sex ratios: Concepts and research methods (pp. 287–311). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Lippa, R. A. (2005). Gender, nature, and nurture (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Lippa, R. A. (2006). Is high sex drive associated with increased sexual attraction to both sexes? It depends on whether you are male or female. Psychological Science, 17, 46–52. CrossRef
- Lippa, R. A. (2007). The preferred traits of mates in a cross-national study of heterosexual and homosexual men and women: An examination of biological and cultural influences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 193–208. CrossRef
- Ostovich, J. M., & Sabini, J. (2004). How are sociosexuality, sex drive, and lifetime number of sexual partners related? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 255–266. CrossRef
- Paoletti, J. B., & Kregloh, C. (1989). The children’s department. In C. B. Kidwell & V. Steele (Eds.), Men and women: Dressing the part (pp. 22–41). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
- Pedersen, F. A. (1991). Secular trends in human sex ratios: Their influence on individual and family behavior. Human Nature, 2, 271–291. CrossRef
- Reimers, S. (2007). The BBC internet study: General methodology. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 147–161. CrossRef
- Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 247–311.
- Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–888. CrossRef
- Spector, I. P., Carey, M. P., & Steinberg, L. (1996). The Sexual Desire Inventory: Development, factor structure, and evidence of reliability. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 22, 175–190.
- Voracek, M. (2005). Shortcomings of the Sociosexual Orientation Inventory: Can psychometrics inform evolutionary psychology? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 296–297. CrossRef
- Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of men and women: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699–727. CrossRef
- Zucker, K. J. (2005). Measurement of psychosexual differentiation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 34, 375–388. CrossRef
- Sex Differences in Sex Drive, Sociosexuality, and Height across 53 Nations: Testing Evolutionary and Social Structural Theories
Archives of Sexual Behavior
Volume 38, Issue 5 , pp 631-651
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Evolutionary theory
- BBC Internet study
- Sex differences
- Sex drive
- Social structural theory
- Industry Sectors
- Richard A. Lippa (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Psychology, California State University, Fullerton, Fullerton, CA, 92834, USA