Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Sexual Assault and Intimate Partner Violence

  • Paul R. GladdenEmail author
  • Anthony M. Cleator
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_1722-1



Rape can be defined as “copulation resisted” by a victim “unless such resistance would probably result in death or serious injury to the victim or in death or injury to individuals the victim commonly protects.” Sexual assault can also include “oral or anal penetration of a man or woman” (Thornhill and Palmer 2000). We use the term sexual coercion (SC) broadly to mean the use of force, intimidation, lying, or psychoactive substances to receive or perform sexual acts involving another individual without that individual’s consent and sometimes without their knowledge or explicit awareness of that act (Gladden et al. 2008). Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a broad term including acts of stalking as well as physical abuse and violence, psychological abuse, and sexual abuse and/or violence directed toward a romantic or sexual partner (Centers for Disease Control 2008).


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


  1. Barnes, J. C., TenEyck, M., Boutwell, B. B., & Beaver, K. M. (2013). Indicators of domestic/intimate partner violence are structured by genetic and nonshared environmental influences. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 47(3), 371–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Buss, D. M. (1991). Evolutionary personality psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 42(1), 459–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). From vigilance to violence: Mate retention tactics in married couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 346–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Camilleri, J. A., & Quinsey, V. L. (2009a). Testing the cuckoldry risk hypothesis of partner sexual coercion in community and forensic samples. Evolutionary Psychology, 7(2), 164–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Camilleri, J. A., & Quinsey, V. L. (2009b). Individual differences in the propensity for partner sexual coercion. Sexual Abuse, 21(1), 111–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2008). Intimate partner violence. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/index.html.
  7. Dunkel, C. S., & Mathes, E. (2011). The effect of individual differences and manipulated life expectancies on the willingness to engage in sexual coercion. Evolutionary Psychology, 9(4), 588–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dunkel, C. S., Mathes, E., & Beaver, K. M. (2013). Life history theory and the general theory of crime: Life expectancy effects on low self-control and criminal intent. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 7(1), 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Figueredo, A. J., & Jacobs, W. J. (2010). Aggression, risk-taking, and alternative life history strategies: The behavioral ecology of social deviance. In M. Frias-Armenta & V. Corral-Verdugo (Eds.), Bio-psycho-social perspectives on interpersonal violence (pp. 3–28). Hauppauge: NOVA Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Figueredo, A. J., & McCloskey, L. A. (1993). Sex, money, and paternity: The evolutionary psychology of domestic violence. Ethology and Sociobiology, 14(6), 353–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Figueredo, A. J., Sales, B. D., Becker, J. V., Russell, K., & Kaplan, M. (2000). A Brunswikian evolutionary-developmental model of adolescent sex offending. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 18, 309–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Figueredo, A. J., Corral-Verdugo, V., Frıas-Armenta, M., Bachar, K. J., White, J., McNeill, P. L., & del PilarCastell-Ruiz, I. (2001). Blood, solidarity, status, and honor: The sexual balance of power and spousal abuse in Sonora, Mexico. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(5), 295–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Figueredo, A. J., Rojas, E. M., Armenta, M. F., & Verdugo, V. C. (2009). Individual differences and social contexts: The absence of family deterrence of spousal abuse in San José, Costa Rica. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 3(1), 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Figueredo, A. J., Jacobs, W. J., Gladden, P. R., Bianchi, J. M. Patch, E. A., Kavanagh, P. S., Beck, C. J. A., Sotomator-Peterson, M., Li, N., & Jiang, F. (2018). Intimate partner violence, interpersonal aggression, and life history strategy. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 12(1), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Garver-Apgar, C. E. (2005). Adaptations to ovulation. In The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 344–371). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Gladden, P. R., Sisco, M., & Figueredo, A. J. (2008). Sexual coercion and life history strategy. Evolution and Human Behavior, 48, 731–735.Google Scholar
  17. Gladden, P. R., Figueredo, A. J., Andrejzak, D. J., Jones, D. N., & Smith-Castro, V. (2013). Reproductive strategy and sexual conflict: Slow life history strategy inhibits negative androcentrism. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 4(1), 48–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goetz, A. T., & Shackelford, T. K. (2009). Sexual coercion in intimate relationships: A comparative analysis of the effects of women’s infidelity and men’s dominance and control. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38(2), 226–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gottschall, J. A., & Gottschall, T. A. (2003). Are per-incident rape-pregnancy rates higher than per-incident consensual pregnancy rates? Human Nature, 14(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jones, D. N., Figueredo, A. J., Dickey, E. D., & Jacobs, W. J. (2007). Relations among individual differences in reproductive strategies, sexual attractiveness, affective and punitive intentions, and imagined sexual or emotional infidelity. Evolutionary Psychology, 5(2), 147470490700500212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kilgallon, S. J., & Simmons, L. W. (2005). Image content influences men’s semen quality. Biology Letters, 1(3), 253–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lalumiere, M. L., & Quinsey, V. L. (1996). Sexual deviance, antisociality, mating effort, and the use of sexually coercive behaviors. Personality and Individual Differences, 21(1), 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lalumière, M. L., Chalmers, L. J., Quinsey, V. L., & Seto, M. C. (1996). A test of the mate deprivation hypothesis of sexual coercion. Ethology and Sociobiology, 17(5), 299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Långström, N., Babchishin, K. M., Fazel, S., Lichtenstein, P., & Frisell, T. (2015). Sexual offending runs in families: A 37-year nationwide study. International Journal of Epidemiology, 44(2), 713–720. dyv029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Malamuth, N. M., Linz, D., Heavey, C. L., Barnes, G., & Acker, M. (1995). Using the confluence model of sexual aggression to predict men's conflict with women: A 10-year follow-up study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(2), 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McKibbin, W. F., Starratt, V. G., Shackelford, T. K., & Goetz, A. T. (2011). Perceived risk of female infidelity moderates the relationship between objective risk of female infidelity and sexual coercion in humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 125(3), 370–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McKibbin, W. F., Pham, M. N., & Shackelford, T. K. (2013). Human sperm competition in postindustrial ecologies: Sperm competition cues predict adult DVD sales. Behavioral Ecology, 24(4), 819–823. art031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Palmer, C. T. (1991). Human rape: Adaptation or by-product? Journal of Sex Research, 28(3), 365–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Polderman, T. J., Benyamin, B., De Leeuw, C. A., Sullivan, P. F., Van Bochoven, A., Visscher, P. M., & Posthuma, D. (2015). Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies. Nature Genetics, 47(7), 702–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pound, N. (2002). Male interest in visual cues of sperm competition risk. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23(6), 443–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Prokop, P. (2015). Perception of intensity of sperm competition on the part of males. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rowe, D. C., Vazsonyi, A. T., & Figueredo, A. J. (1997). Mating-effort in adolescence: A conditional or alternative strategy. Personality and Individual Differences, 23(1), 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rushton, J. P. (1985). Differential K theory: The sociobiology of individual and group differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 6(4), 441–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shackelford, T. K., Goetz, A. T., McKibbin, W. F., & Starratt, V. G. (2007). Absence makes the adaptations grow fonder: Proportion of time apart from partner, male sexual psychology, and sperm competition in humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 121(2), 214–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Starratt, V. G., Shackelford, T. K., Goetz, A. T., & McKibbin, W. F. (2007). Male mate retention behaviors vary with risk of partner infidelity and sperm competition. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 39(3), 523–527.Google Scholar
  36. Starratt, V. G., Popp, D., & Shackelford, T. K. (2008). Not all men are sexually coercive: A preliminary investigation of the moderating effect of mate desirability on the relationship between female infidelity and male sexual coercion. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. T. (2000). A natural history of rape. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Thornhill, R., & Thornhill, N. W. (1983). Human rape: An evolutionary analysis. Ethology and Sociobiology, 4(3), 137–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Turkheimer, E. (2000). Three laws of behavior genetics and what they mean. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(5), 160–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wright, R. D. (1994). The moral animal: Why we are, the way we are: The new science of evolutionary psychology. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology, Sociology, and Criminal JusticeMiddle Georgia State UniversityMaconUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Brian B Boutwell
    • 1
  1. 1.Saint Louis UniversitySaint LouisUSA