Can women perceive male genetic & paternal quality? Q:

Introduction Overview/about the study

 Female Perspective  Mate attractiveness  Genetic quality  Paternal quality  How to test???  Genetic quality  Testosterone  Paternal quality  “Affinity for children” Summary

 Male participants  Completed interest in infants test  Saliva samples  Posed for digital photographs  Female participants  Rated photos  5 Grad students  Rated photos for expression neutrality In this study:

Previous Research  Facial masculinity  Honest signal of genetic quality?  High testosterone only sustainable by healthier men  Cue for paternal quality  Preference for masculinity as a function of menstrual cycle  Masculinity morphing results  Faces altered to look more masculine receive lower ratings than unaltered faces on ‘quality as a parent’ and ‘good father’ dimensions

Methods: Stimulus Photos  51 University of Chicago male  Paid $10  39 straight, willing males  Saliva sample  Either a five minute conversation with a female research assistant during a waiting period or sat alone for five minutes. (part of a larger study)  Photos taken at a standard distance, looking straight into the camera and assume a neutral facial expression.  Visual preference  Interest in infants: pictures of infants and adults were presented simultaneously in pairs (20) and subjects chose preferred photo

 Women raters (N=29)  UCSB undergrads, ages 18–20 (mean=18.41, s.d.=0.57)  Ovals placed around mens’ faces  Rating scale 1–7 scale for ‘likes children,’ ‘masculine,’ ‘physically attractive,’ and ‘kind,’ compared to other men  Rated attractiveness as a short-term romantic partner and as a long-term romantic partner  5 graduate students rated the faces of men 1-7 on how positive or negative their faces looked Methods: Women Raters

 Correlation between men’s testosterone levels and masculinity ratings (r=0.34, n=38, p=0.039).  Women’s average ratings of how men like children were significantly correlated with men’s scores on the interest in infants test (r=0.38, n=39, p=0.017).  Positivity of expression affects women’s judgment of men’s liking of children and men’s actual interest in infants, but not masculinity or testosterone.  Masculinity rating significantly related to men’s testosterone and age  Testosterone (g=0.22, s.e.=0.03, t28= 7.01, p<0.001)  Age (s.e.=0.03, t28=4.75, p<0.001). RESULTS: W OMEN ’ S PERCEPTIONS

RESULTS: I NFANT I NTEREST AND POSITIVE EXPRESSION RATING

 Long-term mate attractiveness--significant effects:  Men’s interest in infants predicted long-term mate attractiveness (standardized b=0.35, s.e.b.=0.16, p=0.033).  ‘Likes children’ in isolation predicted long- term mate attractiveness (g=0.29, s.e.=0.04, t28=6.76, p<0.001).  Age (g=0.11, s.e.=0.03, t28=3.10, p<0.005) (negative effect) Long-Term Mate Attractiveness

 For short-term mate attractiveness testosterone, infant interest, and age exerted influence  Testosterone (g=0.11, s.e.=0.04, t28=2.88, p=0.008)  Interest in infants (g=0.10, s.e.=0.03, t28=3.15, p=0.004)  Age – negative influence (g=0.08, s.e.=0.03, t28=K2.47, p=0.02).  Masculinity in isolation predicted short-term mate attractiveness (g=0.25, s.e.=0.05, t28=4.84, p<0.001) Short-Term Mate Attractiveness

RESULTS: LTM VS. STM ATTRACTIVENESS

Results: P ART O NE  Suggests that women track actual characteristics that are important for mate choice  Perceived infant-liking significantly correlated with men’s interest in infants  Masculinity ratings significantly correlated with men’s testosterone concentrations

 Evidence women may of non-differential attractiveness judgments that track hormone concentrations and infant affinity  Testosterone and infant affinity were not correlated; possibly independent  Independent indices for tracking genetic and paternal quality, not a single dimension (testosterone). Do women weigh paternal quality against genetic quality?

Results: P ART T WO  Facial masculinity/femininty morph  Facial neutrality/happiness morph

Conclusions “Women appear to map facial cues of testosterone onto masculinity judgments, and masculinity judgments in turn positively influence STM attractiveness. Likewise, facial cues of interest in infants are mapped onto judgments of how much men like children, and such judgments in turn positively influence LTM attractiveness.” “This overall pattern of results is consistent with the existence of adaptations that read facial cues in the service of facilitating adaptive mate choices.”