1. Petraitis, Boeckmann, Lampman, Falconer (2014)
Sex differences in the attractiveness of hunter‐gatherer and modern risks
Petraitis, J. M., Lampman, C. B., Boeckmann, R. J., & Falconer, E. M. (2014). Sex differences in the attractiveness of hunter‐gatherer and modern risks. Journal of Applied Social Psychology.
Petraitis, Boeckmann, Lampman, Falconer (2014)

2. Risk Taking
‘the practice of taking action which might have undesirable consequences’ (Collins English Dictionary, 2014)
Within the current study risk taking is divided into two different categories
Hunter gatherer risk taking: Risks related to the ancestral environment e.g. death,
Disease and/or injury
Modern Risk taking: Risks related to the modern environment e.g. focused on
behaviors and situations that simply were not present among ancestral humans
and are not present in Hunter Gatherer societies today
Hunter-gatherer risk: our ancestors had to take risks when searching for food to survive or by protecting their families from animals.
Modern risk taking: these risks were just not present in ancestral time. These risks can result in imprisonment.
It seems we are more likely to take risks if we think the probability of gaining something by taking the risk outweighs the potential losses.
Do we sometimes take risks that may involve more danger when the gain could be a potential mate?
Risk-Taking (n.d.) retrieved from on 21st October 2014

3. The article builds on the results of three studies
Bassett and Moss (2004) which looked at risks in general and attractiveness
Kelley and Dunbar (2001) who looked at physical heroic and non heroic risks and no risks for short term partners
Farthing (2005) Who looked at physically heroic and non heroic risk in relation to attractiveness
All studies used college students in order to assess the effect of risks when assessing attractiveness of a potential partner
Bassett, J. F., & Moss, B. (2004). Men and women prefer risk takers as romantic and nonromantic partners. Current Research in Social Psychology, 9(10),
Kelly, S., & Dunbar, R. I. (2001). Who dares, wins. Human Nature, 12(2),
Farthing, G. W. (2005). Attitudes toward heroic and nonheroic physical risk takers as mates and as friends. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(2),

4. The current study builds on previous research through the use of two distinct hypotheses
1. When rating attractiveness of a long and diverse list of risky behaviors, responses would naturally converge or align around two distinct factors: one composed of Hunter gatherer risks and one composed of modern risks
2. Hunter gatherer risks might be rated as somewhat attractive when performed by females today, hunter gatherer risks will be especially attractive when performed by males. In contrast modern risks will be rated as unattractive when performed by either males or females.
Such a finding may suggest that contemporary humans intuitively view risks one way if they involve evolutionary challenges but view risks another way if they involve uniquely modern situations
Both Hunter gatherer and modern risks have consequences however hunter gatherer risks display evolutionary fitness and strength, modern risks may just show a weakness is character or judgement

5. Method - Participants Undergraduate students N = 233
Greater number of Females to Males
Average age 22.1
Most participants between 18 and 23 (75.3%)
43.3% in a committed relationship
14% married
233 undergraduate students from University of Alaska Anchorage studying Psychology and Social Sciences
143 females, 72 males and 18 withheld their sex, average age 22.1 and most (75.3%) participants were between the ages of 18 and 23
Fewer than half (43.3%) were in committed relationships and only 14% married.

6. Participants - Critique
Not a representative sample
Students
Ages
Jianakoplos & Bernasek (2006)- older people tend to make less financial risks than younger people.
Location
Weber and Hsee (1998) – cross cultural differences in risk perception
Sivak, Soler and Tränkle (1989) – Cross cultural differences were found when undertaking a driving task that involved risk taking
However this is not a representative sample – Why?
Students
All of the students were at University therefore are likely to have a similar IQ
They are all likely to be conscientious as they volunteered to complete a questionnaire for extra credit
Since they are a similar type of person they may have similar preferences as to what is attractive in risk taking which creates a sample bias
Age of participants
Most of the students were aged between 18 and 24, this limits the extent to which the research can be generalised to a wider population.
In hunter gatherer times it would have been the norm for women to start reproducing at the younger age of 15/16 so it would have been a truer reflection of the question to study a younger sample.
Jianakoplos & Bernasek (2006) – Older people tend to make less financial risks than younger people, and take less risks in general. Southern Economic Journal, 72(4)
This tells us that risk taking is not uniform across all ages and therefore it may mean that the perception of how attractive a risk is changes across different ages.
Therefore an older sample should have been tested to make the results more representative
Location
All the participants were from the same geographical area therefore this study does not account for cultural differences.
Weber and Hsee (1998) – Cross cultural differences in risk perception but cross-cultural similarities in attitudes towards perceived risk. Management Science, 44(9),
This shows that there are differences between the ways cultures perceive the riskiness of options, but their attitudes towards the relative risk level is the same i.e. cultures are equally risk-averse to the same perceived level of risk.
Further support for this idea comes from Sivak, Soler and Tränkle (1989) – Cross cultural differences were found when undertaking a driving task that involved risk taking. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 21(4),
This shows that some cultures perceive risks as being far less risky than others. Therefore the results from this study cannot be generalized to other populations.
To sum up the critique of the participants, the participants used created a sample bias as the results obtained are only representative of a small section of the population. However this study was building on the idea of 3 previous studies which used college students as their participants so to use a different age of sample size may not have been appropriate for this particular study.
Jianakoplos, N. A., & Bernasek, A. (2006). Financial risk taking by age and birth cohort. Southern Economic Journal,
Weber, E. U., & Hsee, C. (1998). Cross-cultural differences in risk perception, but cross-cultural similarities in attitudes towards perceived risk. Management Science, 44(9),
Sivak, M., Soler, J., & Tränkle, U. (1989). Cross-cultural differences in driver risk-taking. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 21(4),

7. 1. Method – 3 part questionnaire
Perceived attractiveness of male behavior to female dating partners
Perceived attractiveness of female behavior to male dating partners
Demographics
Counterbalanced
Half rated on perception of males first, the other half rated on the perception of females first. The counterbalanced method reduces order effect which removes the possibility or effect of
Fatigue or external factors in influencing the data therefore this makes the results more reliable.

8. 2. Method- Semantic differential scales
Measures a variety of attitudes to a particular concept or issue.
Provides an average response for an issue/concept
Identifies extremely favorable or objective aspects of issues or concept
Attractiveness (Tovee, Edmonds and Vuong, 2012)
Only useful for questions with responses involving major opposites (
Generally measured on a 7-point scale with opposing adjectives at each end - in our case is a 5-point scale.
1. Tovée, M. J., Edmonds, L., & Vuong, Q. C. (2012). Categorical perception of human female physical attractiveness and health. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(2),
Attractiveness is based on a categorical perception, people notice the difference between attractive and unattractive quite quickly, however within the categorical boundary of attractive and unattractive individuals notice very little difference
2. This is a strength as it will help to keep the results more concise
X: ours did not involve polar opposites -> rock climbing in a health club, rock climbing in the back country

9. 3. Method- Perceived preference
Participants were asked:
‘ to indicate which behaviors they believed a typical female of their age would find attractive among male dating partners’
And:
‘ to indicate which behaviors they believed a typical male of their age would find attractive among female dating partners’
Enabled more data to be collected reliably (Farthing, 2005)
They acknowledged that asking participants to respond for their peers was done to make it possible to collect responses from both sexes, all sexual orientations and regardless of one’s relationship status.
As quoted, Farthing found that “predicted mate preference scores did not differ reliably from the own-mate preference scores” which made the results more valid.
Farthing, G. W. (2005). Attitudes toward heroic and nonheroic physical risk takers as mates and as friends. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(2),

10. Results
Hypothesis One: When rating attractiveness of a long and diverse list of risky
behaviors, responses would naturally converge or align around two distinct factors:
one composed of Hunter gatherer risks and one composed of modern risks
Two factors had loading greater than 0.45 simultaneously for males and females
Factor 1 – 20 pairs: 19 pairs link to the kinds of Hunter Gatherer situations where death, disease, and/or injury could be found
Factor 2 – 10 pairs: focused on uniquely modern risks with academics, caustic chemicals, , power tools, cars, motorcycles, modern medicine, and digital technology.  
Principle components analysis conducted on 101 items it was found that …
Results support hypothesis one, shows clearly two distinct factors – modern risks and huntergatherer risks

11. …
Hypothesis Two: Hunter gatherer risks will be especially attractive when performed by
males. In contrast modern risks will be rated as unattractive when performed by either
males or females.
Subsequent scales were based on only the pairs seen to have high loading for factor 1 and factor 2.
2 (HG vs. modern) × 2 (male vs. female) ANOVA
There was a significant main effect of type of risk p < .001
Significant main effect of sex of dating partner, p < .001
Negative M = would suggest rated as unattractive modern risks rated as unattractive
Hunter Gatherer risks rated as more attractive (M = +0.59) than the Modern risks (M = −0.80).
All risks combined rated as more attractive when performed by males (M = +0.04) than when performed by females (M = −0.25), Females actually had a negative score which would suggest a rating of unattractive

12. … An Interaction was also significant p < .001
HG risks were rated as more attractive - males p < .001, or performed by females p < .001
Hunter Gatherer risks were significantly more attractive when performed by males than when performed by females, p<.001.
Modern risks were equally unattractive when performed by males as when performed by females p = 0.79.
When carrying out the Anova’s there was found to be a Significant interaction of sex and risk
HG risks performed by males were rated as significantly more attractive than (a) HG risks performed by females, (b) modern risks performed by males, and (c) modern risks performed by females.

13. This is a clear visual aid showing how modern risks no matter which sex performed them was deemed as unattractive (unattractive is shown by a negative mean score of less than 0)
The standard error bars would indicate that the data is accurate

14. Results - Critique
Cronbachs α : Hunter Gatherer male attractiveness scale α = .89, Hunter Gatherer female attractiveness scale α = .91, modern male attractiveness scale α = .80, and modern female attractiveness scale α=.81.
Conducted two 3-way ANOVA’s
Cronbachs alpha – above 0.8 therefore shows that there is high internal consistency therefore the items within are highly related and therefore test the same thing. This therefore would show that the scales used and the questionnaires used would be reliable in testing what the researchers set out to test.
One added sex of participant was not significant, p = .90.
relationship statuses was not significant p = .55,.
Therefore supports the use of using any relationship status as it is shown to not effect the data

15. Conclusion
The results suggest that some risky behaviors are more attractive in males than females this may be because males and females differ from evolution
Taylor et al (2000)- females tend and befriend, male fight or flight.
Kelly and Dunbar (2001)- physical risks make males more attractive.
Farthing (2005) : Women prefer risk takers rather than risk avoiders in long term mates
The results show that hunter gatherer risks are rated as more attractive when performed by males than females and modern risks are rated as unattractive for both sexes. These differences in perceptions of attractiveness between the sexes relates to how the sexes evolved differently, due to different reactions to stress.
Taylor, S. E., Klein, L. C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gurung, R. A., & Updegraff, J. A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: tend-and-befriend, not fight-or-flight. Psychological review, 107(3), 411.
Kelly, S., & Dunbar, R. I. (2001). Who dares, wins. Human Nature, 12(2),
Farthing, G. W. (2005). Attitudes toward heroic and nonheroic physical risk takers as mates and as friends. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(2),

16. …
Both sexes rated Hunter-gatherer risks as more attractive than modern risks
Hunter gatherer risks advertise fitness to potential mates and rivals
Modern risks have the opposite effect, advertising a weakness in character judgment and have more potential for negative consequences
Where the HG risks were those demonstrating mastery over physical and less physical threats (water, gravity, creatures, weather, strangers, conflict).
2. Similar to a peacock’s plumage, displaying fitness to potential mates and rivals, and could be applied to AYA males in Spain running through street with bull
3. Without the potential for evolutionary valued benefits (good genes)

17. Conclusion - Critique
HG risks could have been rated more attractive because they are deemed positive by our culture, and modern risks negative
For example, in the media
However, culture exaggerates what evolution creates
Ronay and Hippel (2010): males made more risks when observed by attractive females
In society, HG risks are considered “cool” and modern “uncool”
The media portrays males as taking HG risks – for example, in antiperspirant adverts market to active, risk taking men
Stronger competition between males as fewer fertile females, therefore those lacking financial resources advertise fitness
Participants took more risks at a skateboard park in front of an attractive female observer, compared with a male observer
Ronay R., von Hippel W. (2010), The Presence of an Attractive Woman ELevates Testosterone and Physical Risk Taking in YOung Men, Social Psychological and Personality Science vol

18. …
Some research has shown that some risks in Hunter Gatherers actually decreased survival. Hunter Gatherers were risk averse depending on seasons.
(Kramer, 2014)
This has also been related to the “Sell in May, then go away” effect on stock markets. Therefore may be linked to a modern risk that wasn’t considered, financial risks.
1. The article argues that risks related to hunter gatherers would have increased survival, however, some research has shown that some risks in HGs actually decreased survival, and so HGs were risk averse depending on seasons. For example, stayed hidden in Autumn/Winter until daylight hours were longer, increasing survival until Spring, and saving resources from Spring/Summer for Autumn and Winter.
2. This link between some modern and evolutionary risks could be studied in future, with more research into other modern risks that weren’t taken into account in this study.
Kramer, L , Aug 18. Does the caveman tell you how to invest. Retrieved from

19. Further research Current study highlighted several criticisms
Dating partners, but not long-term partners.
Stewart, Stinnett and Rosenfeld (2000). Individuals look for different characteristics when considering a long term partner
However
Farthing (2005) - Women prefer risk takers rather than risk avoiders in long term mates
Original list of 101 pairs of risks might have gaps.
Age
Gil-Burmann, Peláez and Sánchez (2002) – age can play a part in the traits rated as attractive
Jianakoplos and Bernasek (2006)
Stewart, Stinnett and Rosenfeld (2000)- women and men look for different characteristics when considering a long term partner. If you were to do this study but asked people to rate the attractiveness of risks taken by their potential husband/wife/life partner, would the results differ?
for example, no questions were asked about sleep or any questions about modern financial risks. If these questions were added would we have got different results.
Gil-Burmann, C., Peláez, F., & Sánchez, S. (2002). Mate choice differences according to sex and age. Human Nature, 13(4),
Jianakoplos, N. A., & Bernasek, A. (2006). Financial risk taking by age and birth cohort. Southern Economic Journal, – older people tend to take less financial risk than younger people
Stewart, S., Stinnett, H., & Rosenfeld, L. B. (2000). Sex differences in desired characteristics of short-term and long-term relationship partners. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(6),

20. Continued .. Personality traits
Gullone and Moore (2000) - found personality factor of risk to be significant however different personality factors related to different risk taking behaviour
Nicholson, Soane, Fenton‐O'Creevy, and Willman.(2005) - A clear Big Five pattern emerges for overall risk taking
Sample population
Tested on population with typical roles in society
There are many societies such as Chambri community of Papua New Guinea where gender roles are reversed
There are some cultures where women that are hunter gatherers, if you looked at them would anything change?
Margaret Mead speculated that women in the Chambri were the power individuals within the villages instead of men. She first noted that the Chambri women were the primary suppliers of food and the hunter gatherers of the tribe.
Also if you looked at prisoners, as we know there is a high proportion of people in prison that are high in Extraversion which is related to sensation-seeking and therefore risk taking would the results differ again?
Gullone, E., & Moore, S. (2000). Adolescent risk-taking and the five-factor model of personality. Journal of adolescence, 23(4),
Nicholson, N., Soane, E., Fenton‐O'Creevy, M., & Willman, P. (2005). Personality and domain‐specific risk taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8(2),

21. Any questions ?

22. References
Bassett, J. F., & Moss, B. (2004). Men and women prefer risk takers as romantic and nonromantic partners. Current Research in Social Psychology, 9(10),
Farthing, G. W. (2005). Attitudes toward heroic and nonheroic physical risk takers as mates and as friends. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(2),
Gil-Burmann, C., Peláez, F., & Sánchez, S. (2002). Mate choice differences according to sex and age. Human Nature, 13(4),
Gullone, E., & Moore, S. (2000). Adolescent risk-taking and the five-factor model of personality. Journal of adolescence, 23(4),
Jianakoplos, N. A., & Bernasek, A. (2006). Financial risk taking by age and birth cohort. Southern Economic Journal,
Kelly, S., & Dunbar, R. I. (2001). Who dares, wins. Human Nature, 12(2),
Kramer, L , Aug 18. Does the caveman tell you how to invest. Retrieved from
Nicholson, N., Soane, E., Fenton‐O'Creevy, M., & Willman, P. (2005). Personality and domain‐specific risk taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8(2),
Petraitis, J. M., Lampman, C. B., Boeckmann, R. J., & Falconer, E. M. (2014). Sex differences in the attractiveness of hunter‐gatherer and modern risks. Journal of Applied Social Psychology.

23. …
Risk-Taking (n.d.) retrieved from on 21st October 2014
Ronay R., von Hippel W. (2010), The Presence of an Attractive Woman ELevates Testosterone and Physical Risk Taking in YOung Men, Social Psychological and Personality Science vol
Sivak, M., Soler, J., & Tränkle, U. (1989). Cross-cultural differences in driver risk-taking. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 21(4),
Stewart, S., Stinnett, H., & Rosenfeld, L. B. (2000). Sex differences in desired characteristics of short-term and long-term relationship partners. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(6),
Taylor, S. E., Klein, L. C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gurung, R. A., & Updegraff, J. A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: tend-and-befriend, not fight-or-flight. Psychological review, 107(3), 411.
Tovée, M. J., Edmonds, L., & Vuong, Q. C. (2012). Categorical perception of human female physical attractiveness and health. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(2),
Weber, E. U., & Hsee, C. (1998). Cross-cultural differences in risk perception, but cross-cultural similarities in attitudes towards perceived risk. Management Science, 44(9),