Comment: Beyond “Evolutionary versus Social”: Moving the Cycle Shift Debate Forward

Brown, G.R.; Cross, C.P.; Street, S.E.; Brand, C.O.

Abstract

Wood, Kressel, Joshi, and Louie (2014) thoroughly evaluate the evidence for menstrual cycle shifts in ratings of several male characteristics and conclude that their analyses fail to provide supportive evidence for consistent cycle effects. The topic of menstrual cycle shifts in mate preferences has been strongly debated, with disagreements over both scientific content and practice. Here, we attempt to take a step back from these acrimonious exchanges and focus instead on how to interpret menstrual cycle shifts in mate preference tasks, independently from the question of when, or if, task performance varies with cycle stage. A greater consideration of domain-general mechanisms could provide an opportunity for investigating how evolved predispositions interact with socially transmitted information in biasing women’s responses on mate preference tasks.

Citation

Brown, G., Cross, C., Street, S., & Brand, C. (2014). Comment: Beyond “Evolutionary versus Social”: Moving the Cycle Shift Debate Forward. Emotion Review, 6(3), 250-251. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073914523050

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Online Publication Date: Jun 17, 2014
• Publication Date: 2014-07
• Deposit Date: Aug 9, 2017
• Journal: Emotion Review
• Print ISSN: 1754-0739
• Electronic ISSN: 1754-0747
• Publisher: SAGE Publications
• Volume: 6
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 250-251
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073914523050
• Public URL: https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1352638