Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22947995›Full record

ArticleEvolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior2011

Human sexual conflict from molecules to culture.

Gregory Gorelik, Todd K Shackelford

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gregory GorelikDepartment of Psychology, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USA. gregory.gorelik33@gmail.com
Todd K Shackelford
Florida Atlantic University · USOakland University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coevolutionary arms races between males and females have equipped both sexes with mutually manipulative and defensive adaptations. These adaptations function to benefit individual reproductive interests at the cost of the reproductive interests of opposite-sex mates, and arise from evolutionary dynamics such as parental investment (unequal reproductive costs between the sexes) and sexual selection (unequal access to opposite-sex mates). Individuals use these adaptations to hijack others' reproductive systems, psychological states, and behaviors--essentially using other individuals as extended phenotypes of themselves. Such extended phenotypic manipulation of sexual rivals and opposite-sex mates is enacted by humans with the aid of hormones, pheromones, neurotransmitters, emotions, language, mind-altering substances, social institutions, technologies, and ideologies. Furthermore, sexual conflict may be experienced at an individual level when maternal genes and paternal genes are in conflict within an organism. Sexual conflict may be physically and emotionally destructive, but may also be exciting and constructive for relationships. By extending the biological concept of sexual conflict into social and cultural domains, scholars may successfully bridge many of the interdisciplinary gaps that separate the sciences from the humanities.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionConflict, PsychologicalCultural EvolutionInterpersonal RelationsSexual BehaviorAdaptation, PsychologicalBehavioral ResearchDefense MechanismsFemaleGenetic FitnessHumansMaleSelection, GeneticSex AttractantsSex FactorsSocial ValuesSex Attractants

Identifiers

PMID22947995
PMCPMC10426834
OpenAlexW1856449337

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.