Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34713428›Full record

ArticleArchives of sexual behavior2021

Mate Retention Behavior and Ejaculate Quality in Humans.

Tara DeLecce, Todd K Shackelford, Virgil Zeigler-Hill, Bernhard Fink, Mohaned G Abed

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of sexual behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Tara DeLecceDepartment of Psychology, Oakland University, 213B Pryale Hall, Rochester, MI, 48309, USA. tdelecce@oakland.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-4611-6952
Todd K ShackelfordDepartment of Psychology, Oakland University, 213B Pryale Hall, Rochester, MI, 48309, USA.
Virgil Zeigler-HillDepartment of Psychology, Oakland University, 213B Pryale Hall, Rochester, MI, 48309, USA.
Bernhard FinkDepartment of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Mohaned G AbedEducational Graduate Studies, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Males of some species use mate retention behavior and investment in ejaculate quality as anti-cuckoldry tactics concurrently while others do so in a compensatory fashion. Leivers, Rhodes, and Simmons (2014) reported that men who performed mate retention less frequently produced higher-quality ejaculates, suggesting that humans use these tactics compensatorily. We conducted a conceptual replication of this research in a sample of 41 men (18-33 years; M = 23.33; SD = 3.60). By self-report, participants had not had a vasectomy and had never sought infertility treatment. We controlled for several covariates known to affect ejaculate quality (e.g., abstinence duration before providing an ejaculate) and found no statistically significant relationships between mate retention behavior and four components of ejaculate quality: sperm velocity, sperm concentration, slow motility, and ejaculate volume. The present results provide little support for the hypothesis that human males deploy mate retention behavior and ejaculate quality investment compensatorily. We discuss the limitations of this study and highlight the need for research to address questions about the nature of anti-cuckoldry tactic deployment in humans, especially concerning investment in ejaculate quality.

Indexed as

Semen AnalysisSexual PartnersAnimalsHumansMaleReproductionSexual Behavior, AnimalSpermatozoaAnti-cuckoldry tacticsEjaculate qualityMate retentionSperm competition

Identifiers

PMID34713428

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.