[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background: Sexual behavior usually begins in adolescence, and is mediated by biological, personality and socio-cultural variables which can affect the expression of preventive and risky sexual performance, as well as sex and age differences. Aim: To determine sex differences in the age of sexual initiation, the use ofprotective methods and mate selectivity in young men and women, as well as preventive practices according to age, and the prevalence of partner aggression. Subjects and Methods: Participants were 484 university students from public and private institutions, aged 22 ± 3 years (59% women) assessed using a diversity of self-report measures of personality traits, romantic relationship quality, sexual role, attachment type, socio-sexual openness, and self-esteem; they also answered questions regarding sexual behavior, and violence. Results: Differences in age of sexual initiation, risky sexual behavior, and socio-sexual openness were observed between men and women. Aggression prevalence in romantic relationships also varied according to sex and age. Similarities and differences in patterns of behavior and personality variables were observed in relationship quality, sexual role, kindness, and responsibility in males and females. Conclusions: The findings present consistencies with the international evidence and differences that may be due to context specificities, providing also an empirical referent to consider in health planning.
Revista medica de Chile 02/2013; 141(2):160-6. · 0.36 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In the literature on human mate choice, masculine facial morphology is often proposed to be an intersexual signal of heritable immunocompetence, and hence an important component of men's attractiveness. This hypothesis has received considerable research attention, and is increasingly treated as plausible and well supported. In this article, we propose that the strength of the evidence for the immunocompetence hypothesis is somewhat overstated, and that a number of difficulties have been under-acknowledged. Such difficulties include (1) the tentative nature of the evidence regarding masculinity and disease in humans, (2) the complex and uncertain picture emerging from the animal literature on sexual ornaments and immunity, (3) the absence of consistent, cross-cultural support for the predictions of the immunocompetence hypothesis regarding preferences for masculinized stimuli, and (4) evidence that facial masculinity contributes very little, if anything, to overall attractiveness in real men. Furthermore, alternative explanations for patterns of preferences, in particular the proposal that masculinity is primarily an intrasexual signal, have been neglected. We suggest that immunocompetence perspectives on masculinity, whilst appealing in many ways, should still be regarded as speculative, and that other perspectives-and other traits-should be the subject of greater attention for researchers studying human mate preferences.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Mate choice, according to our data, is a process happening in 47,6% of individuals and not occurring in 52,4% of them. The hypothesis put forward explaining the causes of the process not occurring in our partipicants are: a) Mate choice in humans is part of subjective propability and its quite impossible to make precise predictions, b) The amount of preferences and high information collected during lifetime is impossible to know and be managed by individuals, c) In concordance to previous experiences and different preferences of individuals they show cognitive bias of focusing effect. The causes mentioned above make selection a week force to cultural modules. The model of cultural modules, proposed in this study, helps us understand that the solution of an adaptive problem is defined by the information deposited in the neurons in cerebral cortex. However, mate choice in humans does not exlude epigenetical modules.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.