Author
Listed:
- Jaimie Arona Krems
(Oklahoma State University)
- Scott Claessens
(University of Auckland
Arizona State University
Arizona State University)
- Melissa R. Fales
(University of California
University of California)
- Marco Campenni
(Arizona State University
Arizona State University
University of Exeter)
- Martie G. Haselton
(University of California
University of California
University of California
University of California)
- Athena Aktipis
(Arizona State University
Arizona State University
Arizona State University
Arizona State University)
Abstract
After half a century of debate and few empirical tests, there remains no consensus concerning why ovulation in human females is considered concealed. The predominant male investment hypothesis states that females were better able to obtain material investment from male partners across those females’ ovulatory cycles by concealing ovulation. We build on recent work on female competition to propose and investigate an alternative—the female rivalry hypothesis—that concealed ovulation benefited females by allowing them to avoid aggression from other females. Using an agent-based model of mating behaviour and paternal investment in a human ancestral environment, we did not find strong support for the male investment hypothesis, but found support for the female rivalry hypothesis. Our results suggest that concealed ovulation may have benefitted females in navigating their intrasexual social relationships. More generally, this work implies that explicitly considering female–female interactions may inspire additional insights into female behaviour and physiology.
Suggested Citation
Jaimie Arona Krems & Scott Claessens & Melissa R. Fales & Marco Campenni & Martie G. Haselton & Athena Aktipis, 2021.
"An agent-based model of the female rivalry hypothesis for concealed ovulation in humans,"
Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(6), pages 726-735, June.
Handle:
RePEc:nat:nathum:v:5:y:2021:i:6:d:10.1038_s41562-020-01038-9
DOI: 10.1038/s41562-020-01038-9
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:5:y:2021:i:6:d:10.1038_s41562-020-01038-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.