Male aggressiveness as intrasexual contest competition in 78 societies.

School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
School of Biological Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
Subject Areas
Animal Behavior, Anthropology, Ecology, Evolutionary Studies
sexual selection, aggression, polygyny, human behavioral ecology, sex ratio, subsistence-mating tradeoff
© 2017 Carter et al.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ Preprints) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
Cite this article
Carter T, Kushnick G. (2017) Male aggressiveness as intrasexual contest competition in 78 societies. PeerJ Preprints 5:e3331v1


Sexual selection favors traits that increase mating and, thus, reproductive success. Some scholars have suggested that intrasexual selection driven by contest competition has shaped human male aggression. If this is the case, one testable hypothesis is that beliefs and behavior related to male aggression should be more prevalent in societies where the intensity and strength of sexual selection is higher, as measured by factors such as: (a) the presence and scope of polygyny; (b) the number of same-sex competitors relative to potential mates; and, (c) the amount of effort males have available to allocate to mating. Using mixed-effect linear regression models with data from 78 societies from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample, we found mixed support for the hypothesis using individual variables related to male aggression, but strong support when using a composite measure of male ‘aggressiveness’. We ruled out some potential alternative explanations by controlling for spatial autocorrelation, and confounding variables such as political complexity and warfare.

Author Comment

In this version of the manuscript, we have: (1) revised the title; (2) provided further clarification around our methods and how exactly we arrived at using a composite 'aggressiveness variable'; (3) provided further discussion and justification for variables we have included in the 'aggressiveness variable'.

Supplemental Information