David Michael Buss (born April 14, 1953) is an American evolutionary psychologist at the University of Texas at Austin, researching human sex differences in mate selection. He is considered one of the founders of evolutionary psychology.
Biography Buss earned his PhD in psychology at University of California, Berkeley, in 1981. Before becoming a professor at the University of Texas, he was assistant professor for four years at Harvard University and a professor at the University of Michigan for eleven years.
The primary topics of his research include male mating strategies, conflict between the sexes, social status, social reputation, prestige, the emotion of jealousy, homicide, anti-homicide defenses, and—most recently—stalking. All of these are approached from an evolutionary perspective. Buss is the author of more than 200 scientific articles and has won many awards, including an APA Distinguished Scientific Award for Early Career Contribution to Psychology in 1988 and an APA G. Stanley Hall Lectureship in 1990.
Buss is the author of a number of publications and books, including The Evolution of Desire, The Dangerous Passion, and The Murderer Next Door, which introduces a new theory of homicide from an evolutionary perspective. He is also the author of Evolutionary Psychology: The New Science of the Mind, whose fourth edition was released in 2011. In 2005, Buss edited a reference volume, The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology.Buss, David M. (2005). The handbook of evolutionary psychology. Hoboken: Wiley. His latest book is When Men Behave Badly: The Hidden Roots of Sexual Deception, Harassment, and Assault.
Buss is involved with extensive cross-cultural research collaborations and lectures within the U.S.
Research
Act frequency approach As a solution to these problems of defining and measuring traits (i.e. conditions that constitute a certain personality trait), Buss and K. H. Craik (1980) proposed to introduce prototype theory into personality psychology.Buss, D. M., & Craik, K. H. (1980). The frequency concept of disposition: Dominance and prototypically dominant acts. Journal of Personality, 43, 379-392Buss, D. M., & Craik, K. H. (1983). The act frequency approach to personality. Psychological Review, 90, 105-126critique by Prof. Block and critique by Prof. Moser First, a group of people is asked to list acts that a person bearing the trait in question would show. Next, a different group of people is asked to name from that list those acts that are most typical for the trait. Then the measurement is conducted by counting the number of times (within a given period of time) a proband performs the typical acts.
Short and long-term mating strategies One element of David Buss's research involves studying the differences in mate selection between short-term and long-term mating strategies. Individuals differ in their preferences according to whether they are seeking a short or long-term mating strategy (i.e. whether they are looking for a "hook-up" or for a serious relationship). The Gangestad and Simpson Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI) determines whether a person favors a short-term or long-term strategy (also termed as unrestricted and restricted).S. W. Gangestad, J. A. Simpson Toward an evolutionary history of female sociosexual variation Journal of Personality, 58 (1990), pp. 69–96 Higher SOI scores indicate a less restricted orientation, and thus a preference for a short-term mating strategy.L. Penke, J. B. Asendorpf Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95 (2008), pp. 1113–1135
David Buss and colleagues conducted a study that attempted to uncover where priorities lie—concerning determinants of attractiveness—in short- and long-term mating strategies. In order to do this, participants' mating strategies were determined using the SOI, labeling each participant as favoring either a short- or a long-term mating strategy. Each individual was then given the choice to reveal either the face or body from a portrait of a person of the opposite gender. David Buss and his colleagues found that sociosexual orientation or favored mating strategy influenced which part of the portrait was revealed. Men who favored a short-term mating strategy chose to reveal the woman's body, whereas men who favored a long-term mating strategy chose to reveal the woman's face.Confer, J. C., Perilloux, C., & Buss, D. M. (2010). More than just a pretty face: Men's priority shifts toward bodily attractiveness in short-term versus long-term mating contexts. Evolution And Human Behavior, 31(5), 348-353. . David Buss and his colleagues found that favored mating strategies in women had no correlation with which part of the portrait was revealed but had to do with utilitarian aspects that make sense in terms of supportive and dependable resources, health and stamina. Attractiveness, from a male's perspective, seems to be based on facial cues when seeking a long-term relationship, and bodily cues when seeking a short-term relationship because they cue healthiness and reproductive capacity. They also found men showed more retardation in long term mating strategy than women and in short term strategy for women, their individuality, perceptions of benefit and demand of mate switching influenced. These findings add to David Buss's field of research by demonstrating differences in mating strategies across preferred relationship type.
Sex differences Buss posits that males and females have faced different adaptive challenges throughout human history, which shape behavioral difference in males and females today. Females have faced the challenges of surviving through pregnancy and lactation and then rearing children. Males, by contrast, have faced the challenges of paternity uncertainty, with its related risk of misallocating parental resources, and of maximizing the offspring onto which they pass their genes. Because insemination can occur by any mating choice of the female, males cannot be certain that the child in which they are investing is genetically their offspring.Buss, D. & Schmitt, D. (2011). Evolutionary psychology and feminism. Sex Roles, 64(9-10), 768-787.
To solve the female adaptation dilemma, females select mates who are loyal and are willing and able to invest in her and her offspring by providing resources and protection. Historically, females who were less selective of mates suffered lower reproductive success and survival.Buss, D. (2007). The evolution of human mating. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 39(3), 502-512 Males solve the adaptation challenge of paternity uncertainty and resources misallocation by selecting sexually faithful mates.Schmitt, D. & Buss, D. (1996). Strategic self-promotion and competitor derogation: Sex and context effects on the perceived effectiveness of mate attraction tactics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1185-1204. To maximize their offspring, males have adopted a short-term mating strategy of attracting and impregnating many fertile mates rather than one long-term mate.Buss, D. & Schmitt, D. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100(2), 204-232.
David Buss supported this evolutionary reasoning with research focused on sex differences in mating strategies. In a large cross-cultural study that included 10,047 individuals across 37 cultures, Buss sought first to determine the different characteristics each sex looks for in a mate.Buss, D. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49. From these findings, Buss was able to hypothesize the evolutionary causes for these preference differences. Buss found that males place very high importance on youth. Because youthful appearances signal fertilitySingh, D., & Singh, D. (2011). Shape and significance of feminine beauty: An evolutionary perspective. Sex Roles, 64(9-10), 723-731. Buss, D. (2007). The evolution of human mating. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 39, 502-512. Retrieved from: evolution of_human_mating_2007.pd and males seek to maximize their number of mates capable of passing on their genes, males place high value on fertility cues. Buss also found that females desire older mates. He later hypothesized that this is because older males tend to have a greater chance of higher social status;Buss, D., & Schmitt, D. (2011). Evolutionary psychology and feminism. Sex Roles, 64, 768-787. this social status could lead to more resources for a female and her offspring, and could therefore increase a female's likelihood of sexual success and reproduction.
Another area in which the two sexes seem to differ greatly is in their reactions to sexual and emotional infidelity. Buss found that females were more jealous of emotional infidelity while males were more jealous of sexual infidelity.Shackelford, T., Voracek, M., Schmitt, D., Buss, D., Weekes-Schackelford, V., & Michalski, R.(2004). Romantic jealousy in early adulthood and in later life. Human Nature, 15, 283-300. This has been supported as universal norm by Buss's cross-cultural study. Buss hypothesized that females find emotional infidelity more threatening because it could lead to the female losing the resources she had gained from that mate and having to raise children on her own. He then hypothesized that males found sexual infidelity more threatening because they could risk spending resources on a child that may not be their own.Larsen, R. J., & Buss, D. M. (2009). Personality psychology: Domains of knowledge about human nature. (4th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages
Mate preferences Buss has conducted numerous studies comparing the mate preferences of individuals by factors such as gender, time, parents vs. offspring, and type of relationship. He has also conducted a large study investigating universal mate preferences. He and Chang, Shackelford, and Wang examined a sample from China and discovered that men more than women tend to prefer traits related to fertility, such as youth and physical attractiveness.Chang, L., Wang, Y., Shackelford, T. K., & Buss, D. M. (2011). Chinese mate preferences: Cultural evolution and continuity across a quarter of a century. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(5), 678-683. Men also desired traits that could be seen as feminine stereotypes, including skill as a housekeeper. A similar study conducted in the US by Perilloux, Fleischman, and BussPerilloux, C., Fleischman, D. S., & Buss, D. M. (2011). Meet the parents: Parent-offspring convergence and divergence in mate preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(2), 253-258. revealed the same, with the addition of the desire for the traits healthy, easygoing, and creative/artistic. Women, however, favor traits related to resources, such as good earning capacity, social status, education and intelligence, and ambition and industriousness. Women also favor, more than men, the traits kindness and understanding, sociability, dependability, emotional stability, and an exciting personality. Parents of sons similarly ranked physical attractiveness at higher importance than parents of daughters, and parents of daughters ranked good earning capacity and education at higher importance. Overall, these sex differences in mate preferences appear to reflect gender stereotypes as well as theories of evolutionary psychology, which state that men will prefer fertility to pass on their genes, while women will prefer resources to provide for a family.