The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conflict between the sexes: Strategic interference and the evocation of anger and upset.
Abstract
Advances an evolution-based model of strategic conflict between men and women. Conflict is predicted to occur whenever the reproductive strategy adopted by one sex interferes with that adopted by the opposite sex. Three empirical studies tested hypotheses based on this model. Study 1 (N = 528) examined sex differences in sources of anger and upset (e.g., about sexual aggressiveness or withholding) among 2 samples of Ss differing in age and martial status. Study 2 (N = 60) assessed the perceived magnitude of upset each sex would experience when confronted by each source. Study 3 (N = 214) tested predictions within married couples about sex differences in sources of marital and sexual dissatisfaction. These studies provide modest support for the strategic conflict model and implicate the negative emotions of anger and upset as proximate mechanisms that alert men and women to strategic interference. The diversity of upset elicitors discovered here, such as being condescending, possessive, neglecting, abusive, inconsiderate, moody, and self-centered, point to the limitations of this evolutionary model and the need to develop more comprehensive models of conflict between the sexes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests
Cronbach, L. J. (1951) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02310555 · Cited by 43,931
The genetical theory of natural selection
Fisher, R. A. (1930) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.27468 · Cited by 17,617
The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I
Hamilton, W. D. (1964) · Journal of Theoretical Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4 · Cited by 15,725
Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures
Buss, D. M. (1989) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00023992 · Cited by 4,484
Self-citation
Cited by
Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.100.2.204 · Cited by 4,253
Self-citationSex Differences in Jealousy: Evolution, Physiology, and Psychology
Buss, D. M., Larsen, R. J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, J. (1992) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00038.x · Cited by 1,263
Self-citationNiche construction, biological evolution, and cultural change
Laland, K. N., Odling-Smee, J., & Feldman, M. W. (2000) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00002417 · Cited by 1,103
Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Vohs, K. D. (2001) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0503_5 · Cited by 862
Meston, C. M., & Buss, D. M. (2007) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10508-007-9175-2 · Cited by 781
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Buss, D. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 1989
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 735-747
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2162702287
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 28.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Conflict between the sexes: Strategic interference and the evocation of anger and upset. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0022-3514.56.5.735
- The paper
- Buss, D. M. (1989). Conflict between the sexes: Strategic interference and the evocation of anger and upset. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.5.735
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
