Female intrasexual competition decreases female facial attractiveness
Open accessAbstract
Evolutionary theory predicts that female intrasexual competition will occur when males of high genetic quality are considered to be a resource. It is probable that women compete in terms of attractiveness since this is one of the primary criteria used by men when selecting mates. Furthermore, because hormones influence the mate-selection process, they may also mediate competition. One competitive strategy that women use is derogation--any act intended to decrease a rival's perceived value. To investigate intrasexual competition through derogation, the influence of oestrogen on women's ratings of female facial attractiveness was examined. During periods of high oestrogen, competition, and hence derogation, increased, as evidenced by lower ratings of female facial attractiveness. By contrast, oestrogen levels did not significantly affect ratings of male faces. These findings support the theory of female intrasexual competition with respect to attractiveness.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Women exhibit higher levels of intrasexual competition related to attractiveness at peak fertility in the menstrual cycle.
“For instance, women prefer masculine faces (Little and Jones, 2012) and exhibit higher levels of intrasexual competition related to attractiveness (Fisher, 2004) at peak fertility in the menstrual cycle.”
From Hormonal contraceptives suppress oxytocin-induced brain reward responses to the partner’s face (2016) · cites this paper as Fisher, 2004
Partner preferences vary across the menstrual cycle in an evolutionarily adaptive way.
“Previous research suggests that partner preferences vary across the menstrual cycle in an evolutionarily adaptive way.”
From Hormonal contraceptives suppress oxytocin-induced brain reward responses to the partner’s face (2016) · cites this paper as Fisher, 2004
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 14 · Cited by 287
- Authors
- Fisher, M. L.
- Affiliations
- York University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Fisher, M. L.
- ORCID
- Fisher, M. L.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2004-08-07
- Volume
- 271
- Issue
- suppl_5
- Pages
- S283-5
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- PMC
- PMC1810076
- OpenAlex
- W2129784384
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 8.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
- Keywords
- estrogen, mate choice, derogation, sexual selection, reproductive competition
- MeSH terms
- Analysis of Variance, Beauty, Choice Behavior, Competitive Behavior, Estrogens, Biological Evolution, Face, Female, Humans, Photography, Sexual Behavior
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