Refine
Year of publication
- 2018 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Decision making (2) (remove)
Institute
Consistent individual differences in behavioral tendencies (animal personality) can affect individual mate choice decisions. We asked whether personality traits affect male and female mate choice decisions similarly and whether potential personality effects are consistent across different mate choice situations. Using western mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) as our study organism, we characterized focal individuals (males and females) twice for boldness, activity, and sociability/shoaling and found high and significant behavioral repeatability. Additionally, each focal individual was tested in two different dichotomous mate choice tests in which it could choose between computer-animated stimulus fish of the opposite sex that differed in body size and activity levels, respectively. Personality had different effects on female and male mate choice: females that were larger than average showed stronger preferences for large-bodied males with increasing levels of boldness/activity (i.e., towards more proactive personality types). Males that were larger than average and had higher shoaling tendencies showed stronger preferences for actively swimming females. Size-dependent effects of personality on the strength of preferences for distinct phenotypes of potential mating partners may reflect effects of age/experience (especially in females) and social dominance (especially in males). Previous studies found evidence for assortative mate choice based on personality types or hypothesized the existence of behavioral syndromes of individuals’ choosiness across mate choice criteria, possibly including other personality traits. Our present study exemplifies that far more complex patterns of personality-dependent mate choice can emerge in natural systems.
Background: Previous experimental research on testosterone (T) and psychological traits is inconclusive. Thus, we performed the first large-scale observational study of the association between T and dispositional optimism / pessimism.
Methods: We used prospective data from 6,493 primary-care patients (3,840 women) of the DETECT study (Diabetes Cardiovascular Risk-Evaluation: Targets and Essential Data for Commitment of Treatment), including repeated immunoassay-based measurement of serum T and optimism / pessimism assessed by the revised Life-Orientation Test (LOT-R). Cross-sectional and longitudinal associations of baseline T and one-year change in T with optimism and pessimism were investigated using age- and multivariable-adjusted regression models.
Results: Cross-sectional analyses showed no association of T with optimism or pessimism in both sexes. Longitudinal analyses also showed no association of baseline T with optimism or pessimism at four-year follow-up. Multivariable analyses of total LOT-R score yielded similarly non-significant results (β-coefficient per unit change in T for men: -0.01 (95% CI: -0.24–0.22), women: 0.08 (-0.03–0.20)). Furthermore, change in T was not related to optimism or pessimism at four-year follow-up.
Conclusions: The present observational study of a large-scale prospective sample showed no association of T with optimism or pessimism. Integrating further experimental and interventional evidence from alternative methodological approaches would strengthen this conclusion and establish stronger evidence about the potential hormonal basis of psychological traits.