Socio-sexuality and episodic memory function in women: further evidence of an adaptive “mating mode”

The functionalist memory perspective predicts that information of adaptive value may trigger specific processing modes. It was recently demonstrated that women's memory is sensitive to cues of male sexual dimorphism (i.e., masculinity) that convey information of adaptive value for mate choice because they signal health and genetic quality, as well as personality traits important in relationship contexts. Here, we show that individual differences in women's mating strategies predict the effect of facial masculinity cues upon memory, strengthening the case for functional design within memory. Using the revised socio-sexual orientation inventory, Experiment 1 demonstrates that women pursuing a short-term, uncommitted mating strategy have enhanced source memory for men with exaggerated versus reduced masculine facial features, an effect that reverses in women who favor long-term committed relationships. The reversal in the direction of the effect indicates that it does not reflect the sex typicality of male faces per se. The same pattern occurred within women's source memory for women's faces, implying that the memory bias does not reflect the perceived attractiveness of faces per se. In Experiment 2, we reran the experiment using men's faces to establish the reliability of the core finding and replicated Experiment 1's results. Masculinity cues may therefore trigger a specific mode within women's episodic memory. We discuss why this mode may be triggered by female faces and its possible role in mate choice. In so doing, we draw upon the encoding specificity principle and the idea that episodic memory limits the scope of stereotypical inferences about male behavior

Exploring Implicit Voice Theories at Work

In modern organizations, individuals frequently choose silence over voice (e.g., Milliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003), which can have a variety of detrimental effects on individuals and organizations. This choice of silence is partially due to self-protective implicit voice theories that employees have internalized from interactions with authority over time. In this research, I investigate self-protective implicit voice theories (abbreviated as IVTs throughout), defined as taken-for-granted beliefs about when and why speaking up at work is risky or inappropriate (Detert & Edmondson, 2011). I present three studies employing lab and field research methods to further understand various aspects of IVTs. In the first study, I explored activation and suppression of IVTs from anger and fear primes. I found that IVTs were generally stable and not susceptible to emotional primes, suggesting that they are well-developed beliefs that are strong enough to remain constant in varied emotional states. In the second study, I investigated the extent to which IVTs and evolutionarily significant facial cues of dominance predicted voice in a vignette-based study. IVTs did not predict voice, but further analysis revealed that the dependent variable was more appropriately categorized as helping. There was a significant interaction between gender and face type on helping. Broadly, the results of this study suggest that people may help others after subconsciously calculating their power and predicted reciprocity from the person being helped. Finally, in a third study, I explored the degree to which personality and demographics affect IVTs and how IVTs are related to withholding in four organizations. I found that IVT scores did not cluster in teams, suggesting that they are best analyzed at the individual level and that workplace context has minimal effect on IVTs. Second, I found that IVTs explain withholding above and beyond contextual and personality variables. Last, I found that IVTs mediate the effect of conflict aversion on withholding. The stability and significance of IVTs is further supported from this research, providing additional research opportunities and possibilities to reduce withholding in organizations

Sex-dimorphic face shape preference in heterosexual and homosexual men and women

Studies have used manipulated faces to test the preferences of heterosexual individuals for sexually dimorphic facial cues. In contrast to previous studies, which have generally excluded homosexual participants, we directly compared homosexual and heterosexual male and female preferences for manipulated sexual dimorphism in faces (homosexual males: n = 311; heterosexual males: n = 215; homosexual females: n = 159; heterosexual females: n = 218). Prior studies on sexual orientation and preferences for faces that were paired with masculine and feminine behavioral descriptors suggest that homosexual men prefer more masculine men and that homosexual women demonstrate no preference for either masculinity or femininity in women. In our study, we tested for similarities and differences among heterosexual and homosexual males and females with regard to their preferences for a more specific aspect of faces: sexual dimorphism of face shape. Homosexual men demonstrated stronger preferences for masculinity in male faces than did all of the other groups. Homosexual women demonstrated stronger preferences for masculinity in female faces than did heterosexual women. These results suggest attractiveness judgments of same-sex faces made by homosexual individuals are not a mirror image of those made by heterosexual individuals of the opposite sex. Our data suggest that face preferences of homosexual individuals reflect a system of biologically and socially guided preferences at least as complex as those found among heterosexual individuals

Sex-dimorphic face shape preference in heterosexual and homosexual men and women

Studies have used manipulated faces to test the preferences of heterosexual individuals for sexually dimorphic facial cues. In contrast to previous studies, which have generally excluded homosexual participants, we directly compared homosexual and heterosexual male and female preferences for manipulated sexual dimorphism in faces (homosexual males: n = 311; heterosexual males: n = 215; homosexual females: n = 159; heterosexual females: n = 218). Prior studies on sexual orientation and preferences for faces that were paired with masculine and feminine behavioral descriptors suggest that homosexual men prefer more masculine men and that homosexual women demonstrate no preference for either masculinity or femininity in women. In our study, we tested for similarities and differences among heterosexual and homosexual males and females with regard to their preferences for a more specific aspect of faces: sexual dimorphism of face shape. Homosexual men demonstrated stronger preferences for masculinity in male faces than did all of the other groups. Homosexual women demonstrated stronger preferences for masculinity in female faces than did heterosexual women. These results suggest attractiveness judgments of same-sex faces made by homosexual individuals are not a mirror image of those made by heterosexual individuals of the opposite sex. Our data suggest that face preferences of homosexual individuals reflect a system of biologically and socially guided preferences at least as complex as those found among heterosexual individuals