Ovulatory shifts among pair-bonded women regarding their extra-pair attraction and self-perceived mate value
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the current research was to examine the potential influence of fertility status across the phases of the menstrual cycle (MC) on women?s romantic relationship dynamics. Specifically, women?s feelings and perceptions of interpersonal closeness, relationship and sexual satisfaction, commitment, investment, extra-pair attraction, attitudes toward infidelity, and self-perceived mate value were examined. In order to carry out this study, 20 pair-bonded naturally cycling women and 32 pair-bonded women currently using some form of hormonal contraception (HC) from Lakehead University and the general community of Thunder Bay were recruited to take part in the ?Relationship Satisfaction Study.? A within-subjects design was used to examine significant changes across romantic relationship variables between a high fertile phase (i.e., periovulatory phase) and a low fertile phase (i.e., mid to late luteal phase) of the MC. During the periovulatory phase, naturally cycling women also used midstream urine test strips to confirm the presence or absence of ovulation. Naturally cycling women were found to rate the appeal of alternative dating/relationship partners as significantly greater (i.e., greater extra-pair attraction) during the periovulatory phase; however, this only occurred for women who reported that their partners were lower in mate value. Moreover, a significant main effect of MC phase on self-perceived mate value was discovered, such that naturally cycling women during the periovulatory phase rated themselves as more desirable than during the mid to late luteal phase. These results are consistent with previous research regarding women?s dual mating strategies and further contributes to our knowledge regarding purported hormonally-mediated MC phase shifts in the context of romantic relationships.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".