scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Todd K. Shackelford

Bio: Todd K. Shackelford is an academic researcher from University of Rochester. The author has contributed to research in topics: Evolutionary psychology & Poison control. The author has an hindex of 61, co-authored 408 publications receiving 15081 citations. Previous affiliations of Todd K. Shackelford include Regent's University London & University of Texas at Austin.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
David P. Schmitt1, Jüri Allik2, Robert R. McCrae3, Verónica Benet-Martínez4, Lidia Alcalay5, Lara Ault6, Ivars Austers7, Kevin Bennett8, Gabriel Bianchi9, Fredric Boholst10, Mary Ann Borg Cunen11, Johan Braeckman12, Edwin G. Brainerd13, Leo Gerard A. Caral10, Gabrielle Caron14, María Martina Casullo15, Michael Cunningham6, Ikuo Daibo16, Charlotte J. S. De Backer12, Eros De Souza17, Rolando Díaz-Loving18, Glaucia Ribeiro Starling Diniz19, Kevin Durkin20, Marcela Echegaray21, Ekin Eremsoy22, Harald A. Euler23, Ruth Falzon11, Maryanne L. Fisher24, Dolores Foley25, Douglas P. Fry26, Sirspa Fry26, M. Arif Ghayur27, Debra L. Golden28, Karl Grammer, Liria Grimaldi29, Jamin Halberstadt30, Shamsul Haque31, Dora Herrera21, Janine Hertel32, Heather Hoffmann33, Danica Hooper25, Zuzana Hradilekova34, Jasna Hudek-Kene-Evi35, Jas Laile Suzana Binti Jaafar36, Margarita Jankauskaite37, Heidi Kabangu-Stahel, Igor Kardum35, Brigitte Khoury38, Hayrran Kwon39, Kaia Laidra5, Anton Laireiter40, Dustin Lakerveld41, Ada Lampert, Mary Anne Lauri11, Marguerite Lavallée14, Suk Jae Lee42, Luk Chung Leung43, Kenneth D. Locke44, Vance Locke20, Ivan Lukšík9, Ishmael Magaisa45, Dalia Marcinkeviciene37, André Mata46, Rui Mata46, Barry Mccarthy47, Michael E. Mills48, Nhlanhla Mkhize49, João Manuel Moreira46, Sérgio Moreira46, Miguel Moya50, M. Munyae51, Patricia Noller25, Adrian Opre52, Alexia Panayiotou53, Nebojša Petrović54, Karolien Poels12, Miroslav Popper9, Maria Poulimenou55, Volodymyr P'yatokh, Michel Raymond56, Ulf-Dietrich Reips57, Susan E. Reneau58, Sofía Rivera-Aragón18, Wade C. Rowatt59, Willibald Ruch60, Velko S. Rus61, Marilyn P. Safir62, Sonia Salas63, Fabio Sambataro29, Kenneth Sandnabba26, Marion K. Schulmeyer, Astrid Schütz32, Tullio Scrimali29, Todd K. Shackelford64, Phillip R. Shaver65, Francis J Sichona66, Franco Simonetti2, Tilahun Sineshaw67, Tom Speelman12, Spyros Spyrou68, H. Canan Sümer69, Nebi Sümer69, Marianna Supekova9, Tomasz Szlendak70, Robin Taylor71, Bert Timmermans72, William Tooke73, Ioannis Tsaousis74, F. S.K. Tungaraza66, Griet Vandermassen12, Tim Vanhoomissen72, Frank Van Overwalle72, Ine Vanwesenbeeck, Paul L. Vasey75, João Veríssimo46, Martin Voracek76, Wendy W.N. Wan77, Ta Wei Wang78, Peter Weiss79, Andik Wijaya, Liesbeth Woertman41, Gahyun Youn80, Agata Zupanèiè61, Mithila B. Sharan81 
Bradley University1, University of Tartu2, National Institutes of Health3, University of California4, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile5, University of Louisville6, University of Latvia7, Pennsylvania State University8, Slovak Academy of Sciences9, University of San Carlos10, University of Malta11, Ghent University12, Clemson University13, Laval University14, University of Buenos Aires15, Osaka University16, Illinois State University17, National Autonomous University of Mexico18, University of Brasília19, University of Western Australia20, University of Lima21, Boğaziçi University22, University of Kassel23, York University24, University of Queensland25, Åbo Akademi University26, Al Akhawayn University27, University of Hawaii at Manoa28, University of Catania29, University of Otago30, University of Dhaka31, Chemnitz University of Technology32, Knox College33, Comenius University in Bratislava34, University of Rijeka35, University of Malaya36, Vilnius University37, American University of Beirut38, Kwangju Health College39, University of Salzburg40, Utrecht University41, National Computerization Agency42, City University of Hong Kong43, University of Idaho44, University of Zimbabwe45, University of Lisbon46, University of Central Lancashire47, Loyola Marymount University48, University of KwaZulu-Natal49, University of Granada50, University of Botswana51, Babeș-Bolyai University52, University of Cyprus53, University of Belgrade54, KPMG55, University of Montpellier56, University of Zurich57, University of Alabama58, Baylor University59, Queen's University Belfast60, University of Ljubljana61, University of Haifa62, University of La Serena63, Florida Atlantic University64, University of California, Davis65, University of Dar es Salaam66, Ramapo College67, Cyprus College68, Middle East Technical University69, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń70, University of the South Pacific71, Vrije Universiteit Brussel72, University at Albany, SUNY73, University of the Aegean74, University of Lethbridge75, University of Vienna76, University of Hong Kong77, Yuan Ze University78, Charles University in Prague79, Chonnam National University80, Indian Institutes of Technology81
TL;DR: The Big Five Inventory (BFI) is a self-report measure designed to assess the high-order personality traits of Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The Big Five Inventory (BFI) is a self-report measure designed to assess the high-order personality traits of Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness. As part of the International Sexuality Description Project, the BFI was translated from English into 28 languages and administered to 17,837 individuals from 56 nations. The resulting cross-cultural data set was used to address three main questions: Does the factor structure of the English BFI fully replicate across cultures? How valid are the BFI trait profiles of individual nations? And how are personality traits distributed throughout the world? The five-dimensional structure was robust across major regions of the world. Trait levels were related in predictable ways to self-esteem, sociosexuality, and national personality profiles. People from the geographic regions of South America and East Asia were significantly different in openness from those inhabiting other world regions. The discussion focuses on limitations of t...

876 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Key hypothesized findings include the following: Men's, but not women's, mate retention positively covaried with partner's youth and physical attractiveness, and women's but not men's, mates retention positively correlated with partner''s income and status striving.
Abstract: Although much research has explored the adaptive problems of mate selection and mate attraction, little research has investigated the adaptive problem of mate retention. We tested several evolutionary psychological hypotheses about the determinants of mate retention in 214 married people. We assessed the usage of 19 mate retention tactics ranging from vigilance to violence. Key hypothesized findings include the following: Men's, but not women's, mate retention positively covaried with partner's youth and physical attractiveness. Women's, but not men's, mate retention positively covaried with partner's income and status striving. Men's mate retention positively covaried with perceived probability of partner's infidelity. Men, more than women, reported using resource display, submission and debasement, and intrasexual threats to retain their mates. Women, more than men, reported using appearance enhancement and verbal signals of possession. Discussion includes an evolutionary psychological analysis of mate retention in married couples.

620 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Results indicated there were significant cross-regional differences in the ideal female figure and body dissatisfaction, but effect sizes were small across high-socioeconomic-status (SES) sites.
Abstract: This study reports results from the first International Body Project (IBP-I), which surveyed 7,434 individuals in 10 major world regions about body weight ideals and body dissatisfaction. Participants completed the female Contour Drawing Figure Rating Scale (CDFRS) and self-reported their exposure to Western and local media. Results indicated there were significant cross-regional differences in the ideal female figure and body dissatisfaction, but effect sizes were small across high-socioeconomic-status (SES) sites. Within cultures, heavier bodies were preferred in low-SES sites compared to high-SES sites in Malaysia and South Africa (ds = 1.94-2.49) but not in Austria. Participant age, body mass index (BMI), and Western media exposure predicted body weight ideals. BMI and Western media exposure predicted body dissatisfaction among women. Our results show that body dissatisfaction and desire for thinness is commonplace in high-SES settings across world regions, highlighting the need for international attention to this problem.

584 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The personality characteristics of one's partner significantly predicted marital and sexual dissatisfaction, most notably when the partner was lower on Agreeableness, Emotional Stability, and Intellect-Openness than desired.
Abstract: Although personality characteristics figure prominently in what people want in a mate, little is known about precisely which personality characteristics are most important, whether men and women differ in their personality preferences, whether individual women or men differ in what they want, and whether individuals actually get what they want. To explore these issues, two parallel studies were conducted, one using a sample of dating couples (N = 118) and one using a sample of married couples (N = 216). The five-factor model, operationalized in adjectival form, was used to assess personality characteristics via three data sources-self--report, partner report, and independent interviewer reports. Participants evaluated on a parallel 40-item instrument their preferences for the ideal personality characteristics of their mates. Results were consistent across both studies. Women expressed a greater preference than men for a wide array of socially desirable personality traits. Individuals differed in which characteristics they desired, preferring mates who were similar to themselves and actually obtaining mates who embodied what they desired. Finally, the personality characteristics of one's partner significantly predicted marital and sexual dissatisfaction, most notably when the partner was lower on Agreeableness, Emotional Stability, and Intellect-Openness than desired.

532 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors outline the conceptual and evidentiary standards that apply to adaptations, exaptations, and spandrels and discuss the relative utility of these concepts for psychological science.
Abstract: Adaptation and natural selection are central concepts in the emerging science of evolutionary psychology. Natural selection is the only known causal process capable of producing complex functional organic mechanisms. These adaptations, along with their incidental by-products and a residue of noise, comprise all forms of life. Recently, S. J. Gould (1991) proposed that exaptations and spandrels may be more important than adaptations for evolutionary psychology. These refer to features that did not originally arise for their current use but rather were co-opted for new purposes. He suggested that many important phenomena--such as art, language, commerce, and war--although evolutionary in origin, are incidental spandrels of the large human brain. The authors outline the conceptual and evidentiary standards that apply to adaptations, exaptations, and spandrels and discuss the relative utility of these concepts for psychological science.

492 citations


Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: The Big Five taxonomy as discussed by the authors is a taxonomy of personality dimensions derived from analyses of the natural language terms people use to describe themselves 3 and others, and it has been used for personality assessment.
Abstract: 2 Taxonomy is always a contentious issue because the world does not come to us in neat little packages (S. Personality has been conceptualized from a variety of theoretical perspectives, and at various levels of Each of these levels has made unique contributions to our understanding of individual differences in behavior and experience. However, the number of personality traits, and scales designed to measure them, escalated without an end in sight (Goldberg, 1971). Researchers, as well as practitioners in the field of personality assessment, were faced with a bewildering array of personality scales from which to choose, with little guidance and no overall rationale at hand. What made matters worse was that scales with the same name often measure concepts that are not the same, and scales with different names often measure concepts that are quite similar. Although diversity and scientific pluralism are useful, the systematic accumulation of findings and the communication among researchers became difficult amidst the Babel of concepts and scales. Many personality researchers had hoped that they might devise the structure that would transform the Babel into a community speaking a common language. However, such an integration was not to be achieved by any one researcher or by any one theoretical perspective. As Allport once put it, " each assessor has his own pet units and uses a pet battery of diagnostic devices " (1958, p. 258). What personality psychology needed was a descriptive model, or taxonomy, of its subject matter. One of the central goals of scientific taxonomies is the definition of overarching domains within which large numbers of specific instances can be understood in a simplified way. Thus, in personality psychology, a taxonomy would permit researchers to study specified domains of personality characteristics, rather than examining separately the thousands of particular attributes that make human beings individual and unique. Moreover, a generally accepted taxonomy would greatly facilitate the accumulation and communication of empirical findings by offering a standard vocabulary, or nomenclature. After decades of research, the field is approaching consensus on a general taxonomy of personality traits, the " Big Five " personality dimensions. These dimensions do not represent a particular theoretical perspective but were derived from analyses of the natural-language terms people use to describe themselves 3 and others. Rather than replacing all previous systems, the Big Five taxonomy serves an integrative function because it can represent the various and diverse systems of personality …

7,787 citations

Book
08 Sep 2020
TL;DR: A review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species – frequent outliers.
Abstract: Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers - often implicitly - assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these "standard subjects" are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species - frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior - hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.

6,370 citations

Journal Article

5,680 citations