Original Article Risk-taking as a situationally sensitive male mating strategy Michael D. Baker Jr ⁎ , Jon K. Maner Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA Initial receipt 7 May 2008; final revision 9 June 2008 Abstract Evolutionary theorists suggest that men engage in risk-taking more than women do in part because, throughout human evolutionary history, men have faced greater sexual selection pressures. We build on this idea by testing the hypothesis that risk-taking reflects a male mating strategy that is sensitive to characteristics of a potential mate. Consistent with this hypothesis, the current experiment demonstrated a positive relationship between mating motivation and risk-taking, but only in men who had been exposed to images of highly attractive females. Moreover, risk-taking in men was associated with enhanced memory for attractive female faces, indicating enhanced processing of their attractive facial characteristics. No relationship between mating motivation and risk-taking was observed in men exposed to images of unattractive women, nor was any such relationship observed in women. This experiment provides evidence that psychological states associated with mating may promote risk-taking, and that these effects are sex specific and are sensitive to situational context. © 2008 Published by Elsevier Inc. Keywords: Decision making; Sex differences; Emotion; Signaling 1. Introduction When faced with potentially risky decisions, what factors guide people's choices? A growing body of evidence suggests that decision making under uncertainty is profoundly shaped by people's emotions and goals. Although studies have provided a psychologically prox- imate account of the relationship between affect and decision making, many have fallen short of specifying the more ultimate adaptive functions that risk-taking may be designed to serve. An evolutionary perspective provides an overarching theoretical framework that links affective influences on decision making to the more ultimate adaptive functions potentially associated with risk-taking (cf. Wilson & Daly, 1985). In the current paper, we report on an experiment that adopts an evolutionary framework to better understand when, and in whom, risky decision making is likely to occur. An evolutionary perspective suggests that emotions and goals motivate specific cognitive and behavioral tendencies designed ultimately to increase reproductive success (e.g., Ackerman et al., 2006; Griskevicius et al., 2007). This perspective has important implications for understanding affective influences on decision making. Fessler, Pillsworth, and Flamson (2004), for example, showed that the experience of anger led men (but not women) to make riskier choices. In contrast, disgust led women (but not men) to make less risky choices. Fessler et al. emphasized that anger may lead men to risk harm by aggressing against rivals and enemies, an adaptive challenge faced primarily by men throughout evolutionary history (Wilson & Daly, 1985; Van Vugt, De Cremer, & Janssen, 2007). Conversely, disgust may help women avoid risks associated with exposure to contagion, an especially pernicious adaptive problem for women because of potential infection of offspring (Fessler & Navarrete, 2003). These findings therefore highlight some of the underlying adaptive functions served by risk-taking and risk-aversion. A large body of evidence suggests that men are more inclined to take risks than women (e.g., Byrnes, Miller, & Schaffer, 1999). Daly and Wilson hypothesized that this sex difference is rooted in the fact that men have faced greater intrasexual competition than women have (e.g., Daly & Wilson, 1994; Wilson, Daly, Gordon, Pratt, 1996). Indeed, Evolution and Human Behavior xx (2008) xxx – xxx ⁎ Corresponding author. Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA. E-mail address: baker@psy.fsu.edu (M.D. Baker). 1090-5138/$ – see front matter © 2008 Published by Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2008.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS