xkcd
Campaigns

TS-Si supports open and immediate access to publicly funded research.

Petition: remove women of transsexual / intersex history from the GLAAD Media Reference Guide. [ sign ]
Read: Andrea Rosenfield's call for reform.

Opening Doors to Transsexual Medical Research
TS-Si
is dedicated to the acceptance, medical
treatment, and legal
protection of individuals correcting the misalignment
of their brains and their anatomical sex, while supporting their transition
into society as hormonally reconstituted and surgically corrected citizens.
is dedicated to the acceptance, medical
treatment, and legal
protection of individuals correcting the misalignment
of their brains and their anatomical sex, while supporting their transition
into society as hormonally reconstituted and surgically corrected citizens.
| You Can’t Hurry Love, But Why? |
|
|
| Living - Relationships | |||
| TS-Si News Service | |||
| Saturday, 17 January 2009 22:00 | |||
London, UK. Well, all right, courtship can be a lot of fun. But why does it take so darn long? Experienced people know that it can take a male some time before he can get around to signal his interest in a female but once he does the courtship period can get underway. By declaring his suitability at the start, the female has time to screen out the male if she finds him unsuitable as a mate. Sometimes things can go wrong in a courtship; in human terms we say it just doesn't add up! So, why is courtship so protracted and what does that say about the quality of the outcome?
Scientists have even developed a mathematical model of the mating game to help explain some of this. The model uses game
theory to analyse how males and females behave strategically towards each other in the mating game. Their research demonstrates how an extended courtship enables a male to signal his suitability to a female and enables the female to screen out the male if he is unsuitable as a mate. The research team consisted of personnel from the University College London (UCL ), University of Warwick, and the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Their findings appear in the Journal of Theoretical Biology.
The mathematical model considers a male and a female in a courtship encounter of unspecified duration, with the game ending when one or other party quits or the female accepts the male as a mate. The model makes some basic assumptions.
The study looks for behaviors that are evolutionarily stable and in equilibrium. That is, females are doing as well as they can against male behaviour and males are doing as well as they can against female behaviour. It shows that extended courtship can take place, with a good male being willing to court for longer than a bad male and the female delaying mating. In this way the duration of a male’s courtship effort carries information about his type.
By delaying mating, the female is able to make some use of this information to achieve a degree of screening. Because bad males have a greater tendency to quit the courtship game early, as time goes on and the male has not quit it becomes increasingly probable that he is a “good” male.
Professor Robert Seymour, UCL Mathematics, says: “Courtship in a number of animal species occurs over an extended period of time. Human courtship, for example, can involve a sequence of dinners, theatre trips and other outings lasting months or even years. One partner - often the male - may pay the greater part of the financial cost, but to both sexes there is a significant cost of time which could be spent on other productive activities. Why don't people and other animals speed things up to reduce these costs? The answer seems to be that longer courtship is a way for the female to acquire information about the male.
“By delaying mating, the female is able to reduce the chance that she will mate with a bad male. A male's willingness to court for a long time is a signal that he is likely to be a good male. Long courtship is a price paid for increasing the chance that mating, if it occurs, will be a harmonious match which benefits both sexes. This may help to explain the commonly held belief that a woman is best advised not to sleep with a man on a first date.”
Dr Peter Sozou, Warwick Medical School and LSE Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science, says: “From a female's point of view, males are not all equal. A female would like to mate with a good male, but cannot tell a male's type from his appearance alone. The strategic problem the female faces is how to screen out bad males, and this is where long courtship comes into play."
"A male is assumed to always want to mate with a female, but a good male is more willing to pay the cost of a long courtship in order to claim the prize of mating. This leads to an outcome in which the female is not willing to mate immediately, but instead requires the male to wait for an indeterminate time before she agrees to mate with him. During this time, the male may give up on courting the female."
“Bad males give up at some random time if the female has not by then mated with them, but good males are more persistent and do not give up. The female’s strategy is a compromise - a trade-off between on the one hand the greater risk of mating with a bad male if she mates too quickly, and on the other hand the time cost of delay. Under this compromise there remains some risk that she will mate with the wrong type of male. She cannot eliminate this risk completely unless she decides never to mate.”
CitationDuration of courtship effort as a costly signal. Robert M Seymour and Peter D Sozou. Journal of Theoretical Biology 256(1): 1-13. doi: 10.1016 / j.jtbi.2008.09.026
Abstract We consider a male and a female in a courtship encounter over continuous time. Both parties pay participation costs per unit time. The game ends when either one or other of the parties quits or the female accepts the male as a mate. We assume that there is a binary variable which determines whether the male is a "good" or "bad" type from the female's point of view, according to either his condition or his willingness to care for the young after mating. This variable is not directly observable by the female, but has fitness consequences for her: she gets a positive fitness payoff from mating with a "good" male but a negative fitness payoff from mating with a "bad" male. We assume also that a "good" male has a higher ratio of fitness benefit from mating to fitness cost per unit time of courtship than a "bad" male. We show that, under suitable assumptions, there are evolutionarily stable equilibrium behaviours in which time-extended courtship takes place. A "good" male is willing to court for longer than a "bad" male; in this way the duration of a male's courtship signals his type, and acts as a costly handicap. By not being willing to mate immediately the female achieves a degree of screening because the posterior probability that the male is "good", conditional on his not having quit the game, increases with the duration of courtship.
Email this
Comments (0)
![]() Write comment
|
|||
| Last Updated on Tuesday, 20 January 2009 12:04 |



London, UK. Well, all right, courtship can be a lot of fun. But why does it take so darn long? Experienced people know that it can take a male some time before he can get around to signal his interest in a female but once he does the courtship period can get underway. By declaring his suitability at the start, the female has time to screen out the male if she finds him unsuitable as a mate.
theory
The TS-Si News Service is a collaborative effort by TS-Si.org editors, contributors, and corresponding institutions. Sources can include the cited individuals and organizations, as well as TS-Si.org staff contributions. Articles and news reports do not necessarily convey official positions of TS-Si, its partners, or affiliates. We welcome your comments. Use the form below to leave a public comment or send private correspondence via the TS-Si Contact Page. We will not divulge any personal details or place you on a mailing list without your permission.
The TS-Si News Service
and the TS-Si Research Service are collaborations of TS-Si officials, staff, contributors, and corresponding institutions. The contents do not necessarily convey official positions of TS-Si or its owners, participants, partners, or affiliates.