↓ Skip to main content

Sexual Regret: Evidence for Evolved Sex Differences

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Sexual Behavior, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
37 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
91 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
90 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
Title
Sexual Regret: Evidence for Evolved Sex Differences
Published in
Archives of Sexual Behavior, November 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10508-012-0019-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Galperin, Martie G. Haselton, David A. Frederick, Joshua Poore, William von Hippel, David M. Buss, Gian C. Gonzaga

Abstract

Regret and anticipated regret enhance decision quality by helping people avoid making and repeating mistakes. Some of people's most intense regrets concern sexual decisions. We hypothesized evolved sex differences in women's and men's experiences of sexual regret. Because of women's higher obligatory costs of reproduction throughout evolutionary history, we hypothesized that sexual actions, particularly those involving casual sex, would be regretted more intensely by women than by men. In contrast, because missed sexual opportunities historically carried higher reproductive fitness costs for men than for women, we hypothesized that poorly chosen sexual inactions would be regretted more by men than by women. Across three studies (Ns = 200, 395, and 24,230), we tested these hypotheses using free responses, written scenarios, detailed checklists, and Internet sampling to achieve participant diversity, including diversity in sexual orientation. Across all data sources, results supported predicted psychological sex differences and these differences were localized in casual sex contexts. These findings are consistent with the notion that the psychology of sexual regret was shaped by recurrent sex differences in selection pressures operating over deep time.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 91 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
United Kingdom 3 3%
Colombia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 103 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 17%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 25 22%
Unknown 15 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 54 48%
Social Sciences 14 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 22 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 366. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 January 2024.
All research outputs
#88,152
of 25,756,911 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Sexual Behavior
#56
of 3,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#436
of 287,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Sexual Behavior
#1
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,756,911 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,782 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 287,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.