Evolutionary psychologists propose that men’s conspicuous consumption facilitates mate attraction because it predicts resource investment in offspring. This article elaborates on the ultimate functions of men’s luxury displays based on Life History Theory. Three studies provide evidence for phenotypic mimicry, in which consumer product features mimicking male secondary sex characteristics indicate investment in mating competition, at the expense of paternal investment. Men owning shirts with larger luxury brand logos were rated higher on mating effort, lower on parental investment, higher on interest in brief sexual affairs, lower on interest in long-term committed romantic relationships, higher in attractiveness to women for brief sexual affairs, lower in attractiveness to women for long-term committed relationships, and higher in developmental environment unpredictability compared with men owning shirts displaying a smaller logo. Participants recognized the strategic use of luxury display properties across social contexts but did not consistently associate product properties with owners’ physiological characteristics.
ApicellaC. L.DreberA.CampbellB.GrayP. B.HoffmanM.LittleA. C. (2008). Testosterone and financial risk preference. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 384–390.
2.
ApicellaC. L.FeinbergD. R.MarloweF. W. (2007). Voice pitch predicts reproductive success in male hunter-gatherers. Biology Letters, 3, 682–684.
3.
Bech-SørensenJ.PolletT. V. (2016). Sex differences in mate preferences: A replication study, 20 years later. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2, 171–176.
4.
BeckermanS.LizarraldeR.BallewC.SchroederS.FingeltonC.GarrisonA.SmithH. (1998). The Barí partible paternity project: Preliminary results. Current Anthropology, 39(1), 164–167.
5.
BelkR. W.BahnK. D.MayerR. N. (1982). Developmental recognition of consumption symbolism. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 4–17.
6.
BelskyJ.SchlomerG. L.EllisB. J. (2011). Beyond cumulative risk: Distinguishing harshness and unpredictability as determinants of parenting and early life history strategy. Developmental Psychology, 48, 662–673.
7.
BoothroydL. G.JonesB. C.BurtD. M.PerrettD. I. (2007). Partner characteristics associated with masculinity, health and maturity in male faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1161–1173.
8.
BribiescasR. G. (2001). Reproductive ecology and life history of the human male. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology, 44, 148–176.
9.
BussD. M. (1989). Sex difference in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.
10.
ChisholmJ. S. (1999). Death, hope and sex: Steps to an evolutionary ecology of mind and morality. Cambridge University Press.
11.
ColarelliS. M.DettmanJ. R. (2003). Intuitive evolutionary perspectives in marketing practices. Psychology and Marketing, 20, 837–865.
12.
Conroy-BeamD.BussD. M. (2017). Euclidean distances discriminatively predict short-term and long-term attraction to potential mates. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38, 442–450.
13.
CoppingL. T.CampbellA. (2015). The environment and life history strategies: Neighborhood and individual-level models. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36, 182–190.
14.
CoppingL. T.CampbellA.MuncerS. (2013). Violence, teenage pregnancy, and life history. Human Nature, 24, 137–157.
15.
DarwinC. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. John Murray.
16.
EastwickP. W.FinkelE. J. (2008). Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 245–264.
17.
EffendiR. A.WhitfieldT. W. (2012). He looks six years younger in that Porsche: Do the qualities of products transfer to their owners?Asian Social Science, 8, 250–260.
18.
EllisonP. T. (2001). On fertile ground: A natural history of human reproduction. Harvard University Press.
FisherR. A. (1930). The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford University Press.
21.
GangestadS. W.SimpsonJ. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(4), 573–644.
22.
GearyD. C. (2005). Evolution of paternal investment. In BussD. (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 483–505). John Wiley & Sons.
23.
GriskeviciusV.TyburJ. M.SundieJ. M.CialdiniR. B.MillerG. F.KenrickD. T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 85–102.
24.
HeathA. P.ScottD. (1998). The self-concept and image congruence hypothesis: An empirical evaluation in the motor vehicle market. European Journal of Marketing, 32, 1110–1123.
25.
HillK.HurtadoM. (1996). Ache life history: The ecology and demography of a foraging people. Aldine de Gruyter.
26.
Hodges-SimeonC. R.GaulinS. J. C.PutsD. A. (2011). Voice correlates of mating success in men: Examining “contests” versus “mate choice” modes of sexual selection. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(3), 551–557.
27.
HopcroftR. L. (2006). Sex, status, and reproductive success in the contemporary United States. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 104–120.
28.
HughesS. M.DispenzaF.GallupG. G.Jr. (2004). Ratings of voice attractiveness predict sexual behavior and body configuration. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 295–304.
29.
KappelerP. M.van SchaikC. P. (2004). Sexual selection in primates: New and comparative perspectives. Cambridge University Press.
30.
KimK.SmithP. K.PalermitiA. L. (1997). Conflict in childhood and reproductive development. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18, 109–142.
31.
KrugerD. J. (2006). Male facial masculinity influences attributions of personality and reproductive strategy. Personal Relationships, 13, 451–463.
32.
KrugerD. J. (2008). Male financial consumption is associated with higher mating intentions and mating success. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 603–612.
33.
KrugerD. J. (2017). Brief self-report scales assessing life history dimensions of mating and parenting effort. Evolutionary Psychology, 15(1), 1–9.
34.
KrugerD. J.FisherM.JoblingI. (2003). Proper and dark heroes as dads and cads: Alternative mating strategies in British romantic literature. Human Nature, 14(3), 305–317.
35.
KrugerD. J. (under review). Advancing the Understanding of phenotypic mimicry in men’s conspicuous consumption. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
36.
KrugerD. J.JonssonE. (2019). The Viking and the Farmer: Alternative male life histories portrayed in the romantic poetry of Erik Gustaf Geijer. Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture, 3, 17–38.
37.
KrugerD. J.KrugerJ. S. (2018). What do economically costly signals signal? A life history framework for interpreting conspicuous consumption. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 4, 420–427.
38.
MillerG. F.ToddP. M. (1998). Mate choice turns cognitive. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 190–198.
39.
MuehlenbeinM. P.BribiescasR. G. (2005). Testosterone-mediated immune functions and male life histories. American Journal of Human Biology, 17, 527–558.
40.
NettleD. (2010). Dying young and living fast: Variation in life history across English neighbourhoods. Behavioral Ecology, 21, 387–395.
41.
OtterbringT.RinglerC.SirianniN. J.GustafssonA. (2018). The Abercrombie & Fitch effect: The impact of physical dominance on male customers’ status-signaling consumption. Journal of Marketing Research, 55(1), 69–79.
42.
Penton-VoakI. S.LittleA. C.JonesB. C.BurtD. M.TiddemanB. P.PerrettD. I. (2003). Female condition influences preferences for sexual dimorphism in faces of male humans. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 117, 264–271.
43.
PerrettD. I.LeeK. J.Penton-VoakI.RowlandD.YoshikawaS.BurtD. M.HenziS. P.CastlesD. L.AkamatsuS. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature, 394(6696), 884–887.
44.
PromislowD. E. (1992). Costs of sexual selection in natural populations of mammals. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 247, 230–210.
45.
PutsD. A. (2005). Mating context and menstrual phase affect women’s preferences for male voice pitch. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 388–397.
46.
RhodesG.SimmonsL. W.PetersM. (2005). Attractiveness and sexual behavior: Does attractiveness enhance mating success?Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 186–201.
47.
RoffD. A. (1992). The evolution of life histories: Theory and analysis. University of Chicago Press.
48.
RuckerD. D.GalinskyA. D. (2009). Conspicuous consumption versus utilitarian ideals: How different levels of power shape consumer behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(3), 549–555.
49.
SundieJ. M.KenrickD. T.GriskeviciusV.TyburJ. M.VohsK. D.BealD. J. (2011). Peacocks, Porsches, and Thorstein Veblen: Conspicuous consumption as a sexual signaling system. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 664–680.
50.
VeblenT. (1899/1953). The theory of the leisure class. Mentor.
51.
von RuedenC. R.JaeggiA. V. (2016). Men’s status and reproductive success in 33 nonindustrial societies: Effects of subsistence, marriage system, and reproductive strategy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(39), 10824–10829.
52.
WoodB. M.MarloweF. W. (2013). Household and kin provisioning by Hadza men. Human Nature, 24, 280–317.
53.
ZhangL.LeeA. J.DeBruineL. M.JonesB. C. (2019). Are sex differences in preferences for physical attractiveness and good earning capacity in potential mates smaller in countries with greater gender equality?Evolutionary Psychology, 17(2), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704919852921
54.
ZhaoT.JinX.XuW.ZuoX.CuiH. (2017). Mating goals moderate power’s effect on conspicuous consumption among women. Evolutionary Psychology, 15(3), Article 1474704917723912.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
