how important is getting a mate? was Maslow wrong?

from new research it appears that Maslow’s pyramid has been totally renovated to measure up to today’s values.  Apparently Mate Acquisition, Mate Retention & Parenting have become the high goals for all of us towards which to aim.  I’m having difficulty coming to terms with the results of the research.

It was discussed in PhysOrg’s post Maslow’s pyramid gets a much needed renovation :

The research team – which included Vladas Griskevicius of the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, and Mark Schaller of the University of British Columbia, Vancouver – restructured the famous pyramid after observing how psychological processes radically change in response to evolutionarily fundamental motives, such as self-protection, mating or status concerns.

The bottom four levels of the new pyramid are highly compatible with Maslow’s, but big changes are at the top. Perhaps the most controversial modification is that self-actualization no longer appears on the pyramid at all. At the top of the new pyramid are three evolutionarily critical motives that Maslow overlooked – mate acquisition, mate retention and parenting.

The researchers state in the article that while self-actualization is interesting and important, it isn’t an evolutionarily fundamental need. Instead, many of the activities that Maslow labeled as self-actualizing (artistic creativity, for example) reflect more biologically basic drives to gain status, which in turn serves the goal of attracting mates.

“Among human aspirations that are most biologically fundamental are those that ultimately facilitate reproduction of our genes in our children’s children,” Kenrick explained. “For that reason, parenting is paramount.”

The researchers are not saying that artists or poets are consciously thinking about increasing their reproductive success when they feel the inspiration to paint or write.

“Reproductive goals are ultimate causes,” Kenrick added, “like the desire of birds to migrate because it helps them survive and reproduce. But at a proximate (or immediate psychological) level, the bird migrates because its brain registers that the length of day is changing. In our minds, we humans create simply because it feels good to us; we’re not aware of its ultimate function.”

“You could argue that a peacock’s display is as beautiful as anything any human artist has ever produced,” Kenrick said. “Yet it has a clear biological function – to attract a mate. We suspect that self actualization is also simply an expression of the more evolutionarily fundamental need to reproduce.”

But, Kenrick adds, for humans reproduction is not just about sex and producing children. It’s also about raising those children to the age at which they can reproduce as well. Consequently, parenting sits atop the revamped pyramid.

There are other distinctions as well. For Maslow, once a need was met, it disappeared as the individual moved on to the next level. In the reworked pyramid, needs overlap one another and coexist, instead of completely replacing each other. For example, certain environmental cues can make them come back. If you are walking down the street thinking about love, art or the meaning of life, you will revert quickly to the self-protection level if you see an ominous-looking gang of young men headed your way.

In case you’ve forgotten what Maslow’s pyramid looks like or you’re too young to remember (sorry it’s also been downgraded in size?):

I’m devastated that we lost Self Actualization in this renovation as I have spent most of my life working towards that goal, now  all for nought????

From that fascinating piece of research, we move onto how do you attract that mate that now is the prize of Maslow’s pyramid with new Aussie research.  This was mentioned in another post A tilt of the head can lure a mate

The findings, published in the latest edition of Evolutionary Psychology, are the result of joint research by a husband-and-wife team at the University of Newcastle and Macquarie University that investigated whether differences in visual perspective can alter the face’s appeal and attractiveness.
“Human facial attractiveness from an evolutionary perspective has been extensively studied, and the influence of feminine and masculine facial features on attractiveness is relatively well known,” said lead researcher, Dr. Darren Burke, who is a senior psychology lecturer at the University of Newcastle Central Coast campus.
“A gap in our knowledge, however, is the evolutionary origin of what is considered masculine and feminine about facial features. Our research investigated if looking at the face from different perspectives as a result of the height differential between men and women influenced perceived masculinity or femininity. The research found the way we angle our faces affects our attractiveness to the opposite sex.”
Men, typically taller than women, view a woman’s face from above; and women view men’s faces from below. Through a series of simulations, the research tested whether the angle of view was an important determinant of masculinity/femininity and attractiveness.
The research found that female faces are judged to be more feminine and more attractive when tilted forwards (simulating viewing from above), and less feminine when tilted backwards (simulating viewing from below). Conversely, male faces are judged more masculine when tilted backwards and less masculine when tilted forwards.
“From a scientific perspective, these findings contribute enormously to our understanding of the role of facial attractiveness in evolution,” said Dr. Danielle Sulikowski, who is jointly affiliated with both Macquarie University and the University of Newcastle.
“While the research provides important information about our evolution, the findings also offer some clues to help unravel the mysteries of mateship rituals in the 21st century. The next step is to determine if people use this effect in real-world mate-attraction scenarios.”
The research used computer-generated, three-dimensional models of male and female faces. Participants rated attractiveness and masculinity and femininity of the faces in five positions: ranging from tilted up to tilted down.

Maybe using computer generated models have skewed these results, who knows???   I realize now that I have been pretty deluded & could have just focused my attempts at attracting a mate on tilting my head in the correct manner but I guess we are never too old to learn.  Or maybe not????

This graphic simplifies the process of matching to educate us as well.  Here’s a really funny video from George Carlin ‘We Are Equal’.  Enjoy….

Related articles

• Maslow’s hierarchy has a new pinnacle of human achievement (geneveith.com)
• Micro-Maslow: Shifts up and down the hierarchy throughout the day (psychologytoday.com)
• Attractiveness is all in tilt of the head (telegraph.co.uk)
• A tilt of the head can lure a mate (news.theage.com.au)
• Hierarchy of Needs – Psychology Definition of the Week (psychology.about.com)
• Maslow, Abraham (earthpages.wordpress.com)
• Is the Anti-Maslow Movement Gaining Strength? (i2i-align.com)
• You: Tilt of head enough to attract opposite (nation.com.pk)
• What Did Maslow Know About Customer Centricity? It Ain’t Happening! (enterpriseirregulars.com)
• How the way you tilt your face could be the secret to seduction (dailymail.co.uk)