Ronay Von Hippel (2010)

• Aim 


  Determine if men would take greater risks in the presence of an attractive female, than in the presence of a male. In addition, whether testosterone played a role in this behaviour.
• Hypothesis


  Males would take greater risks as a result of intrasexual selection (he who makes the greatest impression, gets the girl).
• Sample


  96 young adult Australian male skateboarders with a mean age of 21.58. 43 were assigned to a male researcher and 53 were assigned to a female researcher (these were the conditions).
• Procedure (practice) 


  Skateboarders were asked to do one "easy trick" and one "difficult trick" (able to execute 50%). They were asked to practice the tricks 10 times.
• Procedure (real performance)


  They were then given the same male researcher or an 18-year-old female researcher who was blind to the hypothesis. The skateboarders were asked to do the same 10 attempts of each trick.
• Categorisation of attempts

  Success, crash, landing, aborted attempt. (High levels of aborted attempts = low risk-taking behaviour).
• Testosterone testing


  Saliva samples were collected after the experiment. Heart rate was measured by having participants wear a Nordic sports watch (measured before the test and then throughout).
• Results


  Participants took greater risk on difficult tricks in the presence of a female researcher (aborted few times). Testosterone levels were higher when in front of the female researcher. No significant difference of heart rate.
• Conclusion


  Young men take greater physical risks when in the presence of an attractive woman and testosterone may account for this behaviour.
• Inference


  This would fit the evolutionary theory (increased risk-taking may indicate to potential mates that the male is healthy, strong, and dominant).
• Strengths


  "Easy" and "difficult" tricks are subjective, testosterone levels were measured for cause-effect establishment, well-controlled despite field experiment, attractiveness of female was established through prior ratings, highly naturalisitic (high ecological validity).
• Limitations


  Repeated measures means that fatigue could influence results, , measurement of risk-taking is questionable, cannot conclude that reproduction is the intended goal of such behaviour, ethical considerations (due to deception).