Evolutionary explanations of aggression | AQA A-Level Psychology Revision
- Revision Notes
- Aug 7
- 25 min read
Updated: Aug 14
For 7182 specification, first teach in September 2025
AQA A-Level Psychology | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 65 to 80 minutes
Evolutionary explanations A-Level Psychology revision examines why aggressive tendencies may have developed through natural selection. Aggression may have increased reproductive success by helping people compete for resources, establish status, attract partners and retain mates. You will apply these principles to unfamiliar examples involving rivalry, sexual jealousy and controlling behaviour, while considering the explanation’s scientific and social limitations. This lesson builds on the distinction between inherited behaviour and environmental triggers [Lesson 3: The ethological explanation] and develops your understanding of biological accounts of aggression.
The AQA specification requires students to study evolutionary explanations of human aggression.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Define adaptation, reproductive success and natural selection.
Explain why aggression may have provided an evolutionary advantage.
Explain the roles of competition, status, sexual jealousy and mate retention.
Apply evolutionary principles to unfamiliar examples of aggressive behaviour.
Distinguish an evolutionary explanation from an ethological explanation.
Evaluate evolutionary explanations using evidence, methodological issues and wider debates.
Revision Notes 📚
Evolutionary Explanations A-Level Psychology Revision Focus
An evolutionary explanation proposes that aggressive tendencies developed because, under some circumstances, they increased an individual’s chances of surviving and reproducing.
The basic argument is:
Members of a population vary in their behavioural tendencies.
Some tendencies provide an advantage in obtaining resources, status or mates.
Individuals with these tendencies are more likely to reproduce successfully.
They pass the inherited basis of those tendencies to their offspring.
Across many generations, the tendencies become more common in the population.
Aggression is not described as adaptive because it is pleasant, morally acceptable or helpful in modern society. It is described as adaptive only if it increased reproductive success in the environments in which the tendency developed.
Natural Selection
Natural selection is the process through which inherited characteristics that improve survival or reproduction become more common across generations.
Natural selection operates through differences in reproductive success:
Individuals vary.
Some inherited characteristics make successful reproduction more likely.
Those individuals have more surviving offspring.
Their inherited characteristics are passed to the next generation.
The frequency of those characteristics increases within the population.
Applied to aggression, the explanation proposes that an inherited readiness to behave aggressively may have been selected when it helped individuals:
Obtain or defend resources.
Protect territory.
Compete with rivals.
Establish dominance or status.
Protect a partner or offspring.
Prevent a partner from leaving.
Increase certainty that they were raising genetically related offspring.
This connects evolutionary explanations with inherited biological vulnerabilities to aggression [Lesson 2: Hormonal and genetic mechanisms]. Genetic explanations examine how aggression may be inherited, while evolutionary explanations ask why an inherited aggressive tendency might have been selected.
Adaptation
An adaptation is an inherited characteristic or behavioural tendency that increased reproductive success.
A behaviour can be adaptive even when it involves costs. Aggression can lead to injury, retaliation or exclusion, but it may still have been selected if its reproductive benefits outweighed these costs under particular conditions.
For example, aggression might have been advantageous if it enabled an individual to:
Retain access to valuable resources.
Discourage rivals.
Rise within a social hierarchy.
Protect offspring from danger.
Appear strong or capable.
Maintain access to a partner.
Evolutionary explanations therefore consider both the possible benefits and costs of aggression.
Reproductive Success
Reproductive success refers to the extent to which an individual passes their genes to future generations through surviving offspring.
This is the central idea in an evolutionary explanation.
A behaviour does not have to increase a person’s happiness, health or social approval to provide an evolutionary advantage. It needs to increase the transmission of inherited characteristics.
The 2025 AQA mark scheme identifies several ways aggression might confer reproductive success:
An aggressive male may appear to have greater access to resources.
Strength and high status may make a male appear desirable.
Aggressive mate-retention strategies may discourage infidelity.
Preventing infidelity may increase genetic certainty.
Competition for Resources
Resources are limited, so individuals may compete to obtain or retain them.
Relevant resources may include:
Food.
Shelter.
Territory.
Social influence.
Material goods.
Access to potential partners.
Aggression may help someone obtain a resource by intimidating or defeating rivals. Once the resource has been obtained, aggression may also help defend it.
The proposed evolutionary chain is:
Limited resource → competition between individuals → aggression towards rivals → increased access to the resource → greater reproductive advantage
A person with access to valuable resources may be more able to:
Survive.
Support offspring.
Attract a partner.
Protect a family.
Maintain a higher position within a group.
Aggression and Status
Status refers to a person’s position or standing within a social hierarchy.
Aggression may help establish or protect status by demonstrating:
Strength.
Dominance.
Willingness to challenge rivals.
Ability to control resources.
Capacity to protect a partner or group.
Higher status may provide:
Greater access to resources.
More influence within a group.
Greater attractiveness to potential partners.
Better opportunities for reproduction.
An AQA specimen mark scheme recognises that aggression among young males may be explained through attempts to acquire or defend resources, establish status among peers or compete between groups.
However, this does not mean that aggression always raises status. In many modern settings, aggression can produce punishment, rejection, imprisonment or loss of employment.
The evolutionary claim is that an inherited readiness for aggression may have been advantageous in certain competitive conditions, not that every aggressive act is successful.
Male-Male Competition
Evolutionary explanations often focus on competition between males for access to resources and potential partners.
If reproductive opportunities were limited, males who successfully discouraged or defeated rivals may have achieved greater reproductive success.
Aggression could contribute to male-male competition through:
Physical confrontation.
Threatening behaviour.
Displays of strength.
Defence of territory.
Protection of resources.
Attempts to establish dominance.
The explanation may also account for why aggression is often directed towards individuals perceived as rivals.
For example, a young man who responds aggressively when another man challenges his position within a group could be displaying a status-protection strategy.
Why Strength and Resources May Be Attractive
The evolutionary explanation proposes that strength, status and access to resources may signal an ability to:
Provide protection.
Obtain valuable resources.
Compete successfully.
Support offspring.
Aggression may contribute indirectly to reproductive success if it helps a person acquire these qualities or appear capable of defending them.
AQA’s 2025 mark scheme recognises the argument that an aggressive male may appear stronger, higher in status or more capable of accessing resources and may therefore be perceived as desirable.
This does not mean that aggression itself is always attractive. It means that some characteristics connected with successful competition may have been valued under particular conditions.
Sexual Jealousy
Sexual jealousy is an emotional response to a perceived threat to a romantic or sexual relationship.
Evolutionary explanations propose that jealousy may activate behaviours intended to:
Detect a possible rival.
Discourage a partner’s infidelity.
Prevent a partner from leaving.
Retain access to the relationship.
Protect reproductive interests.
Jealousy may therefore contribute to aggression when another person is viewed as a sexual rival.
The basic sequence is:
A possible rival is detected.
The individual perceives a threat to the relationship.
Sexual jealousy is experienced.
The person uses mate-retention behaviour.
Aggression may be directed towards the rival or partner.
Aggression is therefore explained as a strategy that may have reduced the risk of losing a partner.
Paternity Uncertainty
A central part of some evolutionary accounts is paternity uncertainty.
A mother can be certain that a child is genetically related to her because she gives birth to the child. A male cannot achieve the same direct certainty that he is the child’s biological father.
From an evolutionary perspective, investing time and resources in offspring who are not genetically related would not increase the male’s direct reproductive success.
This creates a possible evolutionary pressure to:
Detect infidelity.
Monitor a partner.
Deter potential rivals.
Prevent a partner from forming another relationship.
Use mate-retention strategies.
Aggression linked with sexual jealousy is therefore explained as a possible response to the threat of investing in another male’s offspring.
Cuckoldry
Cuckoldry refers to a male unknowingly investing in offspring who are not genetically his because his partner has reproduced with another male.
In an evolutionary account, the risk of cuckoldry may have selected for:
Sensitivity to signs of infidelity.
Sexual jealousy.
Vigilance.
Direct guarding.
Aggression towards potential rivals.
Attempts to control a partner’s behaviour.
Avoiding cuckoldry would increase genetic certainty, meaning greater confidence that parental investment is directed towards genetically related offspring.
⚠️ This is an explanation of a proposed evolutionary function. It does not justify surveillance, coercion, controlling behaviour or violence within a relationship.
Mate-Retention Strategies
Mate-retention strategies are behaviours intended to prevent a partner from leaving the relationship or becoming involved with a rival.
They range from positive behaviours to harmful and aggressive behaviours.
Within evolutionary explanations of aggression, important strategies include:
Vigilance
Direct guarding
Negative inducements
Threats or coercion
Aggression towards rivals
These strategies are proposed to reduce the risk of infidelity or relationship loss.
Vigilance
Vigilance involves monitoring a partner’s behaviour or activities.
Examples might include:
Repeatedly checking where a partner has been.
Monitoring interactions with possible rivals.
Demanding frequent contact.
Checking messages or communications.
Questioning a partner about friendships.
In an evolutionary explanation, vigilance may allow a person to identify a possible threat to the relationship.
However, the explanation must not be confused with approval. Monitoring a partner may be intrusive, controlling and harmful.
Direct Guarding
Direct guarding involves attempting to prevent a partner from interacting with potential rivals.
Examples include:
Insisting on accompanying a partner.
Trying to prevent them attending social events alone.
Interrupting interactions with a possible rival.
Keeping the partner physically nearby.
Restricting opportunities to meet other people.
The November 2020 AQA mark scheme treated accompanying a partner on nights out as an example of direct guarding.
The proposed evolutionary function is to reduce opportunities for infidelity and therefore increase genetic certainty.
Negative Inducements
Negative inducements are harmful behaviours used to discourage a partner from leaving or being unfaithful.
They can include:
Threats.
Emotional manipulation.
Coercion.
Intimidation.
Aggression.
Attempts to reduce the partner’s independence.
Evolutionary explanations suggest that these behaviours may have functioned as mate-retention strategies.
This is a particularly socially sensitive part of the explanation because describing a possible function can be misinterpreted as excusing domestic abuse.
A clear distinction is essential:
Explaining why a behaviour might have developed is not the same as judging the behaviour to be acceptable.
Aggression Towards Rivals
Aggression may also be directed towards someone perceived as a rival.
The person may attempt to:
Intimidate the rival.
Reduce the rival’s status.
Drive the rival away.
Prevent contact with the partner.
Demonstrate greater strength or dominance.
In an examination scenario, look for clues such as:
Anger towards a partner’s friends.
Threats directed at another potential partner.
Repeated confrontation with rivals.
Attempts to defend status.
Aggression following suspected infidelity.
A Complete Evolutionary Account of Mate Retention
The explanation can be organised into the following sequence:
Losing a partner or experiencing infidelity could reduce reproductive success.
A rival creates a perceived threat to the relationship.
Sexual jealousy is activated.
The person uses vigilance or direct guarding.
More extreme strategies may include threats, coercion or aggression.
These behaviours may reduce the opportunity for infidelity.
Reduced infidelity increases genetic certainty.
Tendencies supporting successful mate retention may be passed across generations.
This sequence contains the mechanism and the proposed evolutionary function.
Applying Evolutionary Principles to Status Competition
Consider the following scenario:
A group of students compete for leadership of a sports society. Aidan becomes threatening whenever another student receives praise and repeatedly challenges other members in front of the group.
An evolutionary explanation might state:
Aidan may perceive the other students as status rivals.
Public challenges could allow him to demonstrate dominance.
Higher status may provide greater access to influence and resources.
Aggressive status-protection strategies may have increased reproductive success across human evolution.
His behaviour could therefore reflect an inherited readiness to respond aggressively during status competition.
A weak answer would merely state:
Aidan is aggressive because of evolution.
A stronger answer identifies:
The relevant competitive problem.
The aggressive strategy.
The potential advantage.
The link with reproductive success.
Applying Evolutionary Principles to Sexual Jealousy
Consider this scenario:
Sami becomes angry when his partner talks to a new colleague. He repeatedly asks to see their messages and insists on attending every work social event.
A strong application might state:
Sami may perceive the colleague as a potential rival, producing sexual jealousy. Asking to see messages can be interpreted as vigilance, while attending every social event may be direct guarding. From an evolutionary perspective, these mate-retention strategies may reduce opportunities for infidelity and increase genetic certainty.
The answer applies psychological terminology to specific details rather than simply repeating the scenario.
Applying Evolutionary Principles to Group Rivalry
Consider another example:
Two groups compete for control of a valued meeting place. Members threaten each other and display symbols showing which group controls the area.
An evolutionary explanation could focus on:
Competition for territory.
Defence of a valuable resource.
Establishment of status within and between groups.
Aggressive displays that discourage rivals.
Greater access to resources for successful group members.
This shows that evolutionary explanations are not limited to sexual jealousy. They can also address aggression associated with resources, dominance and territory.
Applying the Explanation Carefully
Evolutionary explanations should use cautious language.
Appropriate wording includes:
“May have increased reproductive success.”
“Could have provided an adaptive advantage.”
“May reflect a mate-retention strategy.”
“Could be interpreted as direct guarding.”
“May increase genetic certainty.”
“The person appears to perceive the other individual as a rival.”
Avoid absolute claims such as:
“Men are naturally violent.”
“Jealous people cannot control themselves.”
“Evolution causes domestic violence.”
“Aggression is always adaptive.”
“All males use mate-retention strategies.”
Evolutionary explanations describe statistical tendencies and possible functions, not unavoidable behaviour.
Evolutionary and Ethological Explanations Compared
Evolutionary and ethological explanations both view aggression as having an inherited basis, but they answer different questions.
Ethological explanation | Evolutionary explanation |
Explains the immediate release of behaviour | Explains why a behavioural tendency may have developed |
Focuses on innate releasing mechanisms | Focuses on reproductive advantage |
A sign stimulus activates a fixed action pattern | Competition or jealousy may activate an adaptive strategy |
Often studies species-specific animal behaviour | Focuses on the possible functions of human aggression |
Primarily asks how aggression is produced | Primarily asks why aggression was selected |
For example:
An ethological account asks how an environmental releaser activates aggression.
An evolutionary account asks how aggression could improve access to resources or mates.
Understanding innate releasing mechanisms and fixed responses [Lesson 3: The ethological explanation] will help you make this comparison clearly.
Evolutionary and Genetic Explanations Compared
A genetic explanation examines inherited differences, such as genetic variants associated with aggression.
An evolutionary explanation examines why an inherited tendency might have become common.
Genetic explanation | Evolutionary explanation |
Focuses on genetic differences between individuals | Focuses on selection across generations |
Examines mechanisms such as the MAOA gene | Examines adaptive functions such as status or mate retention |
Explains vulnerability to aggression | Explains why vulnerability may have been selected |
Can be investigated through twin and adoption research | Often relies on present behaviour to infer past selection pressures |
The explanations are compatible. An aggressive tendency must have some inherited basis if natural selection is to act upon it.
Evolutionary and Social Learning Explanations Compared
Evolutionary explanations propose that humans may inherit a readiness for aggression. Social learning theory proposes that aggressive behaviour is learned through observation, identification and reinforcement.
Evolutionary explanation | Social learning explanation |
Aggressive tendencies have an inherited basis | Aggressive behaviour is learned |
Behaviour may increase reproductive success | Behaviour is copied when models are observed or rewarded |
Emphasises competition and mate retention | Emphasises modelling and vicarious reinforcement |
Explains broad recurring patterns | Explains variation between environments and cultures |
Takes a nature-based position | Takes a nurture-based position |
Learning aggression from models and consequences [Lesson 6: Social learning theory] may better explain why the form and frequency of aggression vary between people and cultures.
Strength: Supporting Evidence
A strength of evolutionary explanations is that research has linked jealousy and mate-retention strategies with aggressive behaviour.
AQA mark schemes recognise supporting evidence involving:
Wilson and Daly’s research into mate-retention strategies.
Goetz’s research into motivations for intimate partner abuse.
Buss and Shackelford’s research into the use of status as a mate-retention strategy.
Such evidence supports the proposed connections between:
Sexual jealousy.
Vigilance.
Direct guarding.
Status.
Aggressive mate retention.
The explanation is also consistent with evidence that aggression often differs between males and females and that status-related aggression occurs in contexts such as bullying and workplace power struggles.
However, supporting associations do not prove that the behaviours developed through natural selection.
Strength: Explanatory Breadth
Evolutionary principles can be applied to several forms of aggression.
They may explain aggression connected with:
Sexual rivalry.
Mate retention.
Territory.
Status competition.
Bullying.
Resource protection.
Rival group conflict.
Power struggles.
This gives the explanation broad scope.
For example, bullying could be interpreted as an attempt to maintain dominance, while aggression at work could be interpreted as an attempt to protect status or access to resources.
However, applying the same explanation to many different behaviours may make it difficult to determine when the explanation is genuinely supported and when an adaptive function has simply been invented after observing the behaviour.
Strength: Biological and Environmental Factors Are Connected
Evolutionary explanations do not claim that aggression occurs without an environmental trigger.
The explanation involves:
An inherited behavioural tendency.
A situation involving competition, threat or possible infidelity.
An aggressive strategy that may have provided an advantage.
This creates a limited interaction between nature and environment:
Evolved tendency + relevant social situation → increased likelihood of aggression
For example, an inherited sensitivity to relationship threats would not produce jealousy unless a possible threat were perceived.
This is more balanced than claiming that aggressive behaviour is entirely caused by either biology or environment. It connects with the interaction between heredity and experience [Lesson 4: The nature-nurture debate].
Limitation: Evolutionary Explanations Are Difficult to Test
The evolutionary origins of human aggression cannot be observed directly.
Researchers cannot:
Observe the development of aggression across thousands of past generations.
Randomly assign humans to different evolutionary histories.
Directly manipulate ancestral selection pressures.
Establish that a modern behaviour was selected for a particular function.
Instead, researchers observe present-day behaviour and infer why it might have been adaptive.
This creates a problem of falsifiability. It may be difficult to identify evidence that would conclusively disprove the explanation.
For example:
If jealous aggression occurs, it may be explained as mate retention.
If it does not occur, restraint may be explained as avoiding the costs of aggression.
When almost any outcome can be given an adaptive explanation, the account risks becoming a story that fits the findings after the event.
The 2025 mark scheme recognises this criticism, including the argument that the evolutionary development of aggression cannot be directly observed and may rely on circular reasoning.
Limitation: Much of the Evidence Is Correlational
Research may identify a relationship between:
Jealousy and aggression.
Mate retention and violence.
Status and aggressive behaviour.
Competition and aggression.
However, a correlation does not establish an evolutionary cause.
For example, a relationship between jealousy and aggression could be explained by:
Learned beliefs about relationships.
Cultural expectations.
Personality.
Previous experiences of infidelity.
Alcohol use.
Social approval of controlling behaviour.
Existing relationship conflict.
Much research also relies on self-report, creating possible problems with:
Social desirability.
Dishonest answers.
Inaccurate memory.
Different interpretations of questions.
Reluctance to report abusive behaviour.
The November 2020 mark scheme identifies correlational evidence and reliance on self-report as limitations of evolutionary explanations.
Limitation: Cultural Differences
If aggression reflects a universal evolved tendency, broadly similar patterns might be expected across cultures.
However, rates, forms and acceptability of aggression vary between cultural and social environments.
Cultures differ in:
Attitudes towards violence.
Expectations within relationships.
Gender roles.
Responses to jealousy.
Child-rearing practices.
Laws and social sanctions.
Approval of competition or cooperation.
Cultural differences suggest that learning and social norms affect whether an aggressive tendency is expressed.
An evolutionary explanation may account for a broad vulnerability, but it does not fully explain why behaviour takes different forms across cultures.
Limitation: Outdated Assumptions About Relationships
Some evolutionary accounts are based on traditional assumptions that:
Males provide resources.
Females depend on male protection.
Males compete for access to females.
Females are passive recipients of male strategies.
Relationships are always heterosexual and reproductive.
These assumptions may not represent the diversity of modern relationships.
People differ in:
Gender.
Sexual orientation.
Economic independence.
Family structure.
Relationship goals.
Decisions about parenthood.
Distribution of resources and caregiving.
The 2025 mark scheme identifies the possible reliance on outdated ideas about men as providers and women as dependent as a limitation.
This does not automatically disprove evolutionary influence, but it limits explanations built around rigid gender roles.
Limitation: Biological Determinism
Evolutionary explanations may be criticised as biologically deterministic because they present aggression as the product of inherited behavioural tendencies selected across generations.
This may imply that individuals have limited control over:
Jealousy.
Rivalry.
Mate-retention behaviour.
Aggressive responses.
Attempts to establish dominance.
Such an interpretation may underestimate:
Conscious decision-making.
Self-control.
Moral responsibility.
Learning.
Social sanctions.
The possibility of behavioural change.
A better interpretation is that evolution may create a predisposition, while the person and their environment influence whether aggression is expressed.
This connects with the balance between biological causes and personal choice [Lesson 3: Free will and determinism].
Limitation: Reductionism
Evolutionary explanations may be considered reductionist because they explain complex aggression mainly through reproductive success.
This can reduce behaviours such as:
Domestic abuse.
Bullying.
Group violence.
Workplace aggression.
Controlling relationships.
to strategies for obtaining status, resources or genetic certainty.
This may overlook:
Individual beliefs.
Childhood experiences.
Social inequalities.
Reinforcement.
Frustration.
Group processes.
Media influences.
Relationship dynamics.
Reducing aggression to reproductive advantage produces a clear explanation but may not capture the full meaning or cause of the behaviour.
This issue can be developed using different levels of explanation in psychology [Lesson 5: Holism and reductionism].
Limitation: Socially Sensitive Implications
Evolutionary explanations of sexual jealousy and mate retention are socially sensitive.
They may reinforce harmful stereotypes such as:
Men are naturally controlling.
Male violence is unavoidable.
Women are passive or dependent.
Jealousy is proof of commitment.
Aggressive partners are merely acting on evolved instincts.
These interpretations could normalise or excuse coercion and domestic abuse.
The June 2025 examiner report noted that strong evaluations addressed the problematic legitimisation of domestic violence implied by the theory, alongside reductionism and determinism.
Psychologists must distinguish carefully between:
Explaining a possible origin of behaviour.
Excusing or approving that behaviour.
The issue links directly to the consequences of socially sensitive psychological research [Lesson 7: Social sensitivity].
Practical Value
Although the explanation has socially sensitive risks, it may also have practical value.
Understanding behaviours such as:
Vigilance.
Direct guarding.
Negative inducements.
Coercion.
Threats towards rivals.
may help people recognise escalating patterns of controlling behaviour within relationships.
The 2025 AQA mark scheme recognises that understanding mate-retention strategies may contribute to education and protection for people at risk of domestic abuse.
The practical value does not prove that the evolutionary explanation is correct, but it demonstrates that psychological explanations can have useful applications.
Comparison with the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis
The evolutionary explanation focuses on the adaptive function of aggression. Aggression resulting from blocked goals [Lesson 5: The frustration-aggression hypothesis] focuses on frustration as the immediate cause.
Evolutionary explanation | Frustration-aggression hypothesis |
Aggression may increase reproductive success | Aggression develops when a goal is blocked |
Focuses on competition, status and mate retention | Focuses on frustration and aggressive tension |
Explains why a tendency may have developed | Explains an immediate emotional response |
Emphasises inherited predispositions | Emphasises a situational trigger |
Can explain calculated mate-retention behaviour | Often explains reactive aggression |
The two explanations may sometimes operate together. A person could become frustrated because a rival threatens a valued resource, while evolutionary principles explain why defending the resource may be important.
Overall Evaluation
Evolutionary explanations provide a coherent account of recurring patterns in human aggression. Competition for resources, status and partners could have increased reproductive success, while sexual jealousy and mate-retention strategies may have reduced the risks associated with infidelity.
The explanation is supported by evidence connecting jealousy, guarding, coercion and status with aggression. It can also be applied to several forms of human conflict.
However, the evolutionary origins of behaviour cannot be observed directly. Much evidence is correlational or based on self-report, while cultural differences demonstrate the importance of learning and social norms. The explanation may also reinforce harmful gender stereotypes or appear to excuse controlling behaviour.
The most balanced conclusion is that evolution may have created broad aggressive predispositions, but social context, learning and conscious control strongly influence whether and how aggression is expressed.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Evolutionary explanation | An explanation proposing that behaviour developed because it increased survival or reproduction | Introduce the overall explanation of human aggression |
Natural selection | The process through which advantageous inherited characteristics become more common across generations | Explain how aggressive tendencies may have developed |
Adaptation | An inherited characteristic or behavioural tendency that increased reproductive success | Describe aggression as potentially advantageous |
Reproductive success | The extent to which an individual passes their genes to future generations | Explain the ultimate function of adaptive aggression |
Competition | A struggle between individuals for limited resources, status or partners | Apply evolutionary principles to rivalries |
Resource | Something valuable and limited, such as food, territory, status or access to a partner | Explain why competition may produce aggression |
Status | A person’s position within a social hierarchy | Explain dominance-related aggression |
Dominance | Having power or a high position relative to others | Apply the explanation to bullying or group competition |
Sexual jealousy | An emotional response to a perceived threat to a sexual or romantic relationship | Explain aggression towards a partner or rival |
Paternity uncertainty | Uncertainty experienced by a male about whether offspring are genetically his | Explain the proposed evolutionary basis of male sexual jealousy |
Cuckoldry | A male investing in offspring who are not genetically his following a partner’s infidelity | Explain why mate-retention strategies may have been selected |
Genetic certainty | Confidence that parental investment is directed towards genetically related offspring | State the proposed benefit of preventing infidelity |
Mate retention | Behaviour intended to prevent a partner leaving or becoming involved with a rival | Introduce vigilance, guarding and negative inducements |
Vigilance | Monitoring a partner’s activities or interactions | Apply the theory to checking or surveillance |
Direct guarding | Attempting to prevent a partner from interacting with potential rivals | Apply the theory to accompanying or restricting a partner |
Negative inducement | A harmful strategy, such as threats or coercion, intended to prevent a partner leaving | Explain aggressive mate-retention behaviour |
Rival | A person perceived as competing for a resource, status or partner | Identify the target of evolutionary aggression |
Falsifiability | The principle that a scientific explanation must be capable of being disproved | Evaluate whether evolutionary accounts can be tested |
Correlation | A relationship between two co-variables | Explain why evidence does not establish evolutionary causation |
Biological determinism | The view that behaviour is governed by inherited biological influences | Evaluate the limited role given to choice |
Reductionism | Explaining complex behaviour through a small number of basic factors | Evaluate the focus on reproductive success |
Social sensitivity | The possibility that research may have consequences for people or social groups | Discuss stereotypes and the possible normalisation of abuse |
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Keep the Focus on Human Aggression
Examiner hint: Answer the exact question rather than giving a general account of evolution.
In June 2025, some students overlooked the instruction to discuss human aggression and instead described examples from the animal kingdom. Responses organised around human mating and reproductive success tended to perform better.
For a short outline, prioritise:
Reproductive success.
Competition for resources or status.
Sexual jealousy.
Mate retention.
Genetic certainty.
Animal parallels may be useful in evaluation, but they should not replace an explanation of human aggression.
Start with the Evolutionary Function
Examiner hint: Do not merely describe controlling or aggressive behaviour. Explain how it could affect reproductive success.
A strong chain is:
Rival threatens relationship → sexual jealousy → mate-retention strategy → reduced opportunity for infidelity → increased genetic certainty
Without the final evolutionary function, the answer risks becoming a description of jealousy rather than an evolutionary explanation.
Use the Scenario Precisely
Examiner hint: Successful application requires explicit engagement with details from the stem.
The November 2020 examiner report noted that weaker application answers sometimes inserted names into an otherwise generic paragraph. Better responses used particular details from the scenario as evidence for specific concepts.
For example:
Checking communications → vigilance
Insisting on attending events → direct guarding
Anger towards a friend → sexual jealousy or rival-directed aggression
Displaying strength → dominance or status
Do Not Say Evolutionary Explanations Ignore Biology
Examiner hint: Evolutionary explanations are biological explanations because natural selection operates on inherited characteristics.
The November 2020 examiner report identified the claim that evolutionary explanations “ignore biology” as a fundamental misunderstanding.
A valid limitation would be that the explanation:
Underestimates learning or culture.
Is biologically deterministic.
Is difficult to test.
Reduces complex behaviour to reproductive success.
Develop Evaluation Rather Than Listing Labels
Examiner hint: Strong answers explain why a criticism matters.
Instead of writing:
The explanation is deterministic.
Develop the point:
The explanation is biologically deterministic because it presents aggression as an inherited strategy selected across generations. This may underestimate conscious control and could be interpreted as reducing responsibility for harmful behaviour.
The June 2025 report found that well-informed students could sustain critiques involving the legitimisation of domestic abuse, determinism and reductionism.
Separate Explanation from Justification
Examiner hint: Make clear that an adaptive function does not make aggression morally acceptable.
A useful sentence is:
Even if controlling behaviour once increased mate retention, this does not justify coercion or violence in modern relationships.
This distinction strengthens evaluation of socially sensitive implications.
Use Studies to Support an Argument
Do not simply list researchers.
A developed use of evidence might state:
Research connecting mate-retention strategies with partner-directed aggression supports the proposed relationship between sexual jealousy and aggression. However, such evidence is usually correlational, so it cannot demonstrate that an evolved mechanism caused the behaviour.
Interpret Short Evaluation Questions Correctly
A four-mark briefly evaluate question does not require a lengthy description of the explanation.
Use one or two developed points:
State the strength or limitation.
Explain it.
Link it directly to evolutionary aggression.
Reach a conclusion about the explanation.
There are no lesson-specific calculations. When data are provided, describe the relationship accurately and avoid claiming that a correlation proves an evolved cause.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake 1
Mistake: Describing animal territorial aggression instead of human aggression.
Why this is incorrect:
The AQA specification specifically requires evolutionary explanations of human aggression.
How to improve:
Focus on human reproductive success, status, resources, sexual jealousy and mate retention.
Mistake 2
Mistake: Saying aggression is adaptive because it helps someone win a fight.
Why this is incomplete:
Winning is only evolutionarily relevant if it increases survival or reproductive success.
How to improve:
Complete the chain by explaining how victory improves access to resources, status or partners.
Mistake 3
Mistake: Treating reproductive success as general success in life.
Why this is incorrect:
Reproductive success specifically concerns passing genes to future generations.
How to improve:
Define reproductive success before using it in an explanation.
Mistake 4
Mistake: Describing jealousy without explaining its evolutionary function.
Why this is incomplete:
Jealousy becomes part of an evolutionary explanation only when it is connected with mate retention, infidelity or genetic certainty.
How to improve:
Use the sequence:
Rival → sexual jealousy → mate retention → reduced infidelity → genetic certainty
Mistake 5
Mistake: Confusing vigilance and direct guarding.
Why this is incorrect:
Vigilance involves monitoring a partner. Direct guarding involves restricting or preventing contact with rivals.
How to improve:
Remember:
Vigilance: checking.
Direct guarding: restricting access.
Mistake 6
Mistake: Saying aggression is acceptable because it is natural.
Why this is incorrect:
A behaviour’s possible evolutionary origin does not determine its moral or legal acceptability.
How to improve:
Distinguish explanation from justification explicitly.
Mistake 7
Mistake: Claiming all men are naturally aggressive.
Why this is incorrect:
Evolutionary explanations concern possible inherited tendencies and average patterns, not inevitable behaviour in every individual.
How to improve:
Use probability language such as “may increase the likelihood” or “could create a predisposition”.
Mistake 8
Mistake: Saying evolutionary explanations ignore biology.
Why this is incorrect:
Natural selection requires inherited variation, so the explanation is fundamentally biological.
How to improve:
Criticise the explanation for overlooking social or cultural influences instead.
Mistake 9
Mistake: Using evidence from jealousy research as proof of evolution.
Why this is incorrect:
A present-day correlation cannot demonstrate why a behaviour originally developed.
How to improve:
State that the evidence is consistent with the theory but does not establish evolutionary causation.
Mistake 10
Mistake: Writing that cultural variation automatically disproves evolution.
Why this is too absolute:
An inherited tendency may be expressed differently in different environments.
How to improve:
Explain that cultural variation limits a purely evolutionary account and supports an interaction between biology and learning.
Mistake 11
Mistake: Treating ethological and evolutionary explanations as identical.
Why this is incorrect:
Ethology explains how an innate response is released. Evolution explains why a tendency may have been selected.
How to improve:
Remember:
Ethology asks how. Evolution asks why.
Mistake 12
Mistake: Using “reductionist”, “deterministic” or “socially sensitive” without explanation.
Why this is incomplete:
Evaluation marks reward developed reasoning rather than labels.
How to improve:
Explain what the problem is, why it matters and how it affects the explanation’s validity or implications.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
What is meant by reproductive success? [1 mark]
Question 2
Briefly outline one way in which aggression may have increased human reproductive success. [2 marks]
Question 3
Explain how competition for status and resources may lead to aggressive behaviour according to an evolutionary explanation. [4 marks]
Question 4
Jared becomes angry when his partner speaks to an old friend. He repeatedly checks who has contacted his partner and insists on accompanying them whenever the friend is present.
Use your knowledge of evolutionary explanations of aggression to explain Jared’s behaviour. [4 marks]
Question 5
A researcher asks people in relationships whether they have used three behaviours when they believed that a rival was interested in their partner.
Behaviour | Percentage reporting the behaviour |
Checked their partner’s communications | $64%$ |
Accompanied their partner to social events | $49%$ |
Threatened the perceived rival | $21%$ |
Describe one pattern in the results and explain how the findings could be interpreted using evolutionary theory. [4 marks]
Question 6
Explain one difference between the ethological and evolutionary explanations of aggression. [4 marks]
Question 7
A psychologist claims:
“Because jealousy-related aggression may have had an evolutionary advantage, people cannot be held responsible for it.”
Explain one problem with this claim. [3 marks]
Question 8
Outline one strength and one limitation of evolutionary explanations of aggression. [6 marks]
Question 9
Discuss evolutionary explanations of human aggression. [16 marks]
Answers and Mark Scheme
Question 1
Answer: The extent to which an individual passes their genes to future generations through surviving offspring. [1 mark]
Question 2
Award one mark for identifying an appropriate advantage and one mark for linking it to reproductive success.
Possible answers include:
Aggression may help a person obtain or defend resources, improving their ability to support offspring.
Aggression may help establish high status, increasing attractiveness to potential partners.
Aggression may deter sexual rivals and help retain a partner.
Aggressive mate-retention strategies may reduce infidelity and increase genetic certainty.
Maximum: 2 marks
Question 3
Award one mark for each relevant point, up to four marks:
Resources and high-status positions are limited.
Individuals may therefore compete with rivals.
Aggression may intimidate or remove competitors.
Aggression may allow an individual to acquire or defend resources.
Demonstrating dominance may increase status.
Resources and status may make the individual more attractive as a partner.
Greater access to partners or resources may increase reproductive success.
Tendencies producing this advantage may become more common across generations.
A full-mark answer must link competition with reproductive success.
Question 4
Award up to four marks for clear and effective application:
Jared may perceive the old friend as a sexual rival.
This perceived threat may produce sexual jealousy.
Checking contacts is an example of vigilance.
Insisting on attending meetings is an example of direct guarding.
These are mate-retention strategies.
They may reduce opportunities for infidelity.
Reducing infidelity may increase genetic certainty.
The explanation describes a possible function and does not justify Jared’s controlling behaviour.
Do not award full marks for simply stating that Jared is jealous.
Question 5
Award up to two marks for describing the results:
Checking communications is the most frequently reported behaviour.
Threatening the rival is the least frequently reported behaviour.
Monitoring is more common than direct aggression.
$64%$ reported checking communications, compared with $21%$ who threatened a rival.
Award up to two marks for evolutionary interpretation:
Checking communications may be interpreted as vigilance.
Attending events may be interpreted as direct guarding.
Threatening a rival may be a more aggressive mate-retention strategy.
These behaviours may function to reduce opportunities for infidelity.
Reduced infidelity may increase genetic certainty.
Do not credit a claim that the results prove the behaviours evolved. The data are self-reported and correlational.
Question 6
Award marks for a clearly developed distinction.
Possible answer:
The ethological explanation focuses on the immediate mechanism that releases aggression. A sign stimulus activates an inherited neural circuit and produces a fixed action pattern. In contrast, the evolutionary explanation focuses on the function of aggression, proposing that behaviours involving competition or mate retention developed because they increased reproductive success.
For four marks, the answer should accurately describe both explanations and make the contrast explicit.
Question 7
Possible content:
Evolutionary influence does not make a behaviour inevitable.
Humans can exercise self-control and respond differently to jealousy.
Social learning, culture and consequences also affect behaviour.
Explaining a possible evolutionary origin does not justify the behaviour.
The claim is biologically deterministic.
It could reduce perceived responsibility for harmful or abusive behaviour.
Such a conclusion is socially sensitive and may normalise aggression.
Award:
One mark for identifying a relevant problem.
One mark for explaining it.
One mark for linking it to the claim about responsibility.
Question 8
Award up to three marks for one developed strength and up to three marks for one developed limitation.
Possible strength:
Evolutionary explanations are supported by research linking sexual jealousy and mate-retention strategies with aggression. Behaviours such as vigilance, direct guarding and threats towards rivals fit the prediction that aggression may reduce infidelity. This supports the proposed connection between relationship threats and aggressive mate retention.
Possible limitation:
The explanation is difficult to test directly because the selection of aggressive behaviour occurred across past generations. Researchers infer evolutionary functions from modern behaviour rather than observing the process. This makes the explanation difficult to falsify because different outcomes can be given an adaptive interpretation.
Other creditworthy limitations include:
Correlational or self-report evidence.
Cultural differences.
Outdated gender assumptions.
Biological determinism.
Reductionism.
Socially sensitive implications.
Problems generalising from animals.
Comparison with social learning explanations.
Question 9
A high-level answer should contain accurate knowledge, developed evaluation and a clear conclusion.
Indicative AO1 content:
Natural selection.
Adaptation.
Reproductive success.
Competition for resources.
Status and dominance.
Male-male rivalry.
Strength and resource acquisition.
Sexual jealousy.
Paternity uncertainty.
Cuckoldry.
Genetic certainty.
Mate-retention strategies.
Vigilance.
Direct guarding.
Negative inducements.
Aggression towards rivals.
Indicative AO3 content:
Supporting research into mate retention, status and partner aggression.
Consistency with recurring patterns of rivalry and jealousy.
Ability to explain several types of aggression.
Difficulty directly testing evolutionary origins.
Problems of falsifiability and circular reasoning.
Correlational and self-report evidence.
Cultural differences.
Outdated assumptions about gender and relationships.
Biological determinism.
Reductionism.
Socially sensitive implications.
Risk of normalising domestic abuse.
Practical value in recognising controlling behaviour.
Comparison with ethological, frustration-based or social learning explanations.
Interaction between inherited predisposition and social environment.
Thirteen to sixteen marks: Knowledge is accurate and generally detailed. Discussion is thorough, focused and effective. Evaluation points are developed, evidence is used to support arguments, and specialist terminology is precise.
Nine to twelve marks: Knowledge is mostly accurate and discussion is mostly effective. Some arguments may lack development or the answer may occasionally lose focus.
Five to eight marks: Some relevant knowledge is present, but the response is mainly descriptive. Evaluation is limited, generic or only partly connected to the explanation.
One to four marks: Knowledge is very limited or confused. Discussion is absent, inaccurate or poorly focused.
Comments