Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 28, Issue 6 , Pages 430-438 , November 2007

Nepotistic nosiness: inclusive fitness and vigilance of kin members' romantic relationships

  • Jason Faulkner
  • ,
  • Mark Schaller

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC, Canada V6T 1Z4.

Received 15 August 2006 ,Accepted 26 June 2007.

References 

  1. Baber RE. Some mate selection standards of college students and their parents. Journal of Social Hygiene. 1936;22:115–125
  2. Brown DE. Human universals. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1991;
  3. Burnstein E, Crandall C, Kitayama S. Some neo-Darwinian decision rules for altruism: Weighing cues for inclusive fitness as a function of the biological importance of the decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1994;67:773–789
  4. Buss DM. Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1989;12:1–49
  5. Buunk BP, Djikstra P, Fetchenhauer D, Kenrick DT. Age and gender differences in mate selection criteria for various involvement levels. Personal Relationships. 2002;9:271–278
  6. Daly M, Wilson M. Homicide. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter; 1988;
  7. DeBruine LM. Resemblance to self increases the appeal of child faces to both men and women. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2004;25:142–154
  8. DeBruine LM. Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: Context-specific effects of facial resemblance. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B. 2005;272:919–922
  9. Driskoll R, Davis K, Lipetz M. Parental inference and romantic love: The Romeo and Juliet effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1972;24:1–10
  10. Essock-Vitale SM, McGuire M. Predictions derived from the theories of kin selection and reciprocation assessed by anthropological data. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1980;1:233–243
  11. Essock-Vitale SM, McGuire MT. Women's lives viewed from an evolutionary perspective: II. Patterns of helping. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1985;6:155–173
  12. Fessler DMT, Navarrete CD. Third-party attitudes toward incest: Evidence for Westermarck's hypothesis. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2004;25:277–294
  13. Gangestad SW, Haselton MG, Buss DM. Evolutionary foundations of cultural variation: Evoked culture and mate preferences. Psychological Inquiry. 2006;17:75–95
  14. Gangestad SW, Simpson JA. The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2001;23:573–644
  15. Haselton MG, Buss DM. Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000;78:81–91
  16. Haselton MG, Nettle D. The paranoid optimist: An integrative evolutionary model of cognitive biases. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2006;10:47–66
  17. Kenrick DT, Sadalla EK, Groth G, Trost MR. Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: Qualifying the parental investment model. Journal of Personality. 1990;58:97–116
  18. Korchmaros JD, Kenny DA. Emotional closeness as a mediator of the effect of genetic relatedness on altruism. Psychological Science. 2001;12:262–265
  19. Laham SM, Gonsalkorale K, von Hippel W. Darwinian grandparenting: Preferential investment in more certain kin. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2005;31:63–72
  20. Leach E. Virgin birth. In: Proceedings of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 1966;p. 39–49
  21. Lieberman D, Tooby J, Cosmides L. Does morality have a biological basis? An empirical test of the factors governing moral sentiments regarding incest. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B. 2003;270:819–826
  22. Neyer FJ, Lang FR. Blood is thicker than water: Kinship orientation across adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2003;84:310–321
  23. Park JH, Schaller M. Does attitude similarity serve as a heuristic cue for kinship? Evidence of an implicit cognitive association. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2005;26:158–170
  24. Pollet TV. Genetic relatedness and sibling relationship characteristics in a modern society. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2007;28:176–185
  25. Salmon CA, Daly M. On the importance of kin relations to Canadian women and men. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1996;17:289–297
  26. Schaller M. Parasites, behavioral defense, and the social psychological mechanisms through which cultures are evoked. Psychological Inquiry. 2006;17:96–101
  27. Schaller M, Park JH, Kenrick DT. Human evolution and social cognition. In:  Dunbar RIM,  Barrett L editor. Oxford handbook of evolutionary psychology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2007;p. 491–504
  28. Sprecher S, Felmlee D. The influence of parents and friends on the quality and stability of romantic relationships: A three-wave longitudinal investigation. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1992;54:888–900
  29. Stewart-Williams S. Altruism among kin vs. non-kin: Effects of cost of help and reciprocal exchange. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2007;28:193–198
  30. Sundie JM, Cialdini RB, Griskevicius V, Kenrick DT. Evolutionary social influence. In:  Schaller M,  Simpson JA,  Kenrick DT editor. Evolution and social psychology. New York: Psychology Press; 2006;p. 287–316

 This research was supported by a Killam Predoctoral Fellowship awarded to Jason Faulkner and by a research grant awarded to Mark Schaller by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. We deeply appreciate the financial support.

PII: S1090-5138(07)00067-0

doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.06.001

Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 28, Issue 6 , Pages 430-438 , November 2007