Evolution & Human Behavior RSS feed: Current Issue. Evolution and Human Behavior is an interdisciplinary journal, presenting research reports and theory in which evolutionary perspectives are brought to bear on the study of human behavior. It is primarily a scientific journal, but submissions from scholars in the humanities are also encouraged. Papers reporting on theoretical and empirical work on other species will be welcome if their relevance to the human animal is apparent. http://www.ehbonline.org/?rss=yesElsevier Inc.en © 2010 Published by Elsevier Inc. Evolution & Human Behavior1090-5138311January 2010 © 2010 Published by Elsevier Inc. healthpermissions@elsevier.comhttp://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513809001202/abstract?rss=yes Margo Ings Wilson, Professor of PsychologyIn Memoriam: Margo Ings WilsonSteven J.C. Gaulin, Daniel M.T. Fessler10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.11.001Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2010-01-01Evolution & Human Behavior2010-01-01311S1090-5138(09)X0007-316http://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513809000890/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Human fathers face paternity uncertainty and are expected to use cues of relatedness to adjust their investment. So far, the main cue hypothesised to account for paternity assessment is facial phenotypic resemblance between a father and his child. However, previous studies showing a discriminative paternal investment either relied on fathers' perceptions of resemblance (which differs from actual resemblance, as perceived resemblance could be socially biased), or manipulated facial resemblance. In this study, we investigate in a real-life situation, whether (1) the perception of child facial resemblance and (2) the likelihood of parental investment were predicted by actual facial resemblance to self, for both parents. The actual facial resemblance of 79 French children was quantified by testing external judges. Data on ascription of resemblance and parental investment were collected in private for each parent. First, ascription of facial resemblance was found to be consistent between the two parents and to match actual resemblance to the father. Second, emotional closeness as reported by fathers, but not by mothers, was found to be predicted by actual facial resemblance to self. This suggests that paternity uncertainty has favored the use of facial phenotype matching in fathers.Are parents' perceptions of offspring facial resemblance consistent with actual resemblance? Effects on parental investmentAlexandra Alvergne, Charlotte Faurie, Michel Raymond10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.09.002Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2009-11-19Evolution & Human Behavior2009-11-19311S1090-5138(09)X0007-3Original Articles715http://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513809000531/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Neonatal features in the newborn are thought to trigger parental care, the most fundamental prosocial behaviour. The underlying mechanisms that release parental care have not yet been resolved. Here we report sex differences in the ability to discriminate cues to cuteness despite equivalence in the capability to discriminate age and facial expression. These differences become apparent in a task where adults were asked to choose the cuter of two babies. While women could reliably choose the cuter infant, men had more difficulty in doing so. When showing the exact same face pairs but asking to choose the younger or the happier baby, there was no sex difference. These results suggest that the sex difference in the ability to discriminate cues to cuteness in infants underlies female-specific emotive responses. We argue that this reactivity expressed by women evolved to ensure that a female allocates her caretaking resources to her youngest offspring while it needs mothering care.Female and male responses to cuteness, age and emotion in infant facesJanek S. Lobmaier, Reiner Sprengelmeyer, Ben Wiffen, David I. Perrett10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.05.004Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2009-08-06Evolution & Human Behavior2009-08-06311S1090-5138(09)X0007-3Original Articles1621http://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513809000592/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Evidence across the social and behavioral sciences points to psychological mechanisms that facilitate the formation and maintenance of interpersonal commitment. In addition, evolutionary simulation studies suggest that a tendency for increased, seemingly irrational commitment is an important trait of successful exchange strategies. However, empirical research that tests corresponding psychological mechanisms is still largely lacking. Here an experimental test is proposed for one such mechanism, termed the commitment bias, which is hypothesized to increase people's commitment to existing partners beyond instrumental reasons. To exclude one alternative explanation, the commitment bias is distinguished from uncertainty reduction. Results from a cross-culturally replicated laboratory experiment (USA, China, and the Netherlands) provide support for the argument but also point to the importance of culture as an alternative or mediating factor.Commitment bias: mistaken partner selection or ancient wisdom?István H. Back10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.06.006Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2009-09-10Evolution & Human Behavior2009-09-10311S1090-5138(09)X0007-3Original Articles2228http://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513809000610/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Previous mate preference studies indicate that people prefer partners whose personalities are extremely kind and trustworthy, but relatively nondominant. This conclusion, however, is based on research that leaves unclear whether these traits describe the behavior a partner directs toward oneself, toward other classes of people or both. Because the fitness consequences of partners' behaviors likely differed depending on the classes of individuals toward whom behaviors were directed, we predicted that mate preferences for personality traits would change depending on the specific targets of a partner's behavioral acts. Consistent with this, two experiments demonstrated that people prefer partners who are extremely kind and trustworthy when considering behaviors directed toward themselves or their friends/family, but shift their preferences to much lower levels of these traits when considering behaviors directed toward other classes of individuals. In addition, both sexes preferred partners who direct higher levels of dominance toward members of the partner's own sex than toward any other behavioral target category, with women preferring levels of dominance toward other men as high as — or higher than — levels of kindness and trustworthiness. When asked to rate traits for which the behavioral target was left unspecified, furthermore, preferences were very similar to self-directed preferences, suggesting that previous trait-rating studies have not measured preferences for partners' behaviors directed toward people other than oneself. These findings may provide a basic contribution to the mate preference literature via their demonstration that ideal standards for romantic partners are importantly qualified by the targets of behavioral acts.Kind toward whom? Mate preferences for personality traits are target specificAaron W. Lukaszewski, James R. Roney10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.06.008Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2009-09-09Evolution & Human Behavior2009-09-09311S1090-5138(09)X0007-3Original Articles2938http://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513809000634/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Evidence from the anthropological record indicates that in most human societies, parents control the mating access to their offspring. Based on these data, a model of sexual selection has been recently proposed, whereby along with female and male choice, parental choice constitutes a significant sexual selection force in our species. This model was found to provide a good account for the mating patterns which are typical of foraging societies. By employing data from the Standard Cross Cultural Sample, the present study aims at examining whether this model can also account for the mating patterns typical of agricultural and pastoral societies. In addition, comparisons between different society types are made and two model-derived hypotheses are tested. First, it is hypothesised that parents have more control over their offspring's mate choices in non-foraging societies. Second, it is hypothesised that male parents exert greater decision making power in agropastoral societies than in hunting and gathering ones. Both hypotheses are supported by the results presented here. The evolutionary implications of these findings are also explored.Sexual selection under parental choice in agropastoral societiesMenelaos Apostolou10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.06.010Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2009-09-07Evolution & Human Behavior2009-09-07311S1090-5138(09)X0007-3Original Articles3947http://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS109051380900066X/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: It is clear that genes at the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) are involved in mate preferences in a range of species, including humans. However, many questions remain regarding the MHC's exact influence on mate preference in humans. Some research suggests that genetic dissimilarity and individual genetic diversity (heterozygosity) at the MHC influence mate preferences, but the evidence is often inconsistent across studies. In addition, it is not known whether apparent preferences for MHC dissimilarity are specific to the MHC or reflect a more general preference for genome-wide dissimilarity, and whether MHC-related preferences are dependent on the context of mate choice (e.g., when choosing a short-term and long-term partner). Here, we investigated whether preferences for genetic dissimilarity are specific to the MHC and also whether preferences for genetic dissimilarity and diversity are context dependent. Genetic dissimilarity (number of alleles shared) influenced male, but not female, partner preferences, with males showing a preference for the faces of MHC-dissimilar females in both mating contexts. Genetic diversity [heterozygosity (H) and standardized mean (d2)] influenced both male and female preferences, regardless of mating context. Females preferred males with greater diversity at MHC loci (H) and males preferred females with greater diversity at non-MHC loci (d2) in both contexts. Importantly, these findings provide further support for a special role of the MHC in human sexual selection and suggest that male and female mate preferences may work together to potentially enhance both male and female reproductive success by increasing genetic diversity in offspring.Genetic dissimilarity, genetic diversity, and mate preferences in humansHanne. C. Lie, Leigh W. Simmons, Gillian Rhodes10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.07.001Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2009-10-26Evolution & Human Behavior2009-10-26311S1090-5138(09)X0007-3Original Articles4858http://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513809000816/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Evolutionary explanations of low fertility in modern affluent societies commonly state that low fertility is the outcome of high parental investments in the quality of their children. Although the empirical evidence that modern parents do face a quantity–quality trade-off is strong, two issues that are relevant from an evolutionary perspective have not received much attention. First, sex differences in the proximate aspects of quality have been largely ignored. Second, the relationship between the quantity of children and their reproductive success in contemporary low-fertility societies remains unclear. In this article, we study the quantity–quality trade-off as a trade-off between the number of children and the mate value and reproductive success of those children. We examine the trade-off in two steps. First, a lower number of children is expected to increase the mate value of these children. Second, greater mate value is expected to lead to greater reproductive success. Using sex-specific indicators of mate value, we test these hypotheses in a representative sample of the Dutch population aged 55–85 in 1992 (n=3229). This sample contains information on three successive generations in which the middle generation has completed fertility. We find support for the first hypothesis, but only partial support for the second hypothesis. A higher number of children is traded off against the mate value of the children, but not against their reproductive success. We conclude that the conditions under which the quantity of children is traded off against their reproductive success depend on the social environment.Low fertility in contemporary humans and the mate value of their children: sex-specific effects on social status indicatorsRalf Kaptijn, Fleur Thomese, Theo G. van Tilburg, Aart C. Liefbroer, Dorly J.H. Deeg10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.07.007Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2009-10-23Evolution & Human Behavior2009-10-23311S1090-5138(09)X0007-3Original Articles5968http://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513809000907/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Because women's preferences for male masculinity reflect tradeoffs between the benefits of greater genetic health and the costs of lower paternal investment, variables that affect the importance of these costs and benefits also affect masculinity preferences. Concern about disease and pathogens may be one such variable. Here we show that disgust sensitivity in the pathogen domain is positively correlated with facial masculinity preferences, but disgust sensitivity in the moral and sexual domains is not. Our findings present novel evidence that systematic variation in women's preferences for masculine men reflects factors that influence how women resolve the tradeoff between the benefits and costs associated with choosing a masculine partner.Women's preferences for masculinity in male faces are predicted by pathogen disgust, but not by moral or sexual disgustLisa M. DeBruine, Benedict C. Jones, Joshua M. Tybur, Debra Lieberman, Vladas Griskevicius10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.09.003Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2009-11-18Evolution & Human Behavior2009-11-18311S1090-5138(09)X0007-3Original Articles6974http://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS109051380900083X/abstract?rss=yesWhen we think of what behavior, if any, makes us distinctly human—of what do we think? One might be inclined to think of our ability to plan ahead or our complex language, religion, and culture. However, if we look at the most phylogenetically recent structure responsible for generating behavior, the cerebral cortex, we find that the vast majority of ours is dedicated to the interpretation of sensory information, the vast majority of which is dedicated to vision. Oddly, while we have books on the evolution of decision-making, language, religion, and culture, few books on the evolution of visual perception exist. The stated goal of The Vision Revolution is to explain the origin of select visual perception mechanisms.Neither evolution nor revolution—A review of The Vision RevolutionRussell Jackson10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.08.001Evolution & Human Behavior 31, 1 (2010)2009-09-11Evolution & Human Behavior2009-09-11311S1090-5138(09)X0007-3Book Review7577