Evolution & Human Behavior RSS feed: Articles in Press. 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//inpress?rss=yesElsevier Inc.en © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Evolution & Human Behavior1090-51382010-09-01 © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. healthpermissions@elsevier.comhttp://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513810000693/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Humans are an exceptionally intelligent species, and the selective pressures which may have shaped these advanced cognitive powers are therefore of interest. This study investigates the fitness consequences of pre-reproductive school performance in a Swedish population-based cohort of 5244 males and 4863 females born 1915-1929. School performance was measured at around age 10 using three variables: mean school marks, being promoted/held back in school, and recognised learning difficulties. Our primary outcomes were probability of ever marrying, total number of children and total number of grandchildren. In males (but not females), poorer school performance predicted fewer children and grandchildren. This was primarily mediated via probability of marriage; mortality and fertility within marriage were not important mediating pathways. The effect of school performance upon marriage in males was independent of early-life social and biological characteristics, including birth weight for gestational age, preterm birth, family composition, and family socioeconomic position. The effect of school performance upon the probability of marriage in males was, however, largely mediated by adult socioeconomic position. This suggests that in general sexual selection for cognitive abilities per se did not play a major role in either males or females in this cohort. Adult socioeconomic position did not, however, fully explain the marriage disadvantage in males or (at marginal significance) females with particularly poor school performance. We conclude that school performance can affect long-term reproductive success. In this population, however, the effect is confined to males and is largely mediated by the increased probability of marriage which comes with their greater socioeconomic success.The effect of school performance upon marriage and long-term reproductive success in 10,000 Swedish males and females born 1915–1929 - Corrected ProofAnna Goodman, Ilona Koupil10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.06.002Evolution & Human Behavior (2010)2010-09-01Evolution & Human Behavior2010-09-01ORIGINAL ARTICLEhttp://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513810000681/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: A substantial body of work demonstrates that women's mate preferences change across the ovulatory cycle. When fertile in their cycles, women are especially attracted to masculine features (e.g., faces, voices, bodies), socially dominant behavior, and male scents associated with body symmetry and social dominance. Women may also find intelligent men particularly attractive when fertile, though findings are mixed. Related research shows that, on average, romantically-involved women report stronger sexual attraction to men other than their pair-bond partners, but not partners, when fertile, and especially when their partners lack features fertile women prefer (e.g., symmetry). In the current study, we examined whether women's patterns of sexual interests across the cycle are similarly moderated by partners' facial masculinity, facial attractiveness, and intelligence. Results revealed predicted effects of male partners’ facial masculinity but none for partners’ intelligence. Facial attractiveness may have effects, but we find no evidence that it does so independently of facial masculinity.Men's facial masculinity predicts changes in their female partners' sexual interests across the ovulatory cycle, whereas men's intelligence does not - Corrected ProofSteven W. Gangestad, Randy Thornhill, Christine E. Garver-Apgar10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.06.001Evolution & Human Behavior (2010)2010-08-30Evolution & Human Behavior2010-08-30ORIGINAL ARTICLEhttp://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS109051381000070X/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Deviations from perfect symmetry in paired traits of otherwise bilateral symmetrical organisms are thought to reflect developmental quality, especially the ability to resist environmental perturbations early in ontogeny. It is well established that poor environmental conditions increase developmental instability (DI) as reflected by measurements of fluctuating asymmetry. In humans, there is evidence that DI relates to numerous fitness components, and studies have found that perceptions of facial attractiveness for example are positively correlated with measurements of facial symmetry. Here we report the data on measurements of facial symmetry of 503 Turkish senior year high school students aged 17 to 18 years, of whom 133 males and 117 females were recruited from a slum district of Şentepe in Ankara (Group 1), and 131 males and 122 females from three high schools in wealthy central urban areas (Group 2). Digital images were used to assess the degree of facial asymmetry as measured from seven paired traits and calculated as a composite score. Facial asymmetry of participants in Group 1 (slum district) was significantly higher than that of participants in Group 2 (urban areas). Moreover, males in Group 1 were found to have higher facial asymmetry than females, while no sex difference was observed in Group 2. We conclude that poor living conditions have an influence on DI in humans, which manifests itself in the form of facial asymmetry, and that this might be particularly true for males.Facial symmetry in young girls and boys from a slum and a control area of Ankara, Turkey - Corrected ProofBariş Özener, Bernhard Fink10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.06.003Evolution & Human Behavior (2010)2010-08-30Evolution & Human Behavior2010-08-30ORIGINAL ARTICLEhttp://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513810000498/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: Research shows that women more positively evaluate targets evincing cues of high male genetic quality as a function of fertility across the menstrual cycle. Recently, a link between fertility and anti-black race bias has also been documented, an effect that is argued to serve a sexual coercion avoidance function. Here we demonstrate that both effects can be operative toward the same male target depending on inter-individual differences in race perception of the target. Across two studies, we found that the intention to vote for Barack Obama in the months preceding the 2008 election increased as a function of conception risk across the menstrual cycle. In the second study, we found that the effect is greatest among women who perceived him as more white than black, whereas the opposite was true among women who perceived him as mostly black. Our findings tie together separate conceptual research threads on positive and negative evaluations of men by women across the menstrual cycle — integrating them to shed light on women's voting preferences.Fertility and race perception predict voter preference for Barack Obama - Corrected ProofCarlos David Navarrete, Melissa M. McDonald, Michael L. Mott, Joseph Cesario, Robert Sapolsky10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.05.002Evolution & Human Behavior (2010)2010-07-23Evolution & Human Behavior2010-07-23ORIGINAL ARTICLEhttp://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513810000450/abstract?rss=yesAt its best, philosophy provides the theories that empirical scientists test and critically evaluates the results of their work: it is the conceptual wing of the natural sciences. At its worst, it has a reputation for getting itself tangled up in language games, introducing concepts and arguments that serve more to muddle than to clarify. In its finer moments, Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini's (hereafter, FPP) new book, What Darwin Got Wrong, is an example of the first kind of philosophy (). It provides the kind of cautionary note that seems all the rage amongst philosophers writing about “Darwinism” at the moment: a scolding to those of us who are perceived as running amok in the playground of adaptationist explanation (e.g., ). While I happen to find most of these scoldings a bit tiresome—how often do we have to be reminded that all traits of organisms aren't adaptations, or that hypotheses should be evaluated against alternatives?—this book doesn't break any new ground in that regard. Where it really stands out is in advancing a rather startling claim: that the theory of natural selection is, in a nutshell, wrong.Corrected ProofH. Clark Barrett10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.04.003Evolution & Human Behavior (2010)2010-07-09Evolution & Human Behavior2010-07-09BOOK REVIEWhttp://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513810000486/abstract?rss=yesAbstract: The search for a potential partner has been aided over recent years by the widespread use of online dating sites and this process of relationship formation has conveniently presented an ideal opportunity for researchers to analyze human mating desires and to compare evolutionary and social constructivist based hypotheses. One such aspect of human mating behaviour yet to be thoroughly explored using access to online dating advertisements is the idealized age desired by each sex when considering a possible relationship. This study accessed minimum (youngest age considered) and maximum (oldest age considered) age preferences from 14 separate cultures and two religious groups from both sexes at ages 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, and 50 years. The results showed that overall there was a growing disparity between males own age and preferred age of partner as males themselves aged (as indicated by greater effect sizes with advertisers age), with females showing a pattern for preferences around their own age or older. Females did not express an age preference for males younger than male's age preferences for females at any advertiser's age. On only three occasions were there no age differences between the sexes in their desire to initiate a relationship with the opposite sex. The results were clearly concurrent with earlier findings supportive of evolutionary or adaptationist interpretations. Neither a random pattern of age preferences more consistent with an arbitrary norms prediction, nor clear evidence for toy boy proclivities in females or males was found. Future studies utilizing the methodology used in this study to examine other human mating decision making processes are proposed.Universal sex differences in online advertisers age preferences: comparing data from 14 cultures and 2 religious groups - Corrected ProofMichael J. Dunn, Stacey Brinton, Lara Clark10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.05.001Evolution & Human Behavior (2010)2010-07-09Evolution & Human Behavior2010-07-09ORIGINAL ARTICLEhttp://www.ehbonline.org/article/PIIS1090513809001330/abstract?rss=yesRichard Dawkins's The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution is not only an elegant exposition of the evidence for the scientific fact of evolution, but also a clear and creative explanation of the theory, and the stumbling blocks to its proper understanding. Theory should not be confused with hypothesis, and Dawkins is adamant about referring to evolution as a fact. We agree with him. When scientists and evolutionary scholars refer to “evolutionary theory” among themselves, there is no need to explain that a scientific theory is a framework that describes and predicts processes in the physical world based on mutually supportive, empirical evidence. Outside of scientific circles, however, scientists should be cautious when using the term theory, because antiscientific interests are eager to confuse theory with guess. There is more than enough evidence to cement evolution as a fact — more evidence than there is for other commonly accepted facts. Thus, it is logical to refer to evolution as both a scientific theory and an uncontestable fact. Dawkins plays wordsmith by borrowing the mathematical term theorem, to coin “theorum.” He suggests that scientists might use “theorum” in lieu of the more pernicious “theory” when referring to scientific laws and facts that no rational individual would deny, such as the heliocentric theory of the solar system, the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution.Corrected ProofGregory Gorelik, Todd K. Shackelford10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.12.005Evolution & Human Behavior (2010)2010-02-24Evolution & Human Behavior2010-02-24BOOK REVIEW