Slide 1

Aspects of Evolutionary PsychologyHistory of Systems PsychologyPSY401Tiffany Jubb, Joe Milillo, Jen Mislinski, and Cesar Monzon Evolutionary PsychologyEvolutionary Psychology (EP) is a psychology based upon evolutionary biology. It studies behavior as a product of psychological mechanisms (information-processing mechanisms), also called psychological adaptations (Confer, et al., 2010).

A mechanism, and the corresponding neural substrate, are selected by a species because it produces behavior that solves an adaptive problem; each psychological mechanism is specific to a particular adaptive problem, that is it is domain-specific rather than domain-general (Krill, Platek, Goetz, & Shackelford, 2007). This means that mechanisms are problem specific and no one can be generally applied to all problems confronted in life.

Based upon evolutionary biology, EP is seen by its advocates a meta-theory to psychology, building bridges between subdiciplines through conceptual integration (Ploger, 2010).

Joe MililloEvolutionary Psychology:ContributionsEmpirical studies have come to show that psychological traits are shaped by evolutionary forces just as physical traits have been (Krill, Platek, Goetz, & Shackelford, 2007). Just as physiological adaptations solved problems related to reproduction and survival, psychological adaptations do the same (Confer, et al., 2010).

Applying evolution theories and understanding to psychology has broadened our understanding of psychology. It allows for multiple analysis of difficult problems using the psychology of nature/nurture and biology. It aids in developing theories about behavior and social and cognitive functioning (Geary, 2006).

EP has helped advance some treatments of mental disorders, such as depression (Illardi et al., 2007). It also increases understanding of factors in sexual harassment and assault, and guides legal initiatives to preventing them (Confer, et al., 2010). Slowly, EP is beginning to be incorporated in many sub-fields of psychology (Fitzgerald & Whitaker, 2010).

Joe MililloEvolutionary Psychology:LimitationsEven with its promising insights, evolutionary psychology does have its limitations. Limitations are both empirical phenomena that cannot yet be explained using EP, as well as current conceptual constraints. Examples of unexplained phenomena are homosexual orientation and suicide, both of which do not fit the reproduction and survival paradigm (Confer et al., 2010).

Conceptual constraints are a lack of detailed knowledge of natural selection pressures and an insufficiency in explaining cultural and individual differences. (Confer et. al, 2010).

These differences leave ample scope for further research to advance the field.Joe MililloEvolutionary Psychology andCognitive NeuroscienceAn integration of biological approaches and cognitive neuroscience with evolutionary psychology has brought about a new field of inquiry called evolutionary cognitive neuroscience (ECN) (Fitzgerald and Whitaker, 2010). Evolutionary psychology is able to describe mental functions, while cognitive neuroscience provides the knowledge of the structures involved (Krill, Platek, Goetz, & Shackelford, 2007).

ECN attempts to identify the neural mechanisms that have been formed due to selection pressures and allows for a model to guide empirical research on brain-behavior relationships. For example, studies have found links between facial attractions and the reward center in the prefrontal cortex (PFC), as well as other areas like the anterior cingulate cortex and amygdala (Krill, Platek, Goetz, & Shackelford, 2007).

Joe MililloEvolutionary Psychology: Altruism and EmpathyWhile most studies focus on aggression and mate-selection, other aspects of evolutionary psychology and neuroscience that garners some attention is altruism and empathy. In evolutionary theory, natural selection processes have developed these emotions to foster both social and individual survival and well-being (Decety & Batson, 2009).

Many psychopathologies are characterized by a lack of empathy. Various treatments, in one way or another, try to foster its development (Decety & Batson, 2009).

There is increasing evidence that the brain is wired for social connections. It is found that emotional connections are brought about by empathy which motivates people to make altruistic decisions, those that may create difficulty for an individual making the decision, but alleviates it for others (De Waal, 2008).

Joe MililloHis Brain/Her Brain:Gender DifferencesEvolutionary Psychology and Evolutionary Cognitive Neuroscience are deepening the understanding of gender differences which allows for a better understanding of mental and brain disorders (Cahill, 2009).

Neuroscience studies have found that there is no significant difference in emotional reactivity between men and women, but that men are better able at reappraisal of negative emotions, whereas women use more positive emotion to down-regulate negative emotions (McRae, Ochsner, Mauss, Gabrielle, & Gross, 2008).

Evolutionary Psychology research confirms that differences in attitudes toward sex and mate-choosing exist. A meta-analysis on gender differences studies between 1993 and 2007 found that most of these were small with the exceptions being pornography use and causal sex. Nations and ethnic groups that had great gender equality had smaller gender differences. Also, as could be expected, any differences in sexual behavior and attitudes decreased with age (Peterson & Hyde, 2010).

Joe MililloCommentaryEvolutionary Psychology is a growing subdisicipline, with much research focusing on gender differences in mating. SOme studies are coming up on other gender difference, but much is left open to speculation. While I feel that EP needs to be factored into any psychological theory and treatment, it is important not to get fatalistic about its findings. As successful treatments, epigenetics and neuroplasicity show we are not fated to just be instinctual animals that walk up-right. Certainly, Buss' presentation is founded on good research,even when he states that he has found some cultural universality, but I have read an article by him and his group that states many individual and cultural differences are still left unexplained (Confer, et al., 2010). So, based on the two points above, I think the Scientific American article was a bit unfounded and lop-sided. They state that EP is a sort of "pop sociobiology" which I found to be uninformed bias.

Joe MililloReferencesCahill, L. (2009). His brain, her brain. Special Editions, 20(3), 40-47. Confer, J. C., Easton, J. A., Fleischman, D. S., Goetz, C. D., Lewis, D. M. G., Perilloux, C., & Buss, D. M. (2010). Evolutionary psychology: Controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations. American Psychologist, 65(2), 110. De Waal, F. B. M. (2008). Putting the altruism back into altruism: The evolution of empathy. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 59, 279-300. Decety, J., & Batson, C. D. (2009). Empathy and morality: Integrating social and neuroscience approaches. The Moral Brain, 109-127. Fitzgerald, C. J., & Whitaker, M. B. (2010). Examining the acceptance of and resistance to evolutionary psychology. Evolutionary Psychology. Geary, D. C. (2006). Evolutionary developmental psychology: Current status and future directions. Developmental Review, 26(2), 113-119. Ilardi, S., Jacobson, J., Lehman, K., Stites, B., Karwoski, L., Stroupe, N., & Young, C. (2007). Therapeutic lifestyle change for depression: Results from a randomized controlled trial.Krill, A. L., Platek, S. M., Goetz, A. T., & Shackelford, T. K. (2007). Where evolutionary psychology meets cognitive neuroscience: A precs to evolutionary cognitive neuroscience. Evolutionary Psychology. McRae, K., Ochsner, K. N., Mauss, I. B., Gabrieli, J. J. D., & Gross, J. J. (2008). Gender differences in emotion regulation: An fMRI study of cognitive reappraisal. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 11(2), 143. Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 19932007. Psychological bulletin, 136(1), 21. Ploeger, A. (2010). Evolutionary psychology as a metatheory for the social sciences. Integral Review. Joe MililloPersonality and Your Parents

Humans choose mates based on attractiveness or some level of fitness(not just physical). The personality traits you inherited have been given to you through the process known as selection and evolution. (Nettle, 2006) Cesar MonzonPersonality EvolutionThere are many different personality evolution perspectives. One perspective involves a trade off of positive and negative aspects for each variation of behavior(Nettle, 2006). What purpose does your personality serve?Extroversion is related to number of sexual partners but at the same time results in an increase in risky activity with other individuals or the environment(Nettle, 2006).

Neuroticism has benefits such as an increase in speed of detecting threats as well as increasing competetativeness. The negatives of such a trait are obvious stress, anxiety and overall worse physical health(Nettle, 2006). Cesar MonzonPersonality EvolutionOpenness-related to artistic creativity which in turn attracts more mates. Prone to psychosis type disorders(Nettle, 2006).Conscientiousness- sticks to long term plans, delays gratification. Being overly conscientious can be obsessive lower overall fitness by reducing mating opportunities(Nettle, 2006). Agreeableness- Related to trust and cooperation with others, less exposure to violence and more harmony. Lack of agreeableness correlated with antisocial personality disorder(Nettle, 2006).

continuedCesar Monzon

Neuroticism and Your OffspringResearch by Rothen et al. (2009) has shown that levels of a personality trait (neuroticism) show an association with the offspring having a mood disorder.Parents being unipolar or bipolar is not associated with the offsprings levels of of personality traits (extraversion, psychoticism or neuroticism). (Rothen et al., 2009)Cesar Monzon

Obsession and Your OffspringSpecific characteristics of OCPD appear more often in the parents of children with OCD. The exact link has not been found(Calvo et al., 2009).

"hoarding, perfectionism and preoccupation with details" are all specific characteristics which appear more often in the parents of OCD children.(Calvo et al., 2009).

Cesar MonzonReferencesNettle, D. (2006). The evolution of personality variation in humans and other animals. American Psychologist, 61(6), 622-631.Rothen, S., Vandeleur, C.L., Lustenberger, Y., Jeanpretre, N., Ayer, E., Fornerod, D., . . . Gamma, F., (2009). Personality traits in children of parents with unipolar and bipolar mood disorders. Journal of Affective Disorders, (113), 133-141Calvo, R., Lazaro, L., Castro-Fornieles, J., Font, E., & Moreno, E. & Toro, J., (2009). Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder traits and personality dimensions in parents of children with obsessive-compulsive disorder. European Psychiatry, (24), 201-206.

Cesar MonzonWhat are men and women attracted to? (Campos, Otta & Siqueira, 2002) explored how men and women responded to personal advertisements in Brazil, also showing mate selection cross-culturally Campos, Otta & Siqueira, 2002 data source were personal ads taken from a daily Brazilian newspaper807 advertisements were selected for analysis (411 females, 396 males)

Jen MislinskiGender differences in mate selectionGender differences in mate selectionCampos, Otta, & Siqueira, 2002, found that:Younger women were preferred (by men) over older womenYounger = more fertileOlder men were preferred (by women) over younger menOlder = more successful, more resourcesJen Mislinski17Gender differences in mate selectionBuunk, Dijkstra, Fetchenhauer,& Kenrick, 2002 explored mate preferences in 5 relationship situationsMarriage, serious relationship, falling in love, casual sex, and sexual fantasies70 men, 67 women participated in the study (ranging in age groups of 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60s)Subjects were approached in public places and asked to participate, then given questionnaires Jen Mislinski18Gender differences in mate selectionBuunk, Dijkstra, Fetchenhauer,& Kenrick, 2002 found that: both sexes seek mates who are higher in mate value then they are themselves a mate for a sexual fantasy (compared with real mates) is usually more physically attractive men have a higher value placed on physical characteristics, and women on mate status and personality characteristics (similar to Campos, Otta, and Siqueira, 2002 findings)

Jen Mislinski19Gender differences in mate selectionIn a similar study, Todosijevic, Ljubinkovic, & Arancic, 2003 asked 127 Serbian college students to rate the desirability of 60 behavioral and personality traits of the opposite sexfound that men reported that they were more ready to tolerate traits such as fearfulness, self-pity, and aggressiveness in womenseriousness, independence, and enterprising were positively rated by women (they would prefer men with these traits)traits having to do with physical appearance were highly valued by men and traits having to do with strength were highly valued by womenJen Mislinski20Gender differences in mate selectionAll three of these studies suggest that evolutionary psychology may play a role in mate selection between the sexes. Additionally, all three studies showed that men and women prefer different thingsMen=attractive women who are fertileWomen=strong men who are successful or have resourcesJen Mislinski21CommentaryI loved David Buss's talk on sexual conflict! He was very engaging and entertaining, and I wasn't bored for even a moment. The evolutionary prospective of sex differences and adaptive problems was quite interesting. Buss gave a few examples that I never thought about, such as genetic cuckoldry. He mentioned that 9-13% of people have genetic fathers who are different from the person believed to be their father. He also discussed important causes of sexual conflict. Many of his findings made a lot of sense and seem to be obviously tied with evolution, for example men wanting more sexual partners, and being more open to sex when approached by a random woman. I also thought the notion of female sexual deception was intriguing. I never thought of it in depth, and I realized I am sometimes guilty of it.Jen MislinskiReferencesBuunk, B., Dijkstra, P., Fetchenhauer, D., & Kenrick, D. (2002). Age and Gender Differences in Mate Selection Criteria for Various Involvement Levels. Personal Relationships, 9, 271-278. Retrieved April 26, 2011, from the Psych Info database.Campos, L., Otta, E., & Siqueira, J. (2002). Sex Differences in Mate Selection Strategies: Content Analyses and Responses to Advertisements in Brazil. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 395-406. Retrieved April 26, 2011, from the Psych Info database.Todosijevic, B., Ljubinkovic, S., & Arancic, A. (2003). Mate Selection Criteria: A Trait Desirability Assessment Study of Sex Differences in Serbia. Evolutionary Psychology, 1, 116-126. Retrieved April 26, 2011, from the Psych Info database.Jen Mislinski23Infidelity: An Evolutionary PerspectiveAncestral men who failed to identify infidelity in a relationship often faced the risk of being cuckolded, the unwitting investment of resources into genetically unrelated offspring (Goetz & Causey, 2009).Researchers have hypothesized that, in response to cuckolding, men are more likely to detect infidelity in partners than are women in order to prevent the risks associated with being cuckolded.Tiffany JubbInfidelity: An Evolutionary PerspectiveSome of the risks associated with being cuckolded include the failure to reproduce (Andrews, Gangestad, Miller, Haselton, Thornhill & Neale, 2008), as well as misdirection of the male's time, effort, and recourses to rearing a rival's offspring, loss of time, effort, and resources the man spent attracting his partner, and reputational damage if such information becomes known to others (Goetz & Causey, 2009).

Tiffany JubbInfidelity: An Evolutionary PerspectiveResearch conducted by Goetz and Causey (2009) tested the hypothesis that men are more likely to suspect infidelity in relationships than women because the risks associated with infidelity are higher for men.Through participants self-reports, Goetz and Causey (2009) found that not only did men report a higher likelihood of committing infidelity than women, but men also overestimated the probability of being cheated on.

Tiffany JubbInfidelity: An Evolutionary PerspectiveAndrews, Gangestad, Miller, Haselton, Thornhill, and Neale (2008) investigated the difference in infidelity detection between men and women.In order to do this, researchers asked couples to separately complete private questionnaires and report whether or not they had committed extrapair copulation [EPC] (Andrews et al., 2008) and if they believed their partner had ever committed EPC.Researchers found that, if self-report was accurate and honest, men accurately detected EPC 10% better than women.Additionally, men presented more false positive (wrongly assumed EPC) detection than women.

Tiffany JubbInfidelity: An Evolutionary PerspectiveBrand, Markey, Mills, and Hodges (2007) compared the differences between men and women in regards to detecting cheating, participating in infidelity, and the reasons behind cheating. Researchers found that women reported being infidelite more often than men, and that men were more likely to suspect infidelity than women.It was also found that men and women cheat for different reasons. Women tend to commit infidelity as a way of mate-switching while men are typically pursuing a quantity-over quality strategy (Brand, et al., 2007) which is consistent with the hypothesis that men cheat for sexual variety.Tiffany JubbEvolutionary psychology is one of four sciences that are bringing human nature back into the picture.

- Steven Pinker

Tiffany JubbReferencesAndrews, P.W., Gangestad, S.W., Miller, G.F., Haselton, M.G., Thornhill, R, & Neale, M. C. (2008). Sex differences in detecting sexual infidelity: results of a maximum likelihood method for analyzing the sensitivity of sex differences to underreporting. Human Nature, 19, 347-373. Brand, R.J., Markey, C.M., Mills, A., & Hodges, S.D. (2007). Sex differences in self-reported infidelity and its correlates. Sex Roles, 51, 101-109. Goetz, A.T., & Causey, K. (2009). Sex differences in perceptions of infidelity: men often assume the worst. Evolutionary Psychology, 7(2), 253-263.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/psychology.html

Tiffany Jubb