Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.738
D. Krupp
There are numerous complementary approaches to the biology of aggression, ranging from genetic to cognitive research. Arguably, the most successful of them have been guided by hypotheses derived from evolutionary theory. In contrast to the view that human aggression is symptomatic of psychological impairment, social disorganization, or both, evolution-minded hypotheses typically begin from the premise that aggression has been designed by natural selection to serve one or more adaptive functions, and that the mechanisms involved can be sensitive to cues of reproductive consequences in the social environment. Specifically, anatomical, physiological, and psychological adaptations for aggression are expected to evolve when they help individuals secure resources and matings for themselves and for their genealogical kin. From a theoretical perspective, contexts of predation, sexual competition, and sexual conflict are especially likely to foment aggression. A considerable body of research on aggression in nonhuman animals reinforces the adaptationist position, and central findings of this viewpoint—such as differential risk of violence according to sex and kinship—are closely mirrored in humans. Although many features of human aggression are likely the result of adaptations designed to yield these very features, others are more plausibly understood as byproducts of adaptations designed for different purposes. In either case, evolutionary approaches can help to identify the mechanisms underlying aggression and thereby provide ways to reduce its impact.
{"title":"Evolution, Biology, and Aggression","authors":"D. Krupp","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.738","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.738","url":null,"abstract":"There are numerous complementary approaches to the biology of aggression, ranging from genetic to cognitive research. Arguably, the most successful of them have been guided by hypotheses derived from evolutionary theory. In contrast to the view that human aggression is symptomatic of psychological impairment, social disorganization, or both, evolution-minded hypotheses typically begin from the premise that aggression has been designed by natural selection to serve one or more adaptive functions, and that the mechanisms involved can be sensitive to cues of reproductive consequences in the social environment. Specifically, anatomical, physiological, and psychological adaptations for aggression are expected to evolve when they help individuals secure resources and matings for themselves and for their genealogical kin. From a theoretical perspective, contexts of predation, sexual competition, and sexual conflict are especially likely to foment aggression. A considerable body of research on aggression in nonhuman animals reinforces the adaptationist position, and central findings of this viewpoint—such as differential risk of violence according to sex and kinship—are closely mirrored in humans. Although many features of human aggression are likely the result of adaptations designed to yield these very features, others are more plausibly understood as byproducts of adaptations designed for different purposes. In either case, evolutionary approaches can help to identify the mechanisms underlying aggression and thereby provide ways to reduce its impact.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130829511","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.240
Richard P. Eibach
Ideology is a recurrent feature of human societies. Ideologies provide people with frameworks to evaluate the relative legitimacy of different approaches to social order. Such ideologies often involve an opposition between right-leaning ideologies, which tend to justify and maintain the traditional order, and left-leaning ideologies, which advocate for systemic reforms to reduce hierarchies. Social psychological investigations of ideology explore the root motivations and moral foundations of people’s attraction to left versus right ideologies. In particular, such work focuses on understanding the motivational dynamics of ideologies that justify the status quo, promote authoritarian control, and rationalize social dominance hierarchies. Social psychological research also investigates information-processing biases that increase the polarization between left and right. These insights can be applied to bridge divides within ideologically polarized communities.
{"title":"Ideological Polarization and Social Psychology","authors":"Richard P. Eibach","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.240","url":null,"abstract":"Ideology is a recurrent feature of human societies. Ideologies provide people with frameworks to evaluate the relative legitimacy of different approaches to social order. Such ideologies often involve an opposition between right-leaning ideologies, which tend to justify and maintain the traditional order, and left-leaning ideologies, which advocate for systemic reforms to reduce hierarchies. Social psychological investigations of ideology explore the root motivations and moral foundations of people’s attraction to left versus right ideologies. In particular, such work focuses on understanding the motivational dynamics of ideologies that justify the status quo, promote authoritarian control, and rationalize social dominance hierarchies. Social psychological research also investigates information-processing biases that increase the polarization between left and right. These insights can be applied to bridge divides within ideologically polarized communities.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"236 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132182303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.257
Zachary P. Hohman, Olivia R. Kuljian
The need to belong and to be part of a group is a fundamental part of being human. The exact inspirational force that motivates people to join a group is not agreed upon in the psychological literature. Realistic group conflict theory, the self-esteem hypothesis, uncertainty-identity theory, terror management theory, and sociometer theory each explain the need to belong through distinct perspectives. These five heavily researched theories provide different explanations and predictions for why people join and identify with groups, such as the motivation for completing personal goals, the drive to increase self-esteem, to reduce anxiety surrounding death, to reduce uncertainty, and to seek protection within a group. Across the research on this topic, it is becoming clear that self-uncertainty reduction seems to be a powerful reason for identifying with groups. However, there is no doubt that other reasons may also be involved in the motivation to join groups. For example, existential uncertainty may drive people to affiliate with groups that specifically address existential issues; people may prefer to affiliate with desirable, rather than stigmatized, groups in order to satisfy the basic pursuit of pleasure over pain; and people may affiliate to protect against a wide variety of fears. Further research is needed to fully elucidate why people join groups.
{"title":"Why People Join Groups","authors":"Zachary P. Hohman, Olivia R. Kuljian","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.257","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.257","url":null,"abstract":"The need to belong and to be part of a group is a fundamental part of being human. The exact inspirational force that motivates people to join a group is not agreed upon in the psychological literature. Realistic group conflict theory, the self-esteem hypothesis, uncertainty-identity theory, terror management theory, and sociometer theory each explain the need to belong through distinct perspectives. These five heavily researched theories provide different explanations and predictions for why people join and identify with groups, such as the motivation for completing personal goals, the drive to increase self-esteem, to reduce anxiety surrounding death, to reduce uncertainty, and to seek protection within a group. Across the research on this topic, it is becoming clear that self-uncertainty reduction seems to be a powerful reason for identifying with groups. However, there is no doubt that other reasons may also be involved in the motivation to join groups. For example, existential uncertainty may drive people to affiliate with groups that specifically address existential issues; people may prefer to affiliate with desirable, rather than stigmatized, groups in order to satisfy the basic pursuit of pleasure over pain; and people may affiliate to protect against a wide variety of fears. Further research is needed to fully elucidate why people join groups.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128733386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.746
Saeideh Heshmati, Ezra Isabel Cabreros, Olivia Ellis, M. Blackard
Humans are innately social, and this disposition motivates us to build relationships. In particular, close relationships such as romantic love relationships and friendships have a unique bidirectional influence on development. These close relationships influence individuals’ overall well-being in addition to giving purpose and meaning to people’s lives. They also have implications for the development of identity, promoting better mental health, and increasing life satisfaction. Love and friendships are unique in their voluntary and bidirectional nature, and it is this very nature that puts them into the spotlight of interest and makes them prone to change across the lifespan. In the earliest stages of life, the most significant relationships are those with caregivers, although such relationships lay the groundwork for future non-familial relationships. As children begin going to school and interacting with people outside of the home, social connections expand to include friendships during childhood and adolescence. While peer relations teach children and adolescents many of the social skills that are required to maintain close relationships later in life, love relationships, which tend to emerge in adolescence, also contribute to their development and cognitions about social bonds. Love relationships gain a great deal of importance in young adulthood, as young adults strive for intimacy and strong social support. As individuals grow older, they tend to be more selective about the people they spend time with; consequently, middle-aged and older adults’ social circles reduce to the most meaningful connections. These patterns in close relationships provide a deeper understanding of how social connections influence development and, conversely, how development influences social connections.
{"title":"Love and Friendship Across the Lifespan","authors":"Saeideh Heshmati, Ezra Isabel Cabreros, Olivia Ellis, M. Blackard","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.746","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.746","url":null,"abstract":"Humans are innately social, and this disposition motivates us to build relationships. In particular, close relationships such as romantic love relationships and friendships have a unique bidirectional influence on development. These close relationships influence individuals’ overall well-being in addition to giving purpose and meaning to people’s lives. They also have implications for the development of identity, promoting better mental health, and increasing life satisfaction. Love and friendships are unique in their voluntary and bidirectional nature, and it is this very nature that puts them into the spotlight of interest and makes them prone to change across the lifespan. In the earliest stages of life, the most significant relationships are those with caregivers, although such relationships lay the groundwork for future non-familial relationships. As children begin going to school and interacting with people outside of the home, social connections expand to include friendships during childhood and adolescence. While peer relations teach children and adolescents many of the social skills that are required to maintain close relationships later in life, love relationships, which tend to emerge in adolescence, also contribute to their development and cognitions about social bonds. Love relationships gain a great deal of importance in young adulthood, as young adults strive for intimacy and strong social support. As individuals grow older, they tend to be more selective about the people they spend time with; consequently, middle-aged and older adults’ social circles reduce to the most meaningful connections. These patterns in close relationships provide a deeper understanding of how social connections influence development and, conversely, how development influences social connections.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116657645","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.291
Aharon Levy, J. Dovidio
Intergroup behavior involves the feelings, perceptions, beliefs, and actions that groups and their members have toward another group and its members. It frequently involves various forms of bias, such as prejudice (negative feelings and evaluations), stereotypes (beliefs about groups and their members), and discrimination (unfair treatment). However, intergroup bias does not necessarily require overtly negative orientations toward another group. Such bias may reflect favorable attitudes toward members of one’s own group (the ingroup) and preferential treatment of them, rather than hostility or ill-treatment of other groups (outgroups). Intergroup behavior can also be positive, representing cooperation (conduct and exchange that benefits both the ingroup and the outgroup) or prosocial behavior (actions that improve the welfare of another group and its members). The nature of intergroup behavior is determined by psychological processes associated with social categorization, by the identification and motivations of group members, and by the consequent relationship between groups. These processes apply to almost any type of group, including but not limited to work teams, divisions within an organization, companies, sport clubs, ethnic groups, countries, religions, and races. Understanding the psychological dynamics of intergroup relations can guide the development of interventions to achieve stable, constructive, and mutually beneficial exchanges between groups and their members.
{"title":"Intergroup Behavior","authors":"Aharon Levy, J. Dovidio","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.291","url":null,"abstract":"Intergroup behavior involves the feelings, perceptions, beliefs, and actions that groups and their members have toward another group and its members. It frequently involves various forms of bias, such as prejudice (negative feelings and evaluations), stereotypes (beliefs about groups and their members), and discrimination (unfair treatment). However, intergroup bias does not necessarily require overtly negative orientations toward another group. Such bias may reflect favorable attitudes toward members of one’s own group (the ingroup) and preferential treatment of them, rather than hostility or ill-treatment of other groups (outgroups). Intergroup behavior can also be positive, representing cooperation (conduct and exchange that benefits both the ingroup and the outgroup) or prosocial behavior (actions that improve the welfare of another group and its members). The nature of intergroup behavior is determined by psychological processes associated with social categorization, by the identification and motivations of group members, and by the consequent relationship between groups. These processes apply to almost any type of group, including but not limited to work teams, divisions within an organization, companies, sport clubs, ethnic groups, countries, religions, and races. Understanding the psychological dynamics of intergroup relations can guide the development of interventions to achieve stable, constructive, and mutually beneficial exchanges between groups and their members.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122455116","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.271
S. Loughnan, Mayu Koike, Casey L. Bevens
The question of why people act violently is perhaps one of the most enduring and meaningful in social psychology. Among the various ways humans have mistreated one another over the millennia, intergroup violence and genocide stand as terrible monuments to our capacity for violence. It is sensible and important, then, that the psychological underpinnings of this mistreatment are examined as well as the factors that lead people to enact, sustain, and excuse violence. The major psychological theories of dehumanization are outlined, from its roots in genocide studies to a focus on everyday aggression and violence, and modern approaches are presented, which seek to explain extreme violence. The ways in which dehumanization can contribute to violence at the interpersonal level are mapped, examining evidence also from the closely related field of objectification. Finally, dehumanization and violence perpetrated at the level of groups is discussed, covering the small but growing literature focused directly on genocides. Throughout the examination of interpersonal and intergroup violence, it is worth noting that dehumanization plays many roles; it is the cause, catalyst, and consequence of violence.
{"title":"Dehumanization, Violence, and Genocide","authors":"S. Loughnan, Mayu Koike, Casey L. Bevens","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.271","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.271","url":null,"abstract":"The question of why people act violently is perhaps one of the most enduring and meaningful in social psychology. Among the various ways humans have mistreated one another over the millennia, intergroup violence and genocide stand as terrible monuments to our capacity for violence. It is sensible and important, then, that the psychological underpinnings of this mistreatment are examined as well as the factors that lead people to enact, sustain, and excuse violence. The major psychological theories of dehumanization are outlined, from its roots in genocide studies to a focus on everyday aggression and violence, and modern approaches are presented, which seek to explain extreme violence. The ways in which dehumanization can contribute to violence at the interpersonal level are mapped, examining evidence also from the closely related field of objectification. Finally, dehumanization and violence perpetrated at the level of groups is discussed, covering the small but growing literature focused directly on genocides. Throughout the examination of interpersonal and intergroup violence, it is worth noting that dehumanization plays many roles; it is the cause, catalyst, and consequence of violence.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128113033","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.849
C. Creswell, S. Walters, Brynjar Halldorsson, Peter J. Lawrence
Anxiety disorders are the most common psychiatric disorders among children and young people, affecting an estimated 6.5% of children and young people worldwide. Childhood anxiety disorders often persist into adulthood if left untreated and are associated with a significant emotional and financial cost to individuals, their families, and wider society. Models of the development and maintenance of childhood anxiety disorders have underpinned prevention and treatment approaches, and cognitive behavioral treatments have good evidence for their efficacy. Ongoing challenges for the field include the need to improve outcomes for those that do not benefit from current prevention and treatment, and to increase access to those who could benefit.
{"title":"Anxiety Disorders in Children and Young People","authors":"C. Creswell, S. Walters, Brynjar Halldorsson, Peter J. Lawrence","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.849","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.849","url":null,"abstract":"Anxiety disorders are the most common psychiatric disorders among children and young people, affecting an estimated 6.5% of children and young people worldwide. Childhood anxiety disorders often persist into adulthood if left untreated and are associated with a significant emotional and financial cost to individuals, their families, and wider society. Models of the development and maintenance of childhood anxiety disorders have underpinned prevention and treatment approaches, and cognitive behavioral treatments have good evidence for their efficacy. Ongoing challenges for the field include the need to improve outcomes for those that do not benefit from current prevention and treatment, and to increase access to those who could benefit.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114389857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.866
Ryan S. Bisel, K. Rush
Communication serves a constitutive force in making organizations what they are. While communication can be viewed as merely occurring “within” the organization, communication itself is essential to the creation and maintenance of organizations. Modern research in organizational communication explores this constitutive force of communication as well as the ways downward, upward, and lateral communication patterns determine positive and negative outcomes for both organizations and their members. Supportive, adaptive, and ethical downward communication from organizational leadership enhances members’ productivity and satisfaction while reducing turnover. In addition, candid upward communication from members to management is crucial for detecting and correcting troubles while they remain small and resolvable. Lateral communication through which members make sense of organizational events is key to understanding members’ perceptions, decisions, and behaviors. Finally, new information communication technologies both enable distributed work but also create new and troubling issues for modern work life.
{"title":"Communication in Organizations","authors":"Ryan S. Bisel, K. Rush","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.866","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.866","url":null,"abstract":"Communication serves a constitutive force in making organizations what they are. While communication can be viewed as merely occurring “within” the organization, communication itself is essential to the creation and maintenance of organizations. Modern research in organizational communication explores this constitutive force of communication as well as the ways downward, upward, and lateral communication patterns determine positive and negative outcomes for both organizations and their members. Supportive, adaptive, and ethical downward communication from organizational leadership enhances members’ productivity and satisfaction while reducing turnover. In addition, candid upward communication from members to management is crucial for detecting and correcting troubles while they remain small and resolvable. Lateral communication through which members make sense of organizational events is key to understanding members’ perceptions, decisions, and behaviors. Finally, new information communication technologies both enable distributed work but also create new and troubling issues for modern work life.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"200 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123020355","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.836
David Freis
During World War I, soldiers from all warring countries suffered from mental disorders caused by the strains and shocks of modern warfare. Military psychiatrists in Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire were initially overwhelmed by the unexpected numbers of psychiatric patients, and they soon engaged in fierce debates about the etiology and therapy of “war neuroses.” After early therapeutic approaches relying on rest and occupational therapy had failed to yield the necessary results, psychiatry faced increasing pressure by the state and the military. After 1916, the etiological debate coalesced around the diagnosis of “war hysteria,” and psychiatric treatment of war neurotics became dominated by so-called active therapies, which promised to return patients to the frontline or the war industry as quickly and efficiently as possible. War psychiatry became characterized by an unprecedented rationalization of medical treatment, which subordinated the goals of medicine to the needs of the military and the wartime economy. Brutal treatment methods and struggles over pensions led to conflicts between patients and doctors that continued after the war ended.
{"title":"Central European Psychiatry: World War I and the Interwar Period","authors":"David Freis","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.836","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.836","url":null,"abstract":"During World War I, soldiers from all warring countries suffered from mental disorders caused by the strains and shocks of modern warfare. Military psychiatrists in Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire were initially overwhelmed by the unexpected numbers of psychiatric patients, and they soon engaged in fierce debates about the etiology and therapy of “war neuroses.” After early therapeutic approaches relying on rest and occupational therapy had failed to yield the necessary results, psychiatry faced increasing pressure by the state and the military. After 1916, the etiological debate coalesced around the diagnosis of “war hysteria,” and psychiatric treatment of war neurotics became dominated by so-called active therapies, which promised to return patients to the frontline or the war industry as quickly and efficiently as possible. War psychiatry became characterized by an unprecedented rationalization of medical treatment, which subordinated the goals of medicine to the needs of the military and the wartime economy. Brutal treatment methods and struggles over pensions led to conflicts between patients and doctors that continued after the war ended.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126504191","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-28DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.302
Norman P. Li, L. Tan, Bryan K C Choy
Mating and reproduction are central to natural selection, and decisions associated with one’s choice of mate can have significant fitness consequences. From an evolutionary perspective, attraction functions to direct one’s attention and energy toward pursuing, mating with, and retaining individuals who display traits that contribute to greater survival and reproductive success. Humans are theorized to possess a suite of psychological mechanisms that facilitate the identification of such individuals. One trait that humans have potentially evolved to be attracted to is genetic dissimilarity or diversity in the major histocompatibility complex, which is argued to promote greater immunocompetence and pathogen resistance and, hence, health in one’s mate and putative offspring. Another trait is bilateral symmetry, which is theorized to function as a cue to a potential mate’s genetic quality and ability to withstand developmental stressors. Yet another trait is sexual dimorphism. Women are theorized to be attracted to masculinity in men, which is theorized to function as a reliable signal of underlying genetic quality. In contrast, men are theorized to be attracted to femininity in women, which is argued to signal their reproductive viability. Importantly, evolutionary perspectives propose that many attraction mechanisms evolved to adaptively adjust to local conditions. Thus, when faced with high pathogen prevalence, people have heightened preferences for symmetry, which indicates having good genes and thus, greater ability to withstand disease. As another example, when potential mates of the other sex are in relative abundance, people tend to be more selective in their mate choice and exaggerate their preferences for other-sex mates with sex-typical traits. Additionally, near peak fertility, women may have evolved to increase their preferences for masculinity in men, which signals underlying genetic quality. In addition to having psychological mechanisms that facilitate the identification of potential mates, humans may have also evolved psychological mechanisms that adaptively increase the motivation to allocate attention and energy toward pursuing viable mates that have been identified. Both sets of psychological mechanisms are necessary to successful mate selection, and likely operate in tandem. In this regard, dopamine may be centrally involved in driving behaviors associated with attraction and mate pursuit. Finally, recent studies have shown that the evidence for some of the hypothesized attraction preferences is not conclusive; future scholarship will profit from more careful research design and robust methodology.
{"title":"Evolution, Biology, and Attraction","authors":"Norman P. Li, L. Tan, Bryan K C Choy","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.302","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.302","url":null,"abstract":"Mating and reproduction are central to natural selection, and decisions associated with one’s choice of mate can have significant fitness consequences. From an evolutionary perspective, attraction functions to direct one’s attention and energy toward pursuing, mating with, and retaining individuals who display traits that contribute to greater survival and reproductive success. Humans are theorized to possess a suite of psychological mechanisms that facilitate the identification of such individuals. One trait that humans have potentially evolved to be attracted to is genetic dissimilarity or diversity in the major histocompatibility complex, which is argued to promote greater immunocompetence and pathogen resistance and, hence, health in one’s mate and putative offspring. Another trait is bilateral symmetry, which is theorized to function as a cue to a potential mate’s genetic quality and ability to withstand developmental stressors. Yet another trait is sexual dimorphism. Women are theorized to be attracted to masculinity in men, which is theorized to function as a reliable signal of underlying genetic quality. In contrast, men are theorized to be attracted to femininity in women, which is argued to signal their reproductive viability. Importantly, evolutionary perspectives propose that many attraction mechanisms evolved to adaptively adjust to local conditions. Thus, when faced with high pathogen prevalence, people have heightened preferences for symmetry, which indicates having good genes and thus, greater ability to withstand disease. As another example, when potential mates of the other sex are in relative abundance, people tend to be more selective in their mate choice and exaggerate their preferences for other-sex mates with sex-typical traits. Additionally, near peak fertility, women may have evolved to increase their preferences for masculinity in men, which signals underlying genetic quality. In addition to having psychological mechanisms that facilitate the identification of potential mates, humans may have also evolved psychological mechanisms that adaptively increase the motivation to allocate attention and energy toward pursuing viable mates that have been identified. Both sets of psychological mechanisms are necessary to successful mate selection, and likely operate in tandem. In this regard, dopamine may be centrally involved in driving behaviors associated with attraction and mate pursuit. Finally, recent studies have shown that the evidence for some of the hypothesized attraction preferences is not conclusive; future scholarship will profit from more careful research design and robust methodology.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131131338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：