Evolutionary Psychological Science最新文献

Risk taking is more commonly shown by males than females and has a signalling function, serving to advertise one's intrinsic quality to prospective mates. Previous research has established that male risk takers are judged as more attractive for short-term flings than long-term relationships, but the environmental and socioeconomic context surrounding female preferences for male risk takers has been overlooked. Using a survey instrument, we examined female preferences for male risk takers across 1304 females from 47 countries. We found preferences for physical risk takers to be more pronounced in females with a bisexual orientation and females who scored high on risk proneness. Self-reported health was positively associated with preferences for high risk takers as short-term mates, but the effect was moderated by country-level health, i.e. the association was stronger in countries with poorer health. The security provided by better health and access to health care may allow females to capitalise on the genetic quality afforded by selecting a risk-prone male whilst concurrently buffering the potential costs associated with the risk taker's lower paternal investment. The risk of contracting COVID-19 did not predict avoidance of risk takers, perhaps because this environmental cue is too novel to have moulded our behavioural preferences.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40806-023-00354-3.

Among four proposed origins of individualism-collectivism, modernization theory, rice versus wheat theory, climato-economic theory, and pathogen stress theory, the latter has gained more attention in cross-cultural and evolutionary psychology. Since the parasite stress theory of values and sociality makes a connection between infectious diseases and cultural orientations, it gained even more popularity during the COVID pandemic. But despite extensive research on parasite stress theory, it is not still clear what kind of infectious disease contributes more to the emergence of cultures, what are the possible mechanisms through which pathogenic threat gives rise to cultural systems, and how parasite stress might affect vertical vs. horizontal dimensions of individualism-collectivism. This review summarizes and integrates major findings of parasite stress theory related to individualism-collectivism and its closely related variables and discusses future directions that researchers can take to answer the remaining questions.

Responses to COVID-19 public health interventions have been lukewarm. For example, only 64% of the US population has received at least two vaccinations. Because most public health interventions require people to behave in ways that are evolutionarily novel, evolutionary psychological theory and research on mismatch theory, the behavioral immune system, and individual differences can help us gain a better understanding of how people respond to public health information. Primary sources of threat information during the pandemic (particularly in early phases) were geographic differences in morbidity and mortality statistics. We argue that people are unlikely to respond to this type of evolutionarily novel information, particularly under conditions of high uncertainty. However, because individual differences affect threat perceptions, some individual differences will be associated with threat responses. We conducted two studies (during Phase 1 and 2 years later), using data from primarily public sources. We found that state-level COVID-19 morbidity and mortality rates had no relationship with mental health symptoms (an early indicator of how people were responding to the pandemic), suggesting that people-in general-were not attending to this type of information. This result is consistent with the evolutionary psychological explanation that statistical information is likely to have a weak effect on the behavioral immune system. We also found that individual differences (neuroticism, IQ, age, and political ideology) affected how people responded to COVID-19 threats, supporting a niche-picking explanation. We conclude with suggestions for future research and suggestions for improving interventions and promoting greater compliance.