Research Papers What is the question the investigators are asking? How does the design of their study allow them to get

1. Research Papers • What is the question the investigators are asking? • How does the design of their study allow them to get at this question (or not)? • What did they find?

2. Piff et al (2012): Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior (Anna & Ally) Seven studies using experimental and naturalistic methods reveal that upper-class individuals behave more unethically than lower-class individuals. In studies 1 and 2, upper-class individuals were more likely to break the law while driving, relative to lower-class individuals. In follow-up laboratory studies, upper-class individuals were more likely to exhibit unethical decision-making tendencies (study 3), take valued goods from others (study 4), lie in a negotiation (study 5), cheat to increase their chances of winning a prize (study 6), and endorse unethical behavior at work (study 7) than were lower-class individuals. Mediator and moderator data demonstrated that upper-class individuals’ unethical tendencies are accounted for, in part, by their more favorable attitudes toward greed.

3. Nelissen & Meijers (2011): Social benefits of luxury brands as costly signals of wealth and status (Garrett & Briana) Drawing from costly signaling theory, we predicted that luxury consumption enhances status and produces benefits in social interactions. Across seven experiments, displays of luxury — manipulated through brand labels on clothes — elicited different kinds of preferential treatment, which even resulted in financial benefits to people who engaged in conspicuous consumption. Furthermore, we tested preconditions in which the beneficial consequences of conspicuous consumption may arise and determined the proximate mechanisms underlying them. The present data suggest that luxury consumption can be a profitable social strategy because conspicuous displays of luxury qualify as a costly signaling trait that elicits status-dependent favorable treatment in human social interactions.

4. Personality & Individual Differences • The Big 5 personality traits • Heritability of personality, other traits • Difference-detecting adaptations (Buss) • Balancing selection and alternative strategies • Costly signalling theory

5. Biological Hypotheses of Homosexuality • Kin selection hypothesis (Wilson 1978) • Pleiotropy hypothesis (Iemmola & Ciani 2009) • Biological (non-adaptive) side effect Example: mother immune response (fraternal birth order) hypothesis • 4. Alternative strategy – pursued when prospects of RS by conventional strategy is low (also pertains to celibate professions, e.g., priesthood) • Reciprocity in same-sex alliances (Kirkpatrick 2000) – we didn’t cover • Exotic becomes erotic (Bem 1997)

6. Cognition • Modularity • Domain-general vs. domain-specific • Cheater detection • Wason selection task

7. Kramer et al (2011): Identifying personality from the static, nonexpressive face in humans and chimpanzees: evidence of a shared system for signaling personality (Maeghyn & Char May) Many aspects of personality are honestly signaled on the human face, as shown by accurate identification of personality traits from static images of unknown faces with neutral expressions. Here, we examined the evolutionary history of this signal system. In four studies, we found that untrained human observers reliably discriminated characteristics related to extraversion solely from nonexpressive facial images of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). In chimpanzees, as in humans, there is therefore information in the static, nonexpressive face that signals aspects of an individual's personality. We suggest that this performance is best explained by shared personality structure and signaling in the two species.

8. ten Brinke et al (2012): Darwin the detective: Observable facial muscle contractions reveal emotional high-stakes lies (Tasha & Joe) Deception—a fundamental aspect of human communication—often is accompanied by the simulation of unfelt emotions or the concealment of genuine emotions to correspond to the false message. We investigated the consequences of extremely high-stakes emotional deception on the engagement of particular facial muscles, posited by Darwin to reveal the false face. The videotaped facial actions of a sample of individuals (N=52) emotionally pleading to the public for the return of a missing relative—half of whom eventually were convicted of murdering that person—were coded frame by frame. Findings support the view that emotional “leakage,” particularly via those facial muscles under less cortical control, is a byproduct of the overextended cognitive resources available to convey elaborate lies. Specifically, the “grief” muscles (corrugator supercilii, depressor anguli oris) were more often contracted in the faces of genuine than deceptive pleaders. Subtle contraction of the zygomatic major (masking smiles) and full contraction of the frontalis (failed attempts to appear sad) muscles were more commonly identified in the faces of deceptive pleaders. Thus, while interpersonal deception often is highly successful, signs of covert emotional states are communicated clearly to the informed observer.

9. Egan et al (2007): The Origins of Cognitive Dissonance, Evidence From Children and Monkeys (Emily & Morgan) In a study exploring the origins of cognitive dissonance, preschoolers and capuchins were given a choice between two equally preferred alternatives (two different stickers and two differently colored M&M’ss, respectively). On the basis of previous research with adults, this choice was thought to cause dissonance because it conflicted with subjects’ belief that the two options were equally valuable. We therefore expected subjects to change their attitude toward the unchosen alternative, deeming it less valuable. We then presented subjects with a choice between the unchosen option and an option that was originally as attractive as both options in the first choice. Both groups preferred the novel over the unchosen option in this experimental condition, but not in a control condition in which they did not take part in the first decision. These results provide the first evidence of decision rationalization in children and nonhuman primates. They suggest that the mechanisms underlying cognitive-dissonance reduction in human adults may have originated both developmentally and evolutionarily earlier than previously thought.

10. Ermer et al (2008): Relative status regulates risky decision making about resources in men: evidence for the co-evolution of motivation and cognition (Breana & Bryan) Relative social status strongly regulates human behavior, yet this factor has been largely ignored in research on risky decision making. Humans, like other animals, incur risks as they compete to defend or improve their standing in a social group. Among men, access to culturally important resources is a locus of intrasexual competition and a determinant of status. Thus, relative status should affect men's motivations for risk in relevant domains. Contrasting predictions about such effects were derived from dominance theory and risk-sensitive foraging theory. Experiments varied whether subjects thought they were being observed and evaluated by others of lower, equal or higher status, and whether decisions involved resources (status relevant) or medical treatments (status irrelevant). Across two experiments, men who thought others of equal status were viewing and evaluating their decisions were more likely to favor a high-risk/high-gain means of recouping a monetary loss over a no-risk/low-gain means with equal expected value. Supporting predictions from dominance theory, this motivation for risk taking appeared only in the equal status condition, only for men, and only for resource loss problems. Taken together, the results support the idea that motivational systems designed to negotiate a status-saturated social world regulate the cognitive processes that generate risky decision making in men.

11. What is the major mystery in the record of hominid evolution that Calvin is trying to explain?

12. Mental Disorders & Rare Traits • Biological hypotheses of homosexuality • Adaptive vs. non-adaptive hypotheses of mental disorders • Paradox of severe mental disorders • Contrasting explanations for depression, sociopathy and schizophrenia

13. Senju et al (2009): Mindblind Eyes: An Absence of Spontaneous Theory of Mind in Asperger Syndrome (Ariel & Sean) Adults with Asperger syndrome can understand mental states such as desires and beliefs (mentalizing) when explicitly prompted to do so, despite having impairments in social communication. We directly tested the hypothesis that such individuals nevertheless fail to mentalize spontaneously. To this end, we used an eye-tracking task that has revealed the spontaneous ability to mentalize in typically developing infants. We showed that, like infants, neurotypical adults’ (n = 17 participants) eye movements anticipated an actor’s behavior on the basis of her false belief. This was not the case for individuals with Asperger syndrome (n = 19). Thus, these individuals do not attribute mental states spontaneously, but they may be able to do so in explicit tasks through compensatory learning.

14. Language and Culture (Chapts 12 & 13) • Theories of language evolution • Social gossip hypothesis • Social contract hypothesis • Language & theory of mind • Models of cultural evolution

15. Cultural Transmission • Levels of culture • Stimulus enhancement • Emulation • Imitation • teaching • Harris: cultural rules are adaptive • Memes

16. Haidt on Morality • What are the five foundations of morality according to Haidt? • What does he mean when he says they are in mind’s ‘first draft’? • How does he use this viewpoint to try and explain the differences between ‘liberals’ and ‘conservatives’.