PERSONALITY PSY234 Lecture 7 : Evolutionary Psychology

1. PERSONALITY PSY234 Lecture 7:Evolutionary Psychology Dr Simon Boag Email: simon.boag@psy.mq.edu.au

2. Readings • Carver, C. S. & Scheier, M. F. (2004). Perspectives on Personality. (pp. 138-146) Additional (non-assessable) • Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). NY: Basic Books. • Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 2. Separation: Anxiety and Anger. NY: Basic Books. • Buss, ,D. M. (1995). Psychological sex differences. American Psychologist, 50, 164-168.

3. Lecture Outline I. Theories of evolution • Ethology & natural selection II. Evolutionary Psychology • Sex differences III. Attachment theory • Attachment styles • Adult attachment

4. Learning Outcomes After this lecture you should be able to: • Describe the major theories of evolution and their influence on theories of personality • Describe & evaluate Buss’s account of psychological sex differences • Describe & evaluate Bolwby’s theory of attachment & attachment styles

5. I. Theories of Evolution • Enormous influence on psychology • eg. Behaviourism, psychoanalysis • Places humans within the animal kingdon Ethology: Scientific study of the evolutionary basis of behaviours that are: • Universal (species-wide) • Instinctive (genetically programmed) • Adaptive (survival value)

6. Theories of Evolution • Lamarkian: characteristics acquired over an individual’s lifetime are passed on to offspring

7. Theories of Evolution • Darwinian: Natural selection • Individuals within populations vary • Environmental pressures • Those with characteristics for survival do, and pass their characteristics down to offspring • ‘survival of the fittest’ (Spencer)

8. Theories of Evolution Sexual selection: evolution of characteristics linked to mating success

9. II. Evolutionary Psychology • Recent development in psychology • Domain-specificity: adaptations are shaped by specific environments • Functionality: the mind evolved to serve various functions • Sexes will differ in domains where women and men have faced different sorts of adaptive problems (Buss, 2004)

11. Biology & Evolution • Mammals: • Females tend to typically invest more heavily in offspring than do males • Females tend to be more selective in mate choice • Males & intrasexual competition (gaining & preventing access to females) • However: many exceptions to the rule

12. Male & Female Mating Strategies • Males and females have evolved differing mating strategies due to different problems of environmental adaptation (Buss, 1993) • Strategies: evolved solutions to adaptive problems • Psychological mechanisms (preferences) that solve adaptive problems • Unconscious motives

13. Female Mating Strategies(Buss, 1993) • Femalesmust deal with gestation, childbirth, lactation • Females attempt to secure a mate to help maintain her offspring & offer protection • Prefer long-term (LT) mating to short-term (ST) mating • Gain access to resources & parental investment

14. Male Mating Strategies(Buss, 1993) • Malesdesire to spread their genes as far and wide as possible • Males attempt to secure as many sexual partners as possible • Males have greater preference than females for short-term mating • Long-term mating as an attempt of ensuring paternity (‘paternity hypothesis’)

15. Evidence (Clark & Hatfield, 1989) • An ‘attractive’ male or female confederate approaches strangers of the the opposite sex at uni & asks: • “I have been noticing you around campus. I find you very attractive. Will you: • A) Go out with me tonight? • B) Come over to my place tonight? • C) Go to bed with me tonight?”

16. ‘YES’ Responses • Females: • A) Go out with me? 50% • B) To my place? 6% • C) Go to bed? 0% • Males: • A) Go out with me? 50% • B) To my place? 69% • C) Go to bed? 75% • Findings have been replicated

17. Evidence (Buss, 1993) • A)Over lifetime (self-report): • Males desire 18+ sex partners • Female desire 4-5 sex partners • B)Males more willing to engage in sex after short amount of time • C)Males have lower ‘standards’ than Females in ST mating choices • Females express greater care in choice of mate (both ST & LT)

18. Evidence (Buss, 1993) • D)Males prefer ‘looks’ in ST & LT Females prefer status & resource in LT • E)Males: sexual jealousy & insuring paternity • Males more distressed by imagining partner engage in other sexual relations • Females more distressed by imagining partner engage in other emotional relationships

19. Evaluation • Enormous individual variation • Do people have sex in order to pass on their genes? (teleological explanation) • Fails to appreciate cultural/social factors • eg. Silverstein (1996): Feminist critique • Sexual division of labour limited women’s direct access to economic resources • Hence women greater preference for status & resources

20. III. Attachment theory “A relatively durable, affective relationship between a child & one or more specific persons with whom the child regularly interacts” (Van Ijzendoorn, 1988) Bowlby: Attachment & survival • Tendency of child to remain close to adults offers the child protection Cf. Imprinting

21. Imprinting

23. Attachment Behaviours • Selective attachment & stranger wariness begins between 7-11 months Bowlby • WHO study during 1940s • These behaviours appear pre-wired (occurring prior to learning) • Monotropic (single person; generally mother) • ‘Maternal deprivation’

24. Attachment Behaviours (1) Proximity seeking • Clinging, hugging • Watching caregiver • Staying close, following • Protest at separation (separation anxiety) (2) Use of attachment figure as secure base for exploration

25. Attachment Classifications (Ainsworth et al, 1978) ‘Strange situation’ (1) infant/caregiver in room (2) Stranger enters (approaches infant, caregiver leaves) (3) Caregiver returns (4) Stranger leaves (5) Caregiver leaves, stranger returns (6) Caregiver returns, stranger leaves

26. Attachment Classifications Secure & insecure attachment styles (1) Secureattachment style (55-65%) • Can use caregiver as a secure base for exploration • Distress on separation • Seeks proximity on reunion • Settles quickly on reunion

27. Insecure attachment styles (2) Avoidant attachment style (20-25%) • Explores freely before separation • May not be distressed on separation • Affiliates with stranger, even when caregiver absent • On reunion, tends to ignore caregiver

28. Insecure attachment styles (3) Ambivalentattachment style (10-15%) • Unable to use caregiver as base for exploration • Wary of novel situations, people • Intense distress on separation • Ambivalent on reunion (seek/avoid) • Not easily settled on reunion (4) Disorganised/Disoriented

29. Parenting styles • Ainsworth et al: • Secure: Sensitivity to infant’s needs • Insecure: Insensitivity to infant’s needs • Avoidant: impatient & unresponsive to signals • Resistant: inconsistent (hot/cold) misreading signals • Abused children: 80% disorganised

30. Empirical findings • ‘Strange situation’ classification a good predictor of other facets of child’s development • Secure attachment predicts interpersonal confidence, eagerness to learn at school, greater self-esteem, greater capacity for intimacy & closeness with other people (Booth et al, 1991; Grossman & Grossman, 1991; Wartner et al, 1994)

31. Adult Attachment(Hazan & Shaver, 1987) • Adult personality/relationship styles based on early attachments Internal working models: • Expectancies linking early attachment experiences with later feelings & behaviour • Pervasive influence of early attachments on later relationships • eg. fear of abandonment • 0.39 correlation (Fraley, 2002, 2003)

32. Adult Attachment Styles A) Secure: (56%) • Comfortable with others • Develops intimacy • High satisfaction/low anxiety B) Avoidant: (25%) • Difficulty trusting others • Avoids intimacy C) Anxious/ambivalent: (19%) • Anxious/insecure but craves intimacy • High anxiety/low satisfaction

33. Adult Attachments (cont.) Mickelson et al., (1997): • Secure attach. report less mental health problems compared to insecure eg. less depression, phobias, substance abuse etc Scher (2000): • Childhood insecure attach, associated with all adult psychopathology

34. Adult Attachments (cont.) Dieperinsky et al (2001): • Study of 107 former POWs • Secure attach. lower PTSD than insecure • Attach. style stronger predictor of PTSD than trauma severity O’Shea-Lauber (2001): • Short & long term health consequences related to insecure attach. • Avoidant: routine inhibition of emotion • Anx/Ambivalent: high anxiety

35. Evaluation • Dynamics b/w caregiving & attachment not fully understood (correlation) • Multiple attachments questions whether there are ‘types’ • Bolwby’s focus is too much on the mother; ignores father (Rutter, 1984) • Adult attachment: Over-reliance on self-report measures • All relationships influence expectancies, not just early attachment (Levitt, 1991)

36. Summary • Evolutionary theory has had an enormous influence on psychology • Buss argues that mating strategies have evolved as solutions to specific adaptive problems faced by males and females • Attachment styles appear to persist across the life-span, affecting relationships & other areas of life