Do humans have cognitive adaptations for detecting violations of rules in multiple moral domains? Previous research using the Wason Selection Task has provided evidence for domain-specific mechanisms for detecting violations of social exchange and hazard precaution rules. The present study investigates whether similar evidence can be found for mechanisms for detecting violations of rules relating to soliciting aid, maintaining coalitions, and navigating hierarchies. Participants (n = 887) completed one of seven Wason Selection Tasks—five sociomoral tasks (exchange, hazard, aid, coalition, and submission) and two controls (descriptive and general deontic). Participants also completed the short form Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) as a self-report measure of five corresponding sets of moral values. The study found that, as predicted, performance on all five sociomoral tasks was significantly better than performance on the two control tasks. However, there was no relationship between task performance and corresponding moral values. These results provide initial evidence for cognitive adaptations for detecting violations of rules relating to providing aid, maintaining coalitions, and submitting to authority. We outline how future research might provide additional tests of this theory, and thereby further extend our understanding of the foundations of human sociomoral reasoning.

Spontaneous laughter may serve as an auditory cue to affiliative intent within social contexts, whereas volitional laughter may connote deceptive, or non-affiliative, social communication. It would thus be advantageous to distinguish between affiliative and deceptive laughter to identify and prefer conspecifics genuinely interested in affiliating, particularly those whose current affiliative needs are unmet. Furthermore, women’s greater capability to discriminate between emotional cues should implicate them as being especially favorable toward spontaneous laughter. Because social exclusion heightens interest in affiliation, social exclusion should heighten favorability toward those communicating spontaneous laughter, which should be especially augmented among women. The current research examined both trait and state factors that might be moderate responses to spontaneous and volitional laughter. We experimentally activated affiliative motives and tasked men and women with indicating their preferences for spontaneous and volitional laughs. Although activation of affiliative needs did not alter preferences for laughter, participants ultimately preferred spontaneous laughs over volitional. Women were especially sensitive to laughter’s affiliative value, reporting greater disinterest in affiliating with targets emitting volitional laughs, a finding consistent with research indicating women’s heightened sensitivity toward affiliative cues and sensitivity to potentially exploitive conspecifics due to sexual dimorphism.

Across different cultures and across different times, parents exercise considerable influence over their children’s mate choices. When exercising such influence, parents are interested in finding daughters- and sons-in-law who are similar to them and to their children. In this paper, the preference for similarity was examined in China. On the basis of a sample of 534 Chinese parents, it was found that mothers and fathers preferred as daughters- and sons-in-law individuals who were similar to them and to their children, and who came from families of similar background. Comparisons were also made between the preference for similarity of Greek-Cypriot parents from previous studies and the preference for similarity of Chinese parents from the current study. The results indicated that the two groups converged considerably in their preferences. However, differences also existed, predominantly over religious and ethnic background.

People, predominantly men, spend considerable resources in engaging in hunting animals for sport. Such activity is puzzling, as men take risk and sacrifice valuable resources in killing animals, the meat of which they do not need for their subsistence. Toward solving this puzzle, an evolutionary framework was proposed, where the division of labor in ancestral human societies has resulted in men and women having evolved different mechanisms that motivate them to engage in different activities. On the basis of this framework, two hypotheses were derived. First, on average, men would tend to find hunting an enjoyable activity, while women would tend to find gathering an enjoyable activity. Second, on average, men would be willing to engage in hunting, and women would be willing to engage in gathering. Evidence from two independent studies found strong support for both hypotheses.

Homosexuality is an evolutionary puzzle. Many theories attempt to explain how a trait undermining individual reproduction can be maintained, but experimental testing of their predictions remains scarce. The kin selection hypothesis (KSH) is an important theoretical framework to account for the evolution of human homosexuality, postulating that its direct cost to reproduction can be offset by inclusive fitness gains through alloparental assistance to kin. Consistent evidence in support of the KSH has only been garnered from research on Samoan fa’afafine (i.e. feminine, same-sex attracted males), whereas research in numerous industrialized societies has repeatedly failed to secure empirical support for the theory. Here, we propose an alternative test of the KSH by investigating how need for alloparental care influences women’s attitudes toward homosexuality (AtH). AtH would influence the likelihood of women receiving alloparental care from homosexual kin. We applied logistic regression analysis to a large dataset (17,295 women in 58 countries) derived from the World Values Survey. As predicted by the KSH, women who are potentially most in need of alloparental support exhibit significantly more positive attitudes toward homosexuals. For single mothers who expressed parental care concerns, each additional child mothered was associated with an increase of 1.24 in their odds of exhibiting positive attitudes toward homosexuals. Our study is the first to provide circumstantial evidence in support of the KSH on a global scale.

Prior research investigating the mate preferences of women and their parents reveals two important findings with regard to physical attractiveness. First, daughters more strongly value mate characteristics connoting genetic quality (such as physical attractiveness) than their parents. Second, both daughters and their parents report valuing characteristics other than physical attractiveness most strongly (e.g., ambition/industriousness, friendliness/kindness). However, the prior research relies solely on self-report to assess daughters’ and parents’ preferences. We assessed mate preferences among 61 daughter-mother pairs using an experimental design varying target men’s physical attractiveness and trait profiles. We tested four hypotheses investigating whether a minimum level of physical attractiveness was a necessity to both women and their mothers and whether physical attractiveness was a more important determinant of dating desirability than trait profiles. These hypotheses were supported. Women and their mothers were strongly influenced by the physical attractiveness of the target men and preferred the attractive and moderately attractive targets. Men with the most desirable personality profiles were rated more favorably than their counterparts only when they were at least moderately attractive. Unattractive men were never rated as more desirable partners for daughters, even when they possessed the most desirable trait profiles. We conclude that a minimum level of physical attractiveness is a necessity for both women and their mothers and that when women and their parents state that other traits are more important than physical attractiveness, they assume potential mates meet a minimally acceptable standard of physical attractiveness.

For over a century, social scientists have predicted declines in religious beliefs and their replacement with more scientific/naturalistic outlooks, a prediction known as the secularization hypothesis. However, skepticism surrounding this hypothesis has been expressed by some researchers in recent decades. After reviewing the pertinent evidence and arguments, we examined some aspects of the secularization hypothesis from what is termed a biologically informed perspective. Based on large samples of college students in Malaysia and the USA, religiosity, religious affiliation, and parental fertility were measured using self-reports. Three religiosity indicators were factor analyzed, resulting in an index for religiosity. Results reveal that average parental fertility varied considerably according to religious groups, with Muslims being the most religious and the most fertile and Jews and Buddhists being the least. Within most religious groupings, religiosity was positively associated with parental fertility. While cross-sectional in nature, when our results are combined with evidence that both religiosity and fertility are substantially heritable traits, findings are consistent with view that earlier trends toward secularization (due to science education surrounding advancements in science) are currently being counter-balanced by genetic and reproductive forces. We also propose that the inverse association between intelligence and religiosity, and the inverse correlation between intelligence and fertility lead to predictions of a decline in secularism in the foreseeable future. A contra-secularization hypothesis is proposed and defended in the discussion. It states that secularism is likely to undergo a decline throughout the remainder of the twenty-first century, including Europe and other industrial societies.

The general desire for social distance from people with mental illness is one common expression of stigma. Evolutionary theory predicts that mental illness should reduce the desirability of potential mates, but social distancing in the context of sexual and romantic relationships remains to be systematically explored. In order to test this and other evolutionary predictions, two studies examined perceptions of people with mental illness as short-term sexual mates and long-term romantic mates. Study 1 examined perceptions of people with schizophrenia (N = 168), depression (N = 164), and mental illness in general (N = 134) in terms of the traits typically possessed by desirable mates. For the majority of traits, participants evaluated people with mental illness as having significantly lower potential as short-term and long-term mates than the average person. Study 2 asked participants (N = 363) to evaluate personal advertisements depicting someone with mental or physical illness who was either high or low in physical attractiveness. Participants evaluated the person with mental illness as having lower than average potential as a mate, especially in terms of a long-term relationship. The results of the two studies provide preliminary evidence that stigma extends to perceptions of people with mental illness in a manner consistent with evolutionary theory.

Joiner, Hom, Hagan, and Silva (Psychological Review, 123, 235–254, 2016) argue that human suicidal behavior is an evolutionarily maladaptive byproduct of eusociality. We believe that Joiner et al. are committing the moralistic fallacy in their analysis of human suicidal behavior, which may have led to a number of unexamined assumptions and possible errors in their discussion. Specifically, it is because of the moralistic fallacy—i.e., the conflation between that which is socially desirable and that which is in keeping with inclusive fitness concerns—that Joiner et al. dismiss the possibility that suicide may sometimes bring reproductive benefits to individuals via its effect on suicidal individuals’ family members.

Many evolutionary psychologists have asserted that there is a panhuman nature, a species typical psychological structure that is invariant across human populations. Although many social scientists dispute the basic assumptions of evolutionary psychology, they seem widely to agree with this hypothesis. Psychological differences among human populations (demes, ethnic groups, races) are almost always attributed to cultural and sociological forces in the relevant literatures. However, there are strong reasons to suspect that the hypothesis of a panhuman nature is incorrect. Humans migrated out of Africa at least 50,000 years ago and occupied many different ecological and climatological niches. Because of this, they evolved slightly different anatomical and physiological traits. For example, Tibetans evolved various traits that help them cope with the rigors of altitude; similarly, the Inuit evolved various traits that help them cope with the challenges of a very cold environment. It is likely that humans also evolved slightly different psychological traits as a response to different selection pressures in different environments and niches. One possible example is the high intelligence of the Ashkenazi Jewish people. Frank discussions of such differences among human groups have provoked strong ethical concerns in the past. We understand those ethical concerns and believe that it is important to address them. However, we also believe that the benefits of discussing possible human population differences outweigh the costs.