University of Iowa Evolutionary Psychology Critique To Finish the essay based on my essay plan and teacher’s suggestionsUsing the class documents and notes

University of Iowa Evolutionary Psychology Critique To Finish the essay based on my essay plan and teacher’s suggestionsUsing the class documents and notes as the writing materials.To finish the essay before 10 pm (Chicago time)I will email more documents Essay 1 Plan—Topic: Evolutionary psychology theory of sex differences in mating
Psychology of Gender: Take-Home Essay Exam 1
This Essay Plan is worth 10 points. In addition, your essay will not be accepted (grade = 0 points)
if you do not turn in this Essay Plan as required and discuss it with the undergraduate TA.
Ideas and sources you will use to answer Part a. “Explain the main ideas of the standard
evolutionary psychology theory of sex differences in human mating..” Be sure to include sources
from both class—notes, handouts—and readings.
List main ideas you will cover and your source(s) for each
Optimal reproductive strategy for females, be choosy to look
for one partner
APA style in-text citation for
source(s)
(class notes, 2/18/2019)
Optimal reproductive strategy for males, looking for
partners who are fertile
(class notes, 2/18/2019)
Paleo life promotes social evolution
(class notes, 2/18/2019)
Which one of the following criticisms of the evolutionary psychology theory will you
discuss FIRST?
? Traits assumed to be adaptive . . .
? Misconceptions about paleo life
? Sex differences in social status and power . .
? Misconceptions about evolution
Ideas and sources you will use to answer the explanation section of Part b. “explain the criticism
thoroughly.” Be sure to include sources from both class—notes, handouts, videos—and readings.
List main ideas you will cover and your source(s) for each
Adaptive advantages of female promiscuous
APA style in-text citation for
source(s)
(class notes, 2/18/2019)
It may be advantageous for men not to be promiscuous.
(class notes, 2/18/2019)
Example(s) and sources you will use to answer the example section of Part b. “include at least
one example illustrating the criticism.”
List main ideas you will cover and your source(s) for each
Benefits of paternity uncertainty for offspring
APA style in-text citation for
example(s)
(Hrdy, 1999)
One hundred babies
(Fine, 2017)
Empirical research/studies you will use to answer the research evidence section of Part b.
“provide research evidence supporting the criticism.” Be sure to include research/studies from
both class—notes, handouts, videos—and readings. You must have a minimum of two directly
relevant studies.
Describe studies and your source(s) for each
Classic fruit fly study results selectively cited
APA style in-text citation for this
study
(Bateman, 1948)
Dogon people of Mail
(Hrdy,1999)
Which one of the following criticisms of evolutionary psychology theory will you discuss
SECOND?
? Traits assumed to be adaptive . . .
? Misconceptions about paleo life
? Sex differences in social status and power . .
? Misconceptions about evolution
Ideas and sources you will use to answer the explanation section of Part b. “explain the criticism
thoroughly.” Be sure to include sources from both class—notes, handouts, videos—and readings.
List main ideas you will cover and your source(s) for each
There was no single Paleo lifestyle
Child rearing has occurred in extended families and entire
communities.
APA style in-text citation for
source(s)
(class notes, 2/18/2019)
(class notes, 2/18/2019)
Example(s) and sources you will use to answer the example section of Part b. “include at least
one example illustrating the criticism.”
List main ideas you will cover and your source(s) for each
Most resources were provided through male hunting, but
female gathering was probably the primary source of food.
APA style in-text citation for
example(s)
(Zuk, 2013)
Extended families, arranged marriages
(class notes, 2/18/2019)
Empirical research/studies you will use to answer the research evidence section of Part b.
“provide research evidence supporting the criticism.” Be sure to include research/studies from
both class—notes, handouts, videos—and readings. You must have a minimum of two directly
relevant studies.
Describe studies and your source(s) for each
Grandmothers as an important resource for child survival,
behavior, cognitive development
The nuclear family was the basic institution of child rearing,
but this is a recent arrangement
APA style in-text citation for this
study
(Coall & Hertwig, 2011)
(Caporael & Brewer, 1995)
Critique of Standard Evolutionary Psychology Theory of Sex Differences in Human Mating
Psychology of Gender, Dr. Lori Nelson
Strengths
1) The theory can explain, and provide a framework for integrating, a great deal of data.
2) Unlike social explanations (except sexual division of labor as the origin of gender schemas),
evolutionary psychology offers an explanation for the ultimate origin of many sex differences.
Weaknesses & criticisms of “standard” (e.g., Buss) evolutionary psychology theory of sex
differences in human mating
Conceptual problems with the theory, according to critics
1) Good/useful theories should be falsifiable (Karl Popper’s idea), but critics argue that much of the
standard evolutionary psychology theory regarding sex differences in human mating is unfalsifiable:
• Without a physical fossil record or time machine, theorized prehistorical processes cannot be
traced. (In contrast, fossil record is available as evidence for evolution of physical traits.)
• The theory makes few clear predictions about gender differences in advance of data.
• The theory can be used to explain almost any sex difference after the fact (post hoc).
2) Traits Buss assumes are adaptive for males are also adaptive for females, and vice versa.
• Example: Adaptive advantages of female (not just male) promiscuity
Hrdy Mother Nature in
optional readings
• Estrus females in many species are extremely promiscuous
Fine Testerone Rex Ch 1
• Benefits to promiscuous female and her offspring in some situations
Flies of fancy and Ch 2
• Example: Having multiple partners can be maladaptive for males.
One hundred babies
• Example: Male monogamy might be more adaptive than male promiscuity
• Example: Valuing youth in potential mates is adaptive for females (not just for males)
• Research shows older men have more defective sperm and offspring with problems.
3) Sex differences in social status and power (i.e., on average, males have greater access than do
females to resources) can explain the data, as well as the origin of sex differences, equally well.
• Example: Systematic cross-cultural comparisons show correlation between powerlessness of
women and larger sex differences in preferences for mate with resources (Eagly & Wood, 1999)
• Example: Men prefer hourglass WHR in women only in countries where women
Begley Don’t
are economically dependent on men. (Cashdan, 2008). Male preference for .7
blame caveman
female WHR theorized to be universal is not actually universally preferred.
4) Evolutionary psychologists have misconceptions about Paleo (“stone age”) life.
Zuk
• There was no single Paleo lifestyle.
Paleofantasy
• Example: Standard evolutionary psychology theory assumes most resources were
provided through male hunting, but female gathering was probably the primary source of food.
• Example: Standard evolutionary psychology theory assumes the nuclear family was the basic
institution of child rearing, but this is a recent arrangement (Caporael & Brewer, 1995).
o Historically, and currently in many places, child rearing has occurred in extended
families and entire communities.
o Extended families, arranged marriages, etc. may alter some of Buss’s assumptions.
o Example: Grandmothers as an important resource for child survival,
Hrdy Mother Nature in
behavior, cognitive development (Coall & Hertwig, 2011).
optional readings
5) Evolutionary psychologists have misconceptions about basic evolutionary processes.
• Not every trait or behavior is advantageous or adaptive (i.e., “good for something”)
deWaal 2002
•
Search for adaptive human traits should focus on common behaviors (e.g. men who care for
step-children or desire long-term commitment) rather than rare behaviors (e.g., men who
commit infanticide, violent rape)
6) Evolutionary psychologists have misconceptions about genetics. Current research
suggests genetic changes can happen more quickly than previously assumed (“spurts”)
and more recently than the “stone age.” We are not genetically “stuck” in the stone age.
Begley Don’t
blame caveman
7) Evolutionary psychologists have misconceptions about sex and reproduction. Much
human sex is non-reproductive.
Fine Testosterone
Rex Ch3 A new
position on sex
Problems with research evidence cited for the theory
1) Most studies of sex differences in human mating guided by evolutionary psychology examine
self-reported preferences, not actual behavior (Exceptions: age at marriage, responses to offers of
casual sex, physiological responses to infidelity; but problems with data for latter two)
• What people say they prefer is not always reflected in their actions
• Studies of mating behavior of young men vs. women show no sex difference in emphasis
placed on physical attractiveness or resources. (ex: Eastwick & Finkel, 2008) No sex
differences in implicit preferences for attractive partner (Eastwick et al., 2011).
• When social desirability pressure is removed, no sex difference in the number of reported
sex partners (Conley et al., 2011)
2) Comparing means of male vs. female participants sometimes obscures more important similarities.
• Example: Most males want a long-term relationship and do not want hundreds of partners
(Pedersen et al, 2002). Comparing male vs. female mean ideal number of partners obscures
major male-female similarities, because just a few males want a large number of partners.
Fine Testosterone
3) Sex differences in acceptance of offers of casual sex might be caused by confounds— Rex Ch2 One
differing perceptions of male vs. female proposers of casual sex, differing experiences
hundred babies
with casual sex—not necessarily innate sex differences in mating strategies.
• Male proposers are perceived to be more dangerous
• Female proposers are expected to provide more pleasure than male proposers. Females do
not experience as much sexual satisfaction from casual sex as males do.
4) Evolutionary psychologists are biased in the examples they select (“pick and choose” method)
and their interpretations of behaviors in non-human species.
Hrdy Raising Darwin’s
• Example: Changing interpretations of female and male baboon behavior.
Consciousness
• Example: Focusing on mating behavior of chimpanzees– promiscuous
in optional readings
short-term maters– rather than other primates (e.g., gibbons, orangutans)
which are monogamous or polygynous long-term maters
• Example: Chimpanzees vs. bonobos show different mating behavior (DeWaal research)
• Human anatomy and biology are characteristic of primates with long-term mating strategies
for both males and females, not short-term for males (Miller et al, 2002).
5) There is a major flaw in some evolutionary psychologists’ comparisons of humans to other
primate species with regard to sex differences in mating behavior:
• Other primate females have obvious estrus (except orangutans)
• In contrast, human females have continuous sexual receptivity and concealed ovulation
• Another flaw: Alcohol plays an important role in human mating (Miller et al, 2002).
Possible solutions
•
•
•
•
•
Conclude that standard evolutionary psychology theory of human mating is not supported
Revise and improve evolutionary psychology theory (Hrdy and DeWaal promote this
approach)
Empirically examine the effects of various behaviors (in males and in females) on survival,
reproduction, survival of offspring—the bottom line according to the theory of evolution
and evolutionary psychology
Learn from the results of biologists who use an experimental evolution approach in their
research.
Alternative approach (Hrdy is an example): Conclude that the most adaptive trait would be
a repertoire of reproductive strategies combined with flexibility—ability to switch or mix
strategies in response to physical environment and social circumstances—for both males
and females. This is similar to human behavioral ecology.
* * * * *
READ AND KNOW THIS INFORMATION ALSO: Other critiques not discussed in class
There is little evidence of a genetic origin for the mating behaviors (e.g., tendency to choose a mate
with resources) that evolutionary psychology tries to explain. Also, “brain modules” originally
postulated by some evolutionary psychologists are unlikely given other neuroscience findings.
Supposed sex differences in sexual vs. emotional jealousy are not reliable findings; they are only
obtained when participants are given a forced-choice questionnaire format with two hypothetical
scenarios and plenty of time to respond.
• Research with any other self-report measurement method shows no sex difference and does
not support Buss’s claims (DeSteno, 2010; Harris, 2000; DeStefano et al., 2002; DeStefano
& Salovey, 1996).
• Sex differences in physiological responses to sexual vs. emotional infidelity– Research with
improved methodology does not support Buss’s claims (Harris, 2000).
Research on facial attractiveness and health contradicts basic assumptions/predictions of Buss.
• Example of a clear prediction about human mating made by evolutionary psychologists in
advance of data
• Facial attractiveness in adolescence is NOT related to current (adolescent) health or later
(middle age) health, but people mistakenly believe that it is related (Kalick et al., 1998).
Rapid recent changes in mating behavior likely reflect social changes. Fast adaptation (e.g., within
one generation) to new social situations suggests that current reproductive strategies were not
necessarily determined in the “stone age.”
• Example: “Cougar” phenomenon (middle-aged and older women seeking sex with young men)
• Example: Effective birth control and rapid increase in female promiscuity
• Example: Possible increase in female infidelity due to greater opportunity (work outside
home, internet communication)
• Example: Rapid increase in the frequency of bride-older-than-groom marriages
Cross-cultural research cannot provide conclusive evidence regarding innate or evolutionary origin
of sex differences.
• True across cultures does not necessarily mean innate or genetic (ex: use of fire)
• Variation across cultures does not rule out genetic causes (ex: eye color)
• Systematic cross-cultural comparisons are useful (such as research by Eagly & Wood on
male vs. female power and preference for a mate with resources—see #3 above)
Selected sources:
Video– Friends & Rivals
Anger, N. (1994). The male of the species: Why is he needed? New York Times, Tuesday May 17, 1994, C1 & C12. [“Genetic
mutations tied to father in most cases”– older men more likely to have mutations]
Buss, D. M. (1995). Psychological sex differences: Origins through sexual selection. American Psychologist, 50, 164-168.
Buss, D. M. (1994). The Evolution of Desire.
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, 12, 1-14.
Buss, D. M., Larsen, R. J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, J. (1992). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and
psychology. Psychological Science, 3, 251-255.
Buss, D. M. (1988). The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 54, 616-628.
Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 559570.
Buss, D. M. (1996). Paternity uncertainty and the complex repertoire of human mating strategies. American Psychologist, 51, 161162. [reply to responses to Buss 1995]
Caporael, L. R., & Brewer, M. B. (1995). Hierarchical evolutionary theory: There is an alternative, and it’s not creationism.
Psychological Inquiry, 6, 31-34.
Cashdan, E. (2008). Waist-to-hip ratio across cultures: Trade-offs between androgen- and estrogen-dependent traits. Current
Anthropology, 49, 1099-1107. [section near end of article “Population differences” focuses on WHR and economic dependence]
Coall, D. A., & Hertwig, R. (2011). Grandparental investment: A relic of the past or a resource for the future? Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 20, 93-98.
Conley, T. (2011). Perceived proposer personality characteristics and gender differences in acceptance of casual sex offers. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 309-329.
Conley, T. (2011). Women, men, and the bedroom: Methodological and conceptual insights that narrow, reframe, and eliminate
gender differences in sexuality. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 296-300.
Derry, P. S. (1996). Buss and sexual selection: The issue of culture. American Psychologist, 51, 159-160.
DeSteno, D. (2010). Mismeasuring jealousy: A cautionary comment on Levy and Kelly (2010). Psychological Science, 21, 13551356.
de Waal, F. (2002). Evolutionary psychology: The wheat and the chaff. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 187-191.
Eagly, A., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles.
American Psychologist, 54, 408-423.
Eastwick, P. W., Eagly, A. H., Finkel, E. J., & Johnson, S. E. (2011). Implicit and explicit preferences for physical attractiveness in
a romantic partner: A double dissociation in predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 993-1011.
Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2008). Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a
romantic partner? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 245-264.
Fine, C. (2017). Testosterone Rex: Myths of Sex, Science, and Society. New York: Norton.
Haraway, D. (1986). Primatology is politics by other means. In R. Bleier (Ed.), Feminist approaches to science. New York:
Pergamon Press.
Harris, C. R. (2000). Psychophysiological responses to imagined infidelity: The specific innate modular view of jealousy
reconsidered. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1082-1091.
Hartz, A. J. (1996). Psycho-socioeconomics: Attractiveness research from a societal perspective. Journal of Social Behavior and
Personality, 11, 683-694.
Hrdy, S. B. (1988/1998). Raising Darwin’s consciousness: Females and evolutionary theory. In B. M. Clincly & J.K. Norem (Eds.),
The Gender and Psychology Reader (265-270). New York: New York University Press.
Hrdy, S. (1999). Mother Nature. New York: Ballantine Books. [segments can be found on ICON in “Optional readings” folder]
Kalick, S. M., Zebrowitz, L. A., Langlois, J. H., & Johnson, R. M. (1998). Does human facial attractiveness honestly advertise
health? Longitudinal data on an evolutionary question. Psychological Science, 9, 8-13.
Miller, L. C., Putcha-Bhagavatula, A., & Pedersen, W. C. (2002). Men’s and women’s mating preferences: Distinct evolutionary
mechanisms? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 88-93.
Pedersen, W., C., Miller, L. C., Putcha-Bhagavatula, A. D., & Yang, Y. (2002). Evolved sex differences in the number of partners
desired? The long and the short of it. Psychological Science, 13, 157-161.
Pratto, F., & Hegarty, P. (2000). The political psychology of reproductive strategies. Psychological Science, 11, 57-62.
Silverstein, L. B. (1996). Evolutionary psychology and the search for sex differences. American Psychologist, 51, 160-161.
[response to Buss 1995]
Zuk, M. (2013). Paleofantasy: What Evolution Really Tells Us About Sex, Diet, and How We Live. W. W. Norton & Co.
Hi, Deyu,
Thanks for sending me your essay plan. I have some important feedback for you as you finalize
your polished draft and work on your revision. If you can incorporate my feedback into the polished
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment