Transcript Lecture 15
Human Mate Choice Evolutionary psychology is about cognitive mechanisms. It uses a functional (adaptive) approach. Asks what is if for? If we wanted to build a mechanism that did x, what would it look like? Evolutionary psychology is about cognitive mechanisms. It uses a functional (adaptive) approach. Asks what is if for? If we wanted to build a mechanism that did x, what would it look like? It assumes that natural selection (of alternative alleles) built functional cognitive architectures just as it built functional hearts, lungs and livers. Evolutionary psychology is about cognitive mechanisms. It uses a functional (adaptive) approach. Asks what is if for? If we wanted to build a mechanism that did x, what would it look like? It assumes that natural selection (of alternative alleles) built functional cognitive architectures just as it built functional hearts, lungs and livers. It assumes that these cognitive architectures are specialized for particular functions, just as other organs Cognitive specialization: The mind is not a general-purpose computer. Cognitive specialization: The mind is not a general-purpose computer. It is a collection of many mental organs. Phoneme detector, grammar parser, face recognizer, emotion parser, relative motion computer, map builder, spatial updater, threat detector, mate evaluator… Cognitive specialization: The mind is not a general-purpose computer. It is a collection of many mental organs. Phoneme detector, grammar parser, face recognizer, emotion parser, relative motion computer, map builder, spatial updater, threat detector, mate evaluator… We refer to these as (mental) modules. Cognitive specialization: The mind is not a general-purpose computer. It is a collection of many mental organs. Phoneme detector, grammar parser, face recognizer, emotion parser, relative motion computer, map builder, spatial updater, threat detector, mate evaluator… We refer to these as (mental) modules. They are domain-specific cognitive adaptations. They handle certain kinds of input and produce certain kinds of output. Mate evaluator module(s). What would this kind of domain-specific cognitive adaptation look like? Interesting question: Would everybody’s look the same? Would women’s and men’s be the same? Let’s take one example an analyze it in detail: mate evaluator module(s). What would this kind of domain-specific cognitive adaptation look like? Interesting question: Would everybody’s look the same? Would women’s and men’s be the same? This is the strength of EP; we have an overarching theory: natural selection. Selection builds adaptations that address recurring problems... faced by our ancestors. Would the challenges of mate choice have been the same for ancestral males and females? Selection builds adaptations that address recurring problems... faced by our ancestors. Would the challenges of mate choice have been the same for ancestral males and females? Theory of sexual selection says probably not. Selection builds adaptations that address recurring problems... faced by our ancestors. Would the challenges of mate choice have been the same for ancestral males and females? Theory of sexual selection says probably not. Male reproductive success is less limited than female reproductive success. What do we get when we choose a mate? 1. Genes (to mix with our own in forming offspring). Probably similar adaptations in men and women. 2. Parental effort (help in rearing offspring). Probably different adaptations in men and women Cognitive mechanisms should evolve such that we attend to best predictors. Analogy of food preferences. Challenges For females: For males: Quality Quantity Challenges For females: For males: Quality Quantity Mate with good genes Mate with good genes Challenges For females: For males: Quality Quantity Mate with good genes Mate with good genes Good investor (economically) (physiologically) Good investor Challenges For females: For males: Quality Quantity Mate with good genes Mate with good genes Good investor (economically) (physiologically) Good investor Keeps resources at home Keeps paternity at home Challenges For females: For males: Quality Quantity Females more choosy Males more eager Date solicitation experiment Confederates asked unsuspecting subjects for a date. Variable: coffee, apartment visit, sex. Acceptance rate? Date solicitation experiment Confederates asked unsuspecting subjects for a date. Variable: coffee, apartment visit, sex. Acceptance rate? Women Men 50% 50% Apartment 6% 69% Sex 0% 75% Coffee Challenges For females: For males: Quality Quantity Mate with good genes Mate with good genes Red-queen benefits Red-queen benefits Red Queen Model for sexual reproduction Sex appears to be a counter-strategy to parasites and pathogens. Hence “good genes” are the ones that confer parasite and pathogen resistance. Health and vigor are obvious mate-choice criteria for both sexes. And so is symmetry. Challenges For females: For males: Quality Quantity Mate with good genes Mate with good genes Good investor (economically) (physiologically) Good investor Good resource provider: potential: Good “mommy” status, ambition, wealth youth, fertility Sexes value symmetry equally (good genes; parasite resistance) But not youth or body shape (markers of female fertility) male markers female markers Good genes physical physical Good PI behavioral physical Challenges For females: For males: Quality Quantity Mate with good genes Mate with good genes Good investor (economically) (physiologically) Good investor Keeps resources at home at home Avoid partner’s MRS Keeps paternity Avoid partner’s MRS Female mixed reproductive strategy Take genes from one male and paternal effort from another. Male mixed reproductive strategy One long-term mate getting substantial investment, but also pursue short-term mating opportunities. Of course such things can happen…but are there specific psychological mechanisms involved? And specific psychological mechanisms geared to protection against the partner’s MRS? Both sexes experience jealousy but MRS theory suggest their jealousy would be triggered differently. Females: guard against partner’s emotional engagement. Males: guard against partner’s sexual engagement 50 men Percentage recall 40 women 30 20 10 0 sexual infidelity emotional infidelity less threatening sexual infidelity emotional infidelity more threatening . A variety of domain-specific context-specific trait-specific sex-specific cognitive mechanisms suggest that human posses evolved adaptations designed to promote optimal mate choice. Take Darwin seriously!