GC

Week 8

# Super Detailed Notes on Lectures 8.1 (Love & Attraction) and 8.3 (Individual Differences)

---

## Lecture 8.1: What is Love? Evolutionary and Psychological Perspectives

### Key Themes:

1. Defining Love

- Subjective and multifaceted (e.g., connection, safety, bonding, reproduction).

- Evolutionary perspective: Love is a behavior evolved to maximize gene survival.

2. Attraction and Beauty

- Cultural vs. Biological Determinants:

- Cultural: Esther Honig’s "Make Me Beautiful" experiment showed Photoshop artists from different cultures altered her image based on local beauty standards.

- Biological: Universal traits like symmetry, averageness, and neoteny (retention of juvenile features) are cross-culturally attractive.

- Symmetry:

- Indicator of health (asymmetry may signal disease/parasites during development).

- Supported by studies like Rikowski & Grammer (1999) where body odor preferences correlated with symmetry.

- Averageness:

- Averaged faces are perceived as more attractive (Galton’s composite portraits).

- "Cheerleader Effect": Groups appear more attractive because brains average faces.

- Neoteny:

- Features like large eyes, small chin (e.g., Disney characters) signal youth and fertility.

- Evolutionary explanation: Younger mates = higher reproductive potential.

3. Evolutionary Psychology of Love

- Mate Selection:

- Females may prefer males with high testosterone (wide jaws) during peak fertility but nurturing males otherwise.

- Males may prefer youthful features linked to fertility.

- Critiques:

- Heteronormative assumptions; ignores LGBTQ+ relationships.

- Overemphasis on reproduction; neglects emotional/companionate love.

4. Case Study: Grandmother Hypothesis

- People often prefer maternal grandmothers over paternal ones.

- Evolutionary explanation: Maternal grandmothers have higher genetic certainty (mother’s paternity is unambiguous).

- Alternative explanations:

- Proximity (maternal grandmothers may live closer).

- Emotional bonding (mother-daughter relationships are stronger).

5. Cautionary Tales in Evolutionary Psychology

- Kakapo Parrot: Maladapted to new predators (stoats) due to evolved traits (freezing response) that were beneficial in its original environment.

- Rat Pup Behavior: Wriggling to find nipples seems innate but is learned via one-trial conditioning (squeezing in birth canal + smell association).

- Three-Eyed Frog Experiment: Ocular dominance columns (brain structures for 3D vision) emerged in frogs with surgically altered forward-facing eyes, showing neural plasticity, not hardwired genes.

- Limitations:

- Evolutionary explanations often conflate correlation with causation.

- Ignore cultural/social influences (e.g., testosterone drops in new fathers may be due to sleep deprivation, not evolved caregiving).

6. The "Gay Gene" Debate

- No evidence for a "gene for heterosexuality" despite its evolutionary advantage.

- Homosexuality is widespread in nature (e.g., 90% of giraffe mating is male-male).

- Suggests genes encode plasticity, not fixed behaviors.

---

## Lecture 8.3: What Makes Us Different? Personality and Intelligence

### Key Themes:

1. Measuring Individual Differences

- Projective Tests (Rorschach Inkblot):

- Discredited as diagnostic tools; reveal more about the therapist’s biases than the patient.

- Theory-Driven Tests (Myers-Briggs):

- Based on Jungian typology (e.g., INTJ).

- Criticisms:

- Dichotomous categories ignore normal distributions.

- Low test-retest reliability (~50% get different results weeks later).

- Empirical Approaches (Big Five/OCEAN):

- Derived from factor analysis of behavioral data.

- Traits:

1. Openness (creativity, curiosity).

2. Conscientiousness (organization, self-discipline).

3. Extraversion (sociability, enthusiasm).

4. Agreeableness (compassion, cooperation).

5. Neuroticism (emotional instability).

- Predictive validity:

- Extraverts use words like "party"; introverts sigh more in texts.

- Conscientiousness correlates with cleaner shoes.

2. Intelligence Testing

- Stanford-Binet IQ Test:

- Early focus on mental age (e.g., "What’s foolish about claiming to find Columbus’s childhood skull?").

- Cultural bias (e.g., assumes knowledge of Western history).

- Multiple Intelligences (Gardner):

- Linguistic, musical, logical-mathematical, etc.

- General Intelligence (Spearman’s g):

- Statistically, IQ subtests correlate; g explains shared variance.

- Raven’s Matrices:

- Culture-fair measure of fluid intelligence (pattern recognition).

3. Nature vs. Nurture: Heritability

- Definition: Proportion of trait variance in a population due to genetic differences (e.g., height = 0.9, IQ = ~0.5–0.8).

- Misconceptions:

- Not "80% of your IQ is from genes."

- Not "Group differences (e.g., race/class) are genetic."

- Key Insight: Heritability depends on environment.

- Example: In a world where everyone smokes, lung cancer heritability rises because environment is constant.

- Gene-Environment Interaction:

- Flynn Effect: IQ scores rise over decades (due to nutrition, education, etc.), showing environmental impact.

- Shared Environment: Friends are genetically similar to 4th cousins (homophily).

4. Political and Ethical Implications

- Eugenics History:

- Goddard’s (1912) Kallikak Family falsely claimed "feeble-mindedness" was hereditary.

- Used to justify segregation/immigration laws.

- Modern Genetics:

- No "gay gene" or "IQ gene" found; traits are polygenic + environmentally mediated.

- Ethical dilemmas: Should we select embryos based on genetic potential?

---

### Critical Takeaways:

- Love/Attraction: Evolutionary theories explain some patterns but oversimplify human diversity.

- Personality: Big Five is robust; Myers-Briggs is pop psychology.

- Intelligence: g exists but is not destiny—environment matters.

- Heritability: Misused to justify inequality; it describes variance within groups, not between them.

- Caution: Evolutionary psychology risks "just-so stories"; genes interact with culture/development.

---

Final Note: These lectures emphasize critical thinking—question assumptions, distinguish causation from correlation, and recognize the limits of biological determinism.

# Detailed Lecture Notes: Lecture 8.2 – What Makes Us Special?

## Introduction

- Key Question: How does the evolutionary history of our species explain modern behavior?

- Focus Areas:

- Behaviors evolution can explain.

- Insights into our evolutionary past.

- Cautionary tales about evolutionary explanations.

---

## Cautionary Tales

1. Baby-Killing Cavemen: Evolutionary explanations for infanticide (e.g., stepfathers vs. biological fathers).

2. Wriggling Rat Pups: Learned behavior during birth, not hardwired.

3. Three-Eyed Frog: Ocular dominance columns develop based on environmental input, not innate genes.

4. Girls Who Like Boys Who Like Girls: Sexual preference as an interaction of innate dispositions, learning, and social structure (Bem’s Exotic Becomes Erotic theory).

---

## The Kakapo: A Case Study in Evolutionary Mismatch

- Unique Traits:

- World’s only flightless parrot.

- Lek mating system (males build basins and emit low-frequency booms).

- 30-day hatching, strong odor.

- Only 86 alive today (critically endangered).

- Evolutionary Mismatch:

- Adapted to a densely forested New Zealand with abundant fruit trees.

- Deforestation and introduced predators (stoats, weasels) disrupted its survival strategies.

- Lesson: Traits optimized for past environments may be maladaptive in rapidly changing ones.

---

## Evolutionary Psychology

- Definition: Analyzing human behavior through evolutionary adaptations.

- Key Ideas:

- Atavistic Cognitive Quirks: Traits adaptive in ancestral environments but not necessarily today (e.g., disgust responses, social cheating detection).

- Human Uniqueness Claims: Often overstated when compared to other species.

---

## What Makes Humans "Special"?

### 1. Global Dominance?

- Humans populate the entire planet, but:

- Bacteria are the most abundant life form.

- Insects and nematodes dominate in numbers.

### 2. Farming?

- Humans farm plants and animals, but:

- Leafcutter ants farm fungus.

- Wood ants "herd" aphids for secretions.

### 3. Technology?

- Humans invented the wheel, but:

- Bacterial flagella function as rotary engines.

### 4. Weapons?

- Humans have advanced weapons, but:

- Bombardier beetles eject explosive 100°C fluid.

### 5. Art?

- Humans create art, but:

- Bowerbirds construct elaborate, aesthetically arranged displays to attract mates.

### 6. Intelligence?

- Human Strengths:

- Problem-solving, tool use, working memory, symbolic reasoning.

- Animal Counterexamples:

- Chimps outperform humans in short-term visual memory tasks.

- Chimps solve novel problems (e.g., using water displacement to retrieve peanuts).

- Douglas Adams’ Quote:

- Humans assume they’re smarter than dolphins because of technology, but dolphins might think the same for opposite reasons.

---

## The Great Leap Forward (~40,000 Years Ago)

- Sudden Advancements:

- Proliferation of tools (needles, fishing hooks, arrowheads).

- Cave art, symbolic representation, jewelry.

- Possible Causes:

- Not Brain Size: Neanderthals had larger brains.

- Not Tool Use: Tools existed for millions of years.

- Language Hypothesis:

- Lowering of the hyoid bone enabled complex vocalizations.

- May have triggered cultural and technological explosion.

---

## Evolution and Decision-Making

### 1. Disgust and Social Conservatism (Paul Rozin & David Buss)

- Evolved Disgust Mechanism:

- Originally avoided disease (rotting food, bodily fluids).

- Now extends to moral judgments (e.g., associating "evil" with contamination).

- Political Exploitation:

- Linking disgust to social issues (e.g., anti-gay marriage campaigns using foul smells).

### 2. Cheater Detection (Cosmides & Tooby)

- Wason Selection Task:

- Abstract Version: Poor performance (20% correct).

- Social Cheating Version: High performance (75% correct).

- Evolutionary Explanation:

- Humans evolved a "cheater detection module" for reciprocal altruism.

- Explains outrage over social violations (e.g., queue-jumping).

---

## Challenges to Simple Evolutionary Psychology

1. Gene-Environment Interaction:

- Traits develop from interactions, not just genes (e.g., ocular dominance columns in the three-eyed frog).

2. Overemphasis on "Cavemen" Hypotheses:

- Social explanations (modern stressors) may suffice without invoking ancestral environments.

3. No "Gay Gene":

- Bem’s Exotic Becomes Erotic Theory:

- Childhood gender nonconformity → play with opposite-sex peers → unfamiliarity → sexual attraction.

- Explains both heterosexuality and homosexuality via social learning.

4. Culture Shapes Evolution:

- Humans uniquely shape their environment, making simple evolutionary explanations insufficient.

---

## Key Takeaways

- Avoid Anthropomorphic Bias: Humans are not the "pinnacle" of evolution.

- Evolutionary Mismatch: Traits optimized for past environments may not fit modern ones.

- Complex Interactions: Genes, environment, and culture interact in ways that defy simple evolutionary stories.

- Critical Thinking Needed: Evolutionary explanations should be evidence-based, not just speculative.

---

## Further Questions

- How much of human behavior is truly "hardwired" vs. culturally shaped?

- What other species challenge our assumptions about intelligence and uniqueness?

- How does language bridge the gap between biology and culture?

End of Notes.