Human foragers are obligately group-living, and their high dependence on mutual aid is believed to have characterized our species' social evolution. It was therefore a central adaptive problem for our ancestors to avoid damaging the willingness of other group members to render them assistance. Cognitively, this requires a predictive map of the degree to which others would devalue the individual based on each of various possible acts. With such a map, an individual can avoid socially costly behaviors by anticipating how much audience devaluation a potential action (e.g., stealing) would cause and weigh this against the action's direct payoff (e.g., acquiring). The shame system manifests all of the functional properties required to solve this adaptive problem, with the aversive intensity of shame encoding the social cost. Previous data from three Western(ized) societies indicated that the shame evoked when the individual anticipates committing various acts closely tracks the magnitude of devaluation expressed by audiences in response to those acts. Here we report data supporting the broader claim that shame is a basic part of human biology. We conducted an experiment among 899 participants in 15 small-scale communities scattered around the world. Despite widely varying languages, cultures, and subsistence modes, shame in each community closely tracked the devaluation of local audiences (mean = +0.84). The fact that the same pattern is encountered in such mutually remote communities suggests that shame's match to audience devaluation is a design feature crafted by selection and not a product of cultural contact or convergent cultural evolution.
In many species, females and males form long‐term mating bonds, but marriage—and especially arranged marriage—are uniquely human traits. While marriage practices impact many cultural phenomena, they also can have evolutionary (i.e., fitness) consequences. Strongly felt but not necessarily conscious mating preferences presumably evolved because they provide fitness benefits compared to random mating, and this prediction has been supported by experimental animal studies. Arranged marriage might similarly reduce fitness in humans, but only if parents regularly choose different mates for their offspring than offspring would choose for themselves. Here we report a broad ethnographic survey exploring whether parents and offspring disagree over partner choice in arranged marriages. Using the Human Relations Area Files, we reviewed 543 ethnographies to assess the relative frequencies of parent–offspring agreement and disagreement over partner choice, the reasons for disagreement, and the outcomes of disagreement. In all world areas, parents and offspring overwhelmingly choose different partners. Parents and offspring disagreed over fitness‐relevant traits of the potential spouse, and both parties sometimes used extreme methods to influence outcomes. These findings suggest that arranged marriages may be useful for studying the effects of mate choice in humans and for assessing the unique dynamics of human mating systems. [parent–offspring conflict, mate choice, cross‐cultural]
Mate preferences probably evolved to increase fitness; however, studies using arranged and non-arranged marriage as proxies for limited and free mate choice (respectively) do not find any reproductive differences. We explore why arranged and non-arranged marriages are an imperfect proxy for limited and free-choice matings and what fitness effects different marriage types could produce. Data from focus group discussions with men and women in Nepal show that there are three spouse choice categories with differing levels of parental influence over mate choice, reinforcing that arranged and non-arranged are not dichotomous. Discussions also show that parents and offspring, especially sons, may be more aligned in in-law/mate preferences than expected, demonstrating the need to establish clear domains of parent–offspring disagreement over spouse choice in the community before investigating fitness. Several social and financial benefits that are only available to arranged couples in this community were detected, and these benefits could compensate for any costs of not choosing a spouse independently. These benefits of arranged marriage are more salient for women than for men. These discussions indicate that predictions about the effects of spouse choice on fitness outcomes may differ for men and women and depend on community-specific socioeconomic benefits.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.