__

EEvvoolluuttiioonn,, BBiioollooggyy

&& SSoocciieettyy Fall 2010 Newsletter of the ASA Section on , & Society Volume 7, No. 1

Chair In this issue: 2010-2011 Essay:” Replications and Genetic Jeremy Freese, Northwestern University Studies of Behavior” by Michael Shanahan, Shawn Bauldry& Ross Past-Chair Macmillan 2009-2010 Essay: “Are Evolutionary Theory and Stephen Sanderson, UC-Riverside Rational Choice Theory Compatible?” by Richard Hutchinson Chair-Elect Essay: Why Rational Choice Theory 2011-2012 and * Are Natural Allies Jonathan Turner, UC-Riverside by Stephen K. Sanderson New publications of Section Secretary-Treasurer Members 2010-2012 Announcement: Special Issue of F. Scott Lewis, Penn-State Harrisburg Journal of Mathematical : “Micro-Macro Links and Micro- Council Members Foundations” Alan Booth, Penn State University Section Award Winners 2010 (2009-2012) David Franks, Virginia Commonwealth University (2010-2013) Replications and Genetic Christine Horne, Washington State Studies of Behavior University (2008-2011) Richard Machalek, University of Michael Shanahan & Shawn Bauldry, UNC- Wyoming Chapel Hill (2009-2012) Ross Macmillan, University of Minnesota Patrick Nolan, University of South Carolina (2008-2011) Michael Shanahan, University of North The behavioral geneticist Lydon Eaves is Carolina at Chapel Hill (2010-2013) fond of noting that Saint Augustine was among the first to make genetically-informed Newsletter editor and Webperson observations when, in arguing against the Rosemary L. Hopcroft, UNC-Charlotte validity of horoscopes, he pointed out how very www2.asanet.org/sectionevol/ different twins could be. Fast- forward 1,600 years from the Bishop of Hippo to the publication of two papers in Science by Avshalom Caspi, Terri Moffitt, and their Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 2 – colleagues in 2002 and 2003. Both papers when self-reports are used (Uher & McGuffin, were empirical studies that focused on genetic 2010; see also Caspi et al., 2010, for a recent polymorphisms and their interactions with discussion of supporting evidence with non- social experiences in the prediction of human primates). psychiatric outcomes. And both papers have put the issue of replication in the scientific So things stand at this writing. And, quite spotlight. understandably, a major concern in this area of research is now replication, the reproducibility The first such study (the “MAOA study”) of a study’s methods and findings. Yet some reported that a genetic variant associated with basic lessons about replications have been low MAOA activity coupled with child forgotten and, with these lessons in mind, maltreatment was associated with antisocial replication can proceed with a more behavior in young adulthood. A 2006 meta- constructive sense for building scientific analysis by Kim-Cohen and her colleagues knowledge bases and theories. concluded that, across five extant studies, the interactive effect held. The original MAOA At the outset, it is noteworthy that study (cited over 1,800 times to date) and the replication is not a hot topic beyond gene meta-analysis have spawned a cottage candidate research. Turn to any issue of AJS industry of discussion and attempted or ASR in sociology and ask yourself how replications, with some scholars presently many studies constitute replications or will concluding that results are “mixed” (an generate replications or will require replications undesirable descriptor to which we return to be validated. Although there are certainly below). areas of research that have been heavily replicated in the behavioral sciences, explicit The Caspi team’s second Science paper concerns for replication in sociology are (the “5HTT paper”) reported an interaction minimal. This unevenness may be thought between the serotonin transporter linked “unfair” given the extensive attention to polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR) and stressful replication in gene-environment research, but it life events in the prediction of major depression actually works to the disadvantage of subfields in young adulthood. If the MAOA paper requiring little replication. In the long run, such spawned a cottage industry, the 5HTT paper fields cannot generate a cumulative body of gave rise to a veritable rust belt of heavy knowledge. industry, with the original paper now cited almost 3,000 times. A highly influential meta- Historians of science hold that replications analysis appearing in Journal of the American were a major breakthrough for the scientific Medical Association concluded that, across 14 method because they required that scientists reviewed studies, no such interaction was who were largely isolated from one another replicated (Risch et al. 2008; see also Munafo clearly communicate their procedures and et al., 2009 for a similar meta-analysis and findings. If Robert Boyle could confirm the conclusion). Numerous deficiencies in the inverse relationship between an ideal gas’s meta-analyses were noted (see Letters in pressure and volume—and his work was then JAMA, November 4, 2009, for some examples) replicated across Western Europe--then and a qualitative assessment of empirical something indeed had been accomplished studies published at about the same time as (Daston, 1994). But herein lies the first problem Risch concluded that replication results were with replications: the concept of the replication patterned by the measure of life-events, with was originally developed in the physical semi-structured interviews being associated sciences where essentially exact replications with rejection of the null (Uher & McGuffin, were necessary. Indeed, most “facts” in the 2008). More recently, a review concludes that physical sciences rest on hundreds of nearly the interaction does indeed replicate across identical replications, sometimes performed studies using objective measures of adversity purposively, and sometimes performed as the among females, but the effect size attenuates

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 3 – first step in an elaboration of the original measure of childhood maltreatment that shares research. no common items with the original MAOA study? And so on. The behavioral sciences simply have not proceeded in this manner (for reasons The second stage in the replication process discussed by Lindsay and Ehrenberg [1993]); is where life gets yet more interesting because at best, replications are typically “incidental” in differentiated replications help to establish the sense that data collected for one purpose scope conditions to the original finding; further prove reasonably suitable to replicate a finding validate the initial finding by establishing from a different dataset. As Lindsay and convergent validity; and strengthen confidence Ehrenberg note, this incidental quality is both in the original finding by eliminating potential good and bad. The good part: the ultimate biases due to unobserved heterogeneity goals of replications are (1) the validation of a (Rosenbaum, 2001). Through the second finding and (2) a determination of the range of stage, perhaps some replications will reject the conditions in which a finding holds true. null and some will not and, ideally, patterns Incidental replications typically bear on the among the replications will reveal the second purpose, which they view as more conditions under which a gene-environment important than the first purpose. They are effect is valid. The second stage is not without “differentiated” in their methodologies from the its challenges, however. Foremost, because original study and the resulting pattern of most (virtually all) differentiated replications are findings establishes scope conditions to the incidental, they vary many methodological original finding (hopefully). However, they also features of the original study simultaneously. If note that replications should ideally begin with the null hypothesis is not rejected (i.e., a the first purpose in mind: to validate the finding genetic finding is not replicated), it may be with “close” replications, ones that are very unclear which features of the incidental similar, methodologically (i.e., sampling, replication account for this failure to reject. Or measures, research design) to the original perhaps the original finding is a false positive. study. The Caspi 5HTT-Risch-Uher sequence can In other words, in a perfect world, a finding be read as a jumbled variant of this perfect of interest is followed by close replications and world scenario. The 5HTT study was followed then, if validated, by increasingly differentiated by many replications that, not ideally, fell replications. The first stage of close across the continuum from close to replications is an exercise in cost- differentiated replications but were decidedly effectiveness—why bother with differentiated toward the latter end of the continuum. The replications if the basic finding is very likely Risch meta-analysis revealed that across all of untrue? However, what is a close replication, these studies, the interaction did not hold. particularly in gene-environment studies? Does However Uher showed that the interaction is a close replication necessarily refer to the replicable among females when objective same population but a different sample? Must measures of adversity are used. Our own it use the same measures? The issue of review also suggests that the interaction holds measurement is especially vexing because the among clinical samples with high levels of psychometric properties of many social stressors (Shanahan and Bauldry, in press). measures are not well understood. The MAOA Thus, the 5HTT interaction is no law of gravity. study’s measure of maltreatment was based on But it likely holds in some nontrivial prospectively collected data from multiple circumstances. Beyond the 5HTT and MAOA sources in New Zealand describing studies, there is a lesson for future replications experiences before the age of five. Is a of any gene-environment study: just as no one replication based on an American sample and study is decisive, no one replication is decisive. retrospective self-reports of childhood abuse Rather it is the corpus of multiple replications before age 15 more a “close” or “differentiated” that may or may not validate and establish replication? What about a study using a scope conditions for an initial finding.

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 4 –

are necessary, with the latter being especially A second lesson also emerges, seemingly salient when incidental replications are the rule. obvious but rarely discussed: reviews of replications typically ignore statistical power. The foregoing suggests that statements As Ottenbacher (1996) notes, replications must such as “the finding didn’t replicate, casting be interpreted in terms of effect size, sample serious doubt on the original study,” “results size, and Type II error rates. Although he is across the studies are mixed,” “most studies largely concerned with small samples that are fail to replicate the original study” and so on— characteristic of experiments, his point holds which are fairly ubiquitous in journals and the true for gene-environment studies where effect hallways of professional meetings—are, by sizes (think Cohen’s d) are thought to be small. themselves, overly simplifying matters. So, assuming an association between x and y Replications should not be construed in terms is non-zero, these factors set an a priori of a dichotomous outcome (did reject null; did probability that a null will be rejected in any not reject null) but rather in terms of their many given study, assuming there is indeed a complexities, foremost being power, effect significant association. In fact, our recent size, Type II error rates, measures, samples simulation study, focused on 5HTT, and many and populations, designs. other epidemiological studies suggest that the effect sizes of gene-environment interactions If the messiness of gene-environment are fairly small and that studies to date have replications can be disheartening at times, they been—with few exceptions—notably are also exciting opportunities to validate or unpowered. In other words, there was no not, and to learn about scope conditions. But reasonable expectation that a sizable patience is a virtue—solid conclusions require proportion of extant replications of MAOA or multiple replications that differ on the 5HTT would have rejected the null as a matter continuum of close to differentiated. of power alone. In this sense, many replications have been decidedly unfair—why The upshot is, then, that (1) replications would one expect a finding to replicate with an should be interpreted in terms of their unpowered sample? methodological closeness or differentiation from the original study; (2) close replications The average taste of 20 apples simply has make sense early on as necessary validations no bearing on the taste of an orange. of the original findings; (3) numerous differentiated replications can establish scope conditions; ideally they systematically vary aspects of the original study; (4) however close One implication is that reviews of existing or differentiated, replications should not be studies that tally up “significant” and “non- interpreted in dichotomous terms (failed to significant” findings are naïve. The results of reject null; rejected null) but rather in terms of replications are not “yes” or “no” phenomena their power, effect size, and Type II error rate but rather a matter of degree. Meta-analyses and measures. reflect this fact, with their characteristic interest in the consistency of effect size across Gene-environment researchers should take samples. Yet they typically fail to take into heart in the fact that it is not merely their account the diverse methods used across the subfield that often finds itself entangled in studies. Particularly when replications are seemingly conflicting empirical studies. largely differentiated from the original study, Consider the saga of cold fusion. Fleishman the probative value of a meta-analysis and Pons originally reported “desktop” fusion in diminishes. The average taste of 20 apples 1989 and after untold millions of dollars and simply has no bearing on the taste of an countless lab hours, a 2004 Department of orange. Thus, both well done meta-analyses Energy panel of experts was split such that and qualitative assessments of extant studies two-thirds of the experts did not believe that cold fusion was an established fact, one

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 5 – panelist was entirely convinced that it existed, a meta-analysis, Molecular Psychiatry 11, and the remainder of experts was partially 903-913. convinced. Similar stories could be told with respect to so-called endocrine disruptors such Lindsay, R. M. and A. S. C. Ehrenberg. 1993. as BPA in our plastics, many prescription The design of replicated studies. The medications, and so on. Particularly when American Statistician 47(3), 217-228. science matters—when findings can shape our Munafo MR, Durrant C, Lewis G, Flint J. Gene daily lives, promote or detract from our well- × environment interactions at the serotonin being, make us more or less productive— transporter locus. Biological Psychiatry replication is critical. 2009; 65: 211–219.

The good news is that gene-environment Ottenbacher, Kenneth J. 1996. The power of researchers worry about replication. Especially replications and replications of power. The in many subfields of sociology, replication has American Statistician 50(3), 271-275. not been a major concern and thus the accumulation of the knowledge base is greatly Risch, N., Herrell, R., Lehner, T., Liang, K. Y., hindered. To paraphrase Nietzsche, if the Eaves, L., Hoh, J., et al. (2009). Interaction replications don’t kill us, they will make us between the serotonin transporter gene (5- stronger. HTTLPR), stressful life events, and risk of depression: A meta-analysis. JAMA : The Journal of the American Medical References Association, 301(23), 2462-2471.

Caspi, A., Hariri, A. R., Holmes, A., Uher, R., & Rosenbaum, Paul R. 2001. Replicating effects T. Moffitt. 2010. Genetic sensitivity to the and biases. The American Statistician environment: the case of the serontin 55(3), 223-227. transporter and its implications for studying complex diseases and traits. American Shanahan, M. J., & S. Bauldry. In press. Journal of Psychiatry 167(5): 509-527. Improving environmental markers in gene- Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Mill, J., environment research: insights from life Martin, J., Craig, I. W., et al. (2002). Role course sociology. K. Kendler, S. Jaffee, & of genotype in the cycle of violence in D. Romer (Eds.). The dynamic genome maltreated children. Science (New York, and mental health: The role of genes and N.Y.), 297(5582), 851-854. environments in development. NY: Oxford University Press. Caspi, A., Sugden, K., Moffitt, T. E., Taylor, A., Craig, I. W., Harrington, H., et al. (2003). Uher, R., & McGuffin, P. (2008). The Influence of life stress on depression: moderation by the serotonin transporter Moderation by a polymorphism in the 5- gene of environmental adversity in the HTT gene. Science (New York, N.Y.), aetiology of mental illness: Review and 301(5631), 386-389. methodological analysis. Molecular Psychiatry, 13(2), 131-146. Daston, L. 1974. Baconian facts, academic civility, and the prehistory of objectivity. In Uher, R. & P. McGuffin. (2010). The A. Megill (Ed.), Rethinking Objectivity. moderation b the serotonin transporter Durham, NC: Duke. gene of anvironmental adversity in the etiology of depression: 2009 update. Kim-Cohen, J., Caspi, A., Taylor, A., Williams, Molecular Psychiatry 15(1), 18-22. B., Newcombe, R., Craig, I. W., & T. E. Moffitt. 2006. MAOA, maltreatment, and gene-environment interaction predicting children’s mental health: new evidence and

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 6 –

theoretical framework is cognitive, not emotional, and so it is based on what is in an Are Evolutionary Theory and important sense a pre-scientific view of the Rational Choice Theory brain, cognition and rationality. Neoclassical Compatible? economics (NCE), the most fully developed and influential variant of strong RCT, makes completely unrealistic assumptions about Richard Hutchinson, Kennesaw State human information processing, assuming University maximizing based on perfect information, that are not supported by empirical research. In (Talk presented 8/15/10 at the E,B & S Invited recent years the field of behavioral economics Session: “Evolutionary Sociology and Rational th has begun to carry out experiments in order to Choice: Friends or Opponents?” at the 105 develop a more realistic understanding of ASA Annual Meeting) human economic behavior than the NCE equations. Herbert Simon was a pioneer of As sociologists we need to be clear when this field with his theory of “satisficing” instead we talk about evolutionary theory whether we of maximizing in decision-making, and more mean biological evolutionary theory as applied generally, bounded rationality (Simon 1947). to humans, or sociocultural evolutionary theory. Prospect theory recognizes that people tend to So let me begin with the question of whether be risk averse, and therefore value what they biological evolutionary theory is compatible already have more than what they might gain with rational choice theory (RCT). It is central in the future (cited in Macy 2006). Many trials to biological evolution that individuals are self- of The Ultimatum Game show that culturally interested. They aim to survive and reproduce. conditioned norms of fairness trump pure self- Selection takes place primarily at the level of interest, leading to the failure of expected utility the individual organism. Since self-interest is theory, specifically the substitution axiom also the central principle of RCT, then it would (Kahneman and Tversky 1979; Henrich et al seem that biological evolutionary theory and 2004). Recent Nobel Prizes in economics rational choice theory are compatible on a very have been awarded to researchers doing basic level. However, as it has been empirical work that does not support the NCE developed in utilitarianism and economics, and assumption of perfect rationality (Macy 2005). more recently adopted by political scientists, On the other hand, there is substantial sociologists and anthropologists, RCT has empirical evidence that basic self-interest is tended to make “heroic claims” (Macy 2006) typical, lending support to weak RCT. about perfect information and maximizing that Research on foraging peoples has found that are clearly not compatible with an up-to-date optimal foraging theory, originally a biological biological understanding of the human brain. theory of non-human species, also applied to If we call this neoclassical economics variant of humans. And research on peasant societies RCT “strong RCT,” then we can focus on a has found that peasants tend to make rational radically relaxed version of RCT which has choices in terms of optimal yields and prices been called “weak RCT” and say that biological (cited in Little 1991). With the advent of evolutionary theory is compatible with weak urbanization, mass literacy and education, RCT. arguably the capacity for rational calculation is increasing. A basic problem for the compatibility of The level of selection in biology also has biological evolutionary theory and RCT is the implications for compatibility with RCT. realization, based on brain research, that Beyond basic individual selection, emotion dominates rationality in humans. The is also accepted as important in biological mammalian, emotional brain (the limbic evolutionary theory since kin share a significant system) is far larger and more important than proportion of genes (Hamilton 1964, cited in the recently evolved human prefrontal Hopcroft 2009). Kin selection and kin altruism neocortex (Massey 2005). The basic RCT

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 7 – would not seem to present any insurmountable 2003). A provocative outlier using the group as challenge to the RCT framework, although at the unit of analysis is anthropologist the margins it might seem that sacrifice on Christopher Boehm who has argued that the behalf of family members might run counter to long period of hominid foraging provided the pure self-interest. On the whole, though, if kin basis for favoring help one another, then the benefits might egalitarianism (Boehm 1999). So as the outweigh the costs for the individual, though research deepens it might either increasingly the RCT theorist might predict periodic contradict core RCT principles or force their defections as self-interest trumps sacrifice for further modification. the group. But the serious problem is group Macro-level theories of sociocultural selection. Since in biological evolution traits evolution are more contested, and more are transmitted through genes, and individuals difficult to test empirically to the extent that are the level at which genes are transmitted, they theorize an N of 1: human social structure groups as the unit of selection is simply not at the level of the entire species. It is less clear seen by most biologists as being possible. On how any of them might be synthesized with the contrary, it is the variation in a population RCT. The evolution of the entire social or group, variation at the level of individuals structure, as in the theories of Spencer, and their genes that is the source of a species’ Durkheim, Lenski, Harris, Turner and capacity to adapt to the changing environment. Sanderson, may be compatible with individual Only a small minority of biologists advocate the self-interest on the ultimate level of an importance of group selection (Sober and individual’s greater likelihood to survive if the Wilson 1998). society survives (Sanderson 2007). Beyond In principle it might be different in the realm that, some theorists see sociocultural evolution of sociocultural evolution. The main problem as increasingly in conflict with biologically here in terms of compatibility with RCT is that evolved human nature (Turner & Maryanski there is no widely accepted theory of 2008), while others see sociocultural evolution sociocultural evolution comparable to biological as an expression of the underlying biologically evolutionary theory, which has paradigmatic evolved human nature (Sanderson 2001). status in biology. One research program which In conclusion, while work continues on is clearly compatible with weak RCT focuses establishing the precise mechanisms of on the evolution of cooperation (Hammerstein sociocultural evolution, biological evolutionary 2003). Actually, this research cuts across theory and weak RCT seem to be compatible biological and sociocultural evolution. Much of and should be combined to the extent possible the research takes the individual as the unit of in understanding the patterns of human social analysis and models interaction based on interaction. norms, rules and goals. Complex modeling is made possible by computers, including the use REFERENCES of game theory (Axelrod 1984). This field of research includes anthropologists, economists, Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The Evolution of and psychologists. Researchers in this field Cooperation. NY: Basic Books. have sought to develop theories of sociocultural evolution parallel to biological Boehm, Christopher. 1999. Hierarchy in the evolution (Richerson & Boyd 2005). Rational Forest: The Evolution of Egalitarian Behavior. choice sociologists would be among the best Cambridge, MA: Press. suited to participate if they work with a realistically modified and relaxed definition of Fehr, Ernest and Joseph Henrich. 2003. “Is rational choice. But individual action that goes Strong Reciprocity a Maladaptation? On the against self-interest in the form of strong group Evolutionary Foundations of Human norms and strong reciprocity is part of the Altruism.” Chapter 4 in Genetic and Cultural research program on cooperation (Fehr and Evolution of Cooperation, edited by Peter Henrich 2003; Richerson, Boyd & Henrich Hammerstein. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 8 –

Sober, Elliott and David Sloan Wilson. 1998. Hammerstein, Peter, ed. 2003. Genetic and Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Cultural Evolution of Cooperation. Cambridge, Unselfish Behavior. Cambridge, MA: MA: MIT Press. Harvard University Press.

Henrich, Joseph et al, editors. 2004. Turner, Jonathan. 2003. Human Institutions: Foundations of Human . Oxford, A Theory of Societal Evolution. Lanham, MD: England: Oxford University Press. Rowman & Littlefield.

Hopcroft, Rosemary. 2009. “The Evolved Turner, Jonathan H. and Alexandra Maryanski. Actor in Sociology.” Sociological Theory, Vol. 2008. On the Origin of Societies by Natural 27, Number 4 (December 2009): 390-406. Selection. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.

Kahneman, Daniel and Amos Tversky. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” Econometrica, vol. 47, no. 2.

Little, Daniel. 1991. Varieties of Social Explanation. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Macy, Michael. 2006. “Rational Choice.” Chapter 4 in Contemporary Social Psychological Theories, edited by Peter J. Burke. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Massey, Douglas S. 2005. Strangers in a Strange Land: Humans in an Urbanizing World. NY: W.W. Norton.

Richerson, Peter J. and Robert Boyd. 2005. Not By Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Richerson, Peter J., Robert Boyd and Joseph Henrich. 2003. “Cultural Evolution of Human Cooperation.” Chapter 19 in Genetic and Cultural Evolution of Cooperation, edited by Peter Hammerstein. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Sanderson, Stephen K. 2007. Evolutionism and Its Critics. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.

_____. 2001. The Evolution of Human Sociality: A Darwinian Conflict Perspective. Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield.

Simon, Herbert. 1947. Administrative Behavior. NY: Free Press.

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 9 –

Rational choice theory is not popular in sociology and is often severely criticized. Why Rational Choice Theory and However, much of the criticism is based on Sociobiology* several misunderstandings. One type of Are Natural Allies misunderstanding stems from the very name of the theory. “Rational” connotes to critics that Stephen K. Sanderson people always know what they are doing and University of California Riverside that they achieve the results they seek. But this is often not the case: In making decisions, Talk for ASA, Atlanta 2010 people possess a certain amount of information, and obviously there are circumstances in which this information is (This talk was scheduled for presentation in the insufficient to produce a positive outcome (see section’s invited session, but was not delivered point #3 above). Moreover, critics tend to because the session was early in the morning assume that “rational” means substantively and the author’s alarm clock malfunctioned.) rational, i.e., rational in terms of the goals sought. But rational choice theorists are talking Rational choice theory’s basic principles (as about instrumental rationality, i.e., rationality stated by Debra Friedman and Michael with respect to the means chosen. They make Hechter) can be summarized as follows: no assumptions about whether the goals are 1. Social behavior is the result of actors “rational,” i.e., “good” goals for which to strive who are acting purposively in (see point #5 above). accordance with a hierarchy of preferences. Actors are striving to Another basis for misunderstanding realize these preferences with a involves the word “choice.” Critics of all types minimum of cost. Actors are rational think this means that individuals are always calculators of benefits and costs. making deliberate calculations, often very 2. The rational calculations made by actors complex calculations, and that such are subject to at least two kinds of calculations are the basis of all social behavior. constraints. Individuals confront It is true that “choice” often implies deliberate opportunity costs, or costs associated calculation, but it is not true that some sort of with foregoing certain courses of action. choice is always involved, and it is seldom true They also confront institutional that individual behavior is driven by highly constraints, which act as positive or complex calculations. The human brain is negative sanctions on the net benefit of simply not built to do this; it is built to simplify any given course of action. matters and use “workarounds,” as stressed by 3. Actors are in possession of a certain recent cognitive psychologists. amount of information regarding what choices will best realize their Another problem with the word “choice” preferences. How much information is that much social behavior is driven by people have will affect the choices they emotions that lie below the level of conscious make and the outcomes of those awareness, and thus cannot really involve choices. deliberate choosing. So the name of the theory 4. Individuals act rationally in accordance is problematic. A better name, I think, is cost- with their own subjective sense of what benefit analysis (another possiblity is interest is in their interests. theory). People are self-interested creatures 5. Choices made by individuals concern who seek various kinds of rewards and who the means they use to achieve their wish to minimize the costs of obtaining them. goals, not the goals themselves. Before he married, made a list of “reasons to marry” (benefits of marriage) accompanied by “reasons not to marry” (costs of marriage). He eventually decided that the

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 10 – first list was more compelling than the second, certain values at the expense of others. so he married. Most people are not so The Nuer, a tribe in East Africa, offer a deliberate, of course, but their minds may still good example. Given the nature of the work in such a manner. environment that the Nuer occupied, pastoralism was the most viable mode Understood in this way, I believe that of production. To the degree that the rational choice theory has much to contribute; social institutions of all pastoral societies still, by itself it is not enough. Its most critical take the same form [and this is certainly deficiency is the problem of preferences, a a big oversimplification; it can be only deficiency freely acknowledged by rational partly true – AU], the members of such choice theorists themselves. Rational choice societies will have a set of common theorists have in mind various goals that values – in addition to those that they people pursue, but these are simply assumed, share as members of the same species. rarely theorized. However, understanding what these preferences are and where they come Next come institutional determinants. from is critical to sociological explanation, and To the degree that environmental rational choice theorists’ failure to address this conditions allow for the establishment of is a serious lacuna in their work. different kinds of social institutions, we would expect to find members of these On the few occasions in which rational respective societies to have choice theorists have attempted to deal with systematically different values. Clearly this problem, the results have not been very there is a great scope for institutional impressive. Michael Hechter, for example, calls differentiation within the same ecological attention to the so-called typical value parameters. Advanced technology assumption of rational choice theory, which certainly loosens the coupling between holds that actors are motivated to attain such social institutions and the environment. instrumental goods as wealth, power, and Hence, in advanced societies, we would prestige, goods that can be exchanged for expect that more variation in values other goods that are valued in and of would be due to social institutions than themselves. This assumption is highly realistic, to ecological variables per se. in my view, but it is unfortunately a theoretically ungrounded assumption. No reason is given as The penultimate cause of to why people should value these things, nor variation in personal values lies in can such goods be considered simply idiosyncrasies of personal biography, instrumental. They can be exchanged for other some of which can be explained by valuable things, but they are also valuable in individual patterns of group affiliation. and of themselves. Be all this as it may, Membership in each group may foster Hechter then goes on to propose the idea of a particular values. For example, we might hierarchy of nested values: expect to see (with a positive probability) certain kinds of common values held by At the most fundamental level, Catholics as against Protestants, by biological determinants produce values members of the Chamber of Commerce that are common to or, perhaps, as against union members, and by constitutive of all human beings. This sociologists as against economists. source of values produces no variation to be explained. [This is definitely not There is much in this statement that is true and shows that Hechter has an sensible, and it is certainly an improvement on overly simple understanding of rational choice theory’s usual silence. sociobiology – AU.] Ecological Unfortunately, Hechter’s formulation does not determinants of values indirectly take us much beyond traditional sociology, nor influence the establishment of a set of does he explain why it is that biology and social institutions that, in turn, highlight ecology should be determinants of values.

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 11 –

So enter sociobiology. It can take us quite a There is a good deal of empirical long way in establishing human preferences, support for the hypothesis, especially in especially those that are found in all societies. preindustrial societies. But one can derive a Here is a list: related hypothesis from TW, which is that high- 1. People value kin over non-kin and close status parents will invest more in sons, low- kin over more distant kin. status parents more in daughters. There is 2. People have genetic interests, that is, considerable support for this too. Studies of an interest in maximizing their eighteenth- and nineteenth-century China and reproductive success, although they are India carried out by Mildred Dickemann have not necessarily aware, or at least fully shown that the daughters of lower-status aware, of such interests. parents had better marital prospects than sons 3. People highly value status and wealth. because of hypergyny, i.e., the tendency of This is because these are the main women to marry upward in the status avenues to reproductive success. hierarchy. Lower-status parents therefore 4. Some people like power. This, like favored daughters over sons. But in higher- status and wealth, promotes status groups sons had better marital reproductive success. However, like the prospects, and thus sons were favored over quest for status and wealth, the quest daughters. In fact, in some higher-status for power can become partially groups sons were so strongly favored and detached from the quest for females so strongly disfavored that rates of reproductive success. People can strive female infanticide were often exceedingly high. for status and wealth in their own right. The same is true for power – some Another example. The Mukogodo of Kenya people simply like dominating and studied by Lee Cronk say they favor sons but controlling other people. their actual behavior shows that they clearly 5. People like sex and will expend a great favor daughters. Their daughters have better deal of effort to get it. This seems to be marital prospects than their sons because the especially true for males. Mukogodo can marry off their daughters to the 6. People everywhere – not all people, but Masai, who are a higher-status group linked most of them – have needs that are with the Mukogodo in a marital exchange difficult to meet through mundane system. (I suspect the reason the Mukogodo means. They turn to supernatural say they favor sons is that they are imitating agents to help them meet these needs. the high-status Masai, who not only declare Religion is about a number of things, but son favoritism but actually practice it.) one of the most important is relief from anxiety, insecurity, and uncertainty. Were members of the groups in question 7. acting rationally? Yes, specifically in terms of Let’s take some examples. There is a their reproductive interests. But if we used famous sociobiological hypothesis known as rational choice theory alone, we might fail to the Trivers-Willard hypothesis (TW), which is see the kind of preference that was driving the assumed to apply to both animals and humans. parents’ behavior. Why one group favored It contends that mothers in good condition will sons and the other daughters would likely produce more sons and mothers in poor remain a puzzle. (Most sociologists would condition will produce more daughters. The probably say, “It’s just because of their culture,” hypothesis derives from the fact that it takes a useless culture-vulture explanation à la more energy and effort to produce sons. In the George Homans.) human case, Trivers and Willard assumed that social status could be used as a proxy for Using rational choice theory and condition, and thus that high-status mothers sociobiology together makes good sense will bear more sons and low-status mothers will because they share at least two important bear more daughters. assumptions: Individuals are the basis of society, which is built from the ground up; and

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 12 – individuals are trying to maximize something, ____.“Review of Myra J. Hird’s The Origins of or at least receive a satisfying level of it. In Sociable Life: Evolution After Science essence, sociobiology allows us to take rational Studies.” New York: Palgrave choice theory to a deeper level and establish a Macmillan, Canadian Journal of kind of metaphysic, or a set of first principles Sociology 34(4) 1161-1164, 2009. for social action. I have been trying to convince some rational choice theorists of this, but so far ____. “On Dupré and O’Malley’s Varieties of I have been met with resistance. However, not Living Things: Life at the Intersection of all of them resist, and perhaps fewer will in the Lineages and Metabolism.” Blog Post, future. Jan. 16, 2010. Philosophy & Theory in Biology. ______*I use the term sociobiology rather than http://philosophyandtheoryinbiology.org/ because I think it more clearly expresses how sociologists use (or should use) Darwinian evolutionism. The ____.With Paul Armstrong, “Reports of the name evolutionary psychology was apparently Death of the Sociology of Science Have concocted for two reasons. One was to get rid Been Greatly Exaggerated.” of the political baggage associated with the Forthcoming, Canadian Review of term sociobiology; the other was that the new Sociology. term was coined by psychologists who had become Darwinians. The principles of ____. “Review of Martin Carrier, Don Howard evolutionary psychology are almost the same and Janet Kourany (Eds.). “The as those of sociobiology, and evolutionary Challenge of the Social and the psychology as practiced today has become Pressure of Practice: Science and increasingly narrow in its choice of topics (e.g., Values Revisited.” Pittsburgh: The the ratio of the second to the fourth finger in University of Pittsburgh Press, 2008. males vs. females and the relationship of the Forthcoming, History and Philosophy of ratio to testosterone levels). Sociologists have the Life Sciences. a much broader range of topics to explore – I certainly do – and therefore I choose the term ____. “Review of W. G. Runciman, “The sociobiology. Theory of Cultural and Social Selection.” ********* Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Forthcoming, Canadian Journal of Sociology. New Publications of Section Members ____.With Paul Armstrong, “The Reinvention of Grand Theories of Science.” Forthcoming, Perspectives on Science. Abrutyn, Seth and Kirk Lawrence. 2010. "From Chiefdoms to States: Toward an Hopcroft, Rosemary L. and Joseph M. Integrative Theory of the Evolution of Whitmeyer. Hopcroft. 2010.“A Choice Polity." Sociological Perspectives Model of Occupational Status and Fertility.” 53:419-442. Journal of Mathematical Sociology 34: 4, 283 — 300. Blute, Marion. “Reflections on Trees of Knowledge.” Spontaneous Generations: Powell, Brian, Catherine Bolzendahl, Claudia A Journal for the History and Philosophy Geist, and Lala Carr Steelman. 2010. of Science, 3(1) 223-225, 2009. COUNTED OUT: Same-Sex Relations and Americans’ Definitions of Family. New York: Russell Sage Foundation (American Sociological Association Rose Series in

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 13 –

Sociology). NOTE: Chapter 5 (“Accounting Substitutability and Complementarity of for Sexuality: God, Genes and Gays”) Social Actions.” should be of particular interest to section 4. Arnout van de Rijt. “The Micro-Macro members. It discusses how Americans Link for the Theory of Structural have becoming increasingly supportive of Balance.” genetic explanations of sexuality. The 5. Mark Fossett. “Generative Models of chapter discusses how genetic explanations Segregation: Investigating Model- can sometimes be used as a tool not to Generated Patterns of Residential perpetuate the status quo (as critics often Segregation by Ethnicity and claim) but rather to promote social equality. Socioeconomic Status.” ********* 6. Andreas Flache and Michael W. Macy. “Small Worlds and Cultural Polarization.” 7. Dirk Helbing, Wenjian Yu, and Heiko Announcement Rauhut. “Self-Organization and Emergence in Social Systems. Modeling Double Special Issue the Coevolution of Social Environments and Cooperative Behavior.” “Micro-Macro Links and Micro- 8. Karl-Dieter Opp. “Modeling Micro-Macro Foundations” Relationships: Problems and Solutions.” Journal of Mathematical The contributions in the special issue reflect Sociology 35(1/2) 2011 key features of micro-macro modeling in sociology as well as recent progress in this Special Issue Editors: field. The papers address important topics Marcel van Assen, Vincent Buskens, and such as core features of explanations of social Werner Raub phenomena using micro-macro models, the problem of cooperation, heterogeneity of A double special issue on “Micro-Macro Links actors, structural balance, opinion formation, and Micro-Foundations” of the Journal of segregation, and problems of micro-macro Mathematical Sociology will appear in early models that are based on rational choice 2011. assumptions. Moreover, the contributions show how different research methods can be applied The contributions to the special issue focus on fruitfully, such as laboratory experiments, two essential issues: (i) how macro-conditions equilibrium analysis, and agent-based affect actor behavior at the micro-level and modeling. how actor behavior affects macro-outcomes (micro-macro links), and (ii) how different For further information, see: micro-models affect macro-outcomes (micro- foundations). The special issue comprises http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=jo eight papers: urnal&issn=0022-250X

Contents 1. Werner Raub, Vincent Buskens, and Marcel A. L. M. van Assen. “Micro- Macro Links and Micro-Foundations in Sociology.” 2. Simon Gächter and Christian Thöni. “Micromotives, Microstructure and Macrobehavior: The Case of Voluntary Cooperation.” 3. Kazuo Yamaguchi. “Population Heterogeneity and Between-Group

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 14 –

Presentations of CONGRATULATIONS TO THE Section Members FIRST WINNERS OF THE EVOLUTION, BIOLOGY AND Barber, Mel. Spencer, Durkheim, and Marx and the Quest for an Evolutionary Science of SOCIOLOGY SECTION AWARDS the Social World. The paper was presented at the XVII ISA World Congress Faculty Award: of Sociology entitled Sociology on the Move, Gothenburg, Sweden on 17 July, Allan Horwitz of Rutgers University, for his 2010. book: Allan V. Horwitz, Jerome C. Wakefield, and Robert L. Spitzer (2007). The Loss of Sadness: How Psychiatry Transformed Normal Sorrow into Depressive Disorder.

Student Award

David Peterson of Northwestern University for J. Scott Lewis presents the faculty award to his paper "The Ivy and the Trellis: Agency, Allan V. Horwitz at the Section Reception. Biology, and Socialization"

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 15 –

Neurosociology: the nexus between

Find the Complete Works of Charles Darwin neuroscience and social psychology on-line at http://darwin-online.org.uk/ David D. Franks Springer Press

Recently, neuroscientists have presented new research which has a direct impact on many areas of social psychology. These include the evolution of the social brain and the human "self", the social nature of mind, socialization and language acquisition, role-taking (theory of mind), consciousness, intersubjectivity, a balanced social constructionism, human agency and the necessity of emotion for rational decision making. This book integrates glossed-over areas of George Herbert Mead's social behaviorism with current neuroscience and demonstrates how current work on mirror neurons supports the basic tenets of the American pragmatists' focus on the priority of motor behavior and their metatheory of transactional analysis.

Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 7, No. 1 Spring 2010 - 16 –

Free exam copies available for professors Free exam copies available for professors

th Sociology: A Biosocial Introduction New 11 Edition Human Societies Rosemary L. Hopcroft An Introduction to Macrosociology

Patrick Nolan and Gerhard Lenski In an era of human genome research, environmental challenges, new reproductive This classic text has been fully revised, updated technologies, and more, students can with new data, and refreshed in design for benefit from an introductory sociology text student-friendly reading. that is a biologically informed. This innovative text integrates mainstream sociological research in all areas of On the Origins of Gender Inequality sociology with a scientifically-informed model of an evolved, biological human actor. Joan Huber This grounding of sociology in a biosocial conception of the individual actor is coupled Joan Huber challenges feminists toward a richer with a comparative approach, as human understanding of biological origins of biology is universal and often reveals itself inequality—knowledge that can help women as variations on themes across human achieve greater equality today. cultures. Tables, Figures, Photos, and the author’s concise and remarkably lively style Visit our Website and click on “Order an make this a truly enjoyable book to read and Exam Copy” teach. Makes a good companion book to www.paradigmpublishers.com Nolan and Lenski’s Human Societies.

Visit our Website and click on “Order an Exam Copy” www.paradigmpublishers.com