DOCSLIB.ORG

Preferences Under Pressure

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preferences Under Pressure Eric Skoog Preferences Under Pressure Conflict, Threat Cues and Willingness to Compromise Dissertation presented at Uppsala University to be publicly examined in Zootissalen, EBC, Villavägen 9, Uppsala, Friday, 13 March 2020 at 10:15 for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The examination will be conducted in English. Faculty examiner: Associate Professor Thomas Zeitzoff (American University, School of Public Affairs). Abstract Skoog, E. 2020. Preferences Under Pressure. Conflict, Threat Cues and Willingness to Compromise. Report / Department of Peace and Conflict Research 121. 66 pp. Uppsala: Department of Peace and Conflict Research. ISBN 978-91-506-2805-0. Understanding how preferences are formed is a key question in the social sciences. The ability of agents to interact with each other is a prerequisite for well-functioning societies. Nevertheless, the process whereby the preferences of agents in conflict are formed have often been black boxed, and the literature on the effects of armed conflict on individuals reveals a great variation in terms of outcomes. Sometimes, individuals are willing to cooperate and interact even with former enemies, while sometimes, we see outright refusal to cooperate or interact at all. In this dissertation, I look at the role of threat in driving some of these divergent results. Armed conflict is rife with physical threats to life, limb and property, and there has been much research pointing to the impact of threat on preferences, attitudes and behavior. Research in the field of evolutionary psychology has revealed that threat is not a singular category, but a nuanced phenomenon, where different types of threat may lead to different responses. I argue that by taking a more nuanced approach to threat, drawing on theories from the field of evolutionary psychology, some of the variance in outcomes can be explained. In particular, some commonly observed features of protracted conflicts, such as seemingly indivisible issues and parochialism may be moderated by threat. In the four essays, I address this from both a theoretical and empirical point of view. In Essay I, I illustrate in a formal bargaining setting how threats can lead actors to prefer risky all-or-nothing gambles to division schemes, preventing bargaining solutions to be found. In the second essay (Essay II), I show that willingness to make compromises with members of other groups are not contingent on group affiliation alone, but rather on the expected reciprocity of that group. Furthermore, characteristics of others beyond group can also affect pro-sociality. Based on a threat management perspective, me and my coauthors in Essay III show that non-threatening social categories, such as women or the elderly, are shown higher levels of altruism, also when there individuals are outgroup members. Exposure to violence can even increase altruism across group lines, but only to these non-threatening groups. Finally, in Essay IV, I show that those who experience post-traumatic growth as a result of traumatic events reverse the standard loss aversion people generally display, even showing gain-seeking preferences. Together, these results point to the importance of bringing in a more nuanced conceptualization of the role of threat in the study of peace and conflict. Even in the most brutal and destructive conflicts, humans are able to cooperate, also across group lines. However, for this cooperation to function, managing the threats in conflict is of central importance. Keywords: Evolutionary psychology, Conflict, Threat perception, Social preferences Eric Skoog, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Box 514, Uppsala University, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden. © Eric Skoog 2020 ISSN 0566-8808 ISBN 978-91-506-2805-0 urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-403234 (http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-403234) To those who came before me List of Essays This thesis is based on the following essays, which are referred to in the text by their Roman numerals. I Skoog, Eric (2020). Divide or Conquer? Deep Rationality and Seemingly Indivisible Issues as a Cause of Conflict. Unpublished manuscript. An earlier version was presented at the 58th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, Baltimore MD, USA, 22-25 February 2017. II Skoog, Eric (2020). Indirect reciprocity and tradeoff paradigms in the wake of violent intergroup conflict. Unpublished manu- script. An earlier version was presented at the 59th Annual Con- vention of the International Studies Association, San Francisco, CA, USA, 4-7 April 2018. III Hall, Jonathan, Eric Skoog and Dogukan Cansin Karakus (2020). Kindness in the aftermath of cruelty? The effect of exposure to war-time trauma on altruism across social categories. Un- published manuscript. An earlier version was presented at the 51th Peace Science Society International North American Meet- ing, Tempe, AZ, USA, 2-4 November 2017. IV Skoog, Eric (2020). The Vagaries of Valuation. How post-trau- matic growth impacts psychological responses to gains and losses. Unpublished manuscript. An earlier version was pre- sented at the 60th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, Toronto, ON, Canada, 27-30 March 2019. Contents Introduction ................................................................................................... 13 Definitions of the central concepts ............................................................... 16 Preferences, pro-sociality and compromise ......................................... 17 Threat, threat perception, and threat cues ............................................ 18 Intergroup armed conflict: ................................................................... 20 Previous literature ......................................................................................... 21 Conflict and its effects on society ........................................................ 21 Individual level effects of conflict exposure........................................ 23 Parochialism in conflict ....................................................................... 25 The role of threat in parochial attitudes ............................................... 27 Theoretical framework .................................................................................. 30 Methodology and empirical strategy............................................................. 38 Presenting the essays..................................................................................... 45 Essay I.................................................................................................. 46 Essay II ................................................................................................ 47 Essay III ............................................................................................... 47 Essay IV ............................................................................................... 48 Conclusion .................................................................................................... 49 Avenues for future research ................................................................. 51 Policy implications .............................................................................. 52 References ..................................................................................................... 54 Acknowledgements This dissertation would scarcely amount to a thing were it not for my super- visors, Magnus Öberg and Hanne Fjelde, who have been there as support, sounding boards – and indeed disciplinarians when needed to – throughout the entire process. Whatever issue, whether milestone or minor inconvenience, you have been excellent mentors and guides into the mystical land that is the academic world. Magnus – your advise when I first started to always read broadly and not get stuck in an intellectual silo has in no small part contributed to the direction this dissertation has taken. Your calm, down-to-earth and prag- matic approach has been invaluable for a mildly manic-depressive character such as myself, while still encouraging me to address the Big Questions, and seek out new and untrodden paths of scientific inquiry. Hanne – no matter which tangential (at best) or outlandish (at worst) line of reasoning I have me- andered down, your comments have always been clear-headed, to-the-point, impeccably structured and relevant. Knowing all too well my own tendency to sometimes go tightrope-walking over the chasm of chaos, I am greatly in- debted to your ability to offer staunch support for my many stunts, yet always being able to pull me back up and set me on the right path as soon as my stride got too wobbly. Jonathan Hall has in many ways been my ”unofficial third supervisor”, since he first invited me into the project that would also form the basis for the empirical part of my dissertation, back when I had just started my PhD. Through our multiple collaborations, I have been able to work on many and varying topics and issues, and through successes and struggles (remember Heroku?), your enthusiasm, energy and support has been truly inspiring. The dissertation has also benefitted immensely from the persistent scrutiny, ques- tioning and encouragement of the members of the Monday group (lately on Wednesdays): Håvard Hegre, Nina von Uexkull, Nynke Salverda, Colin Walch, Niklas Karlén, Karin Johansson, Sophia Hatz, Ida Rudolfsen, Stefan Döring, David Randahl, Mihai Croicu, Kristina Petrova, Gudlaug Olafsdottir and (briefly) Annkatrin Tritschoks. On a more personal note,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Cooperation in Adversity: an Evolutionary Approach John Lazarus1 Centre for Behaviour and Evolution, Newcastle University
    Cooperation in adversity: An evolutionary approach John Lazarus1 Centre for Behaviour and Evolution, Newcastle University This is an Author’s Original Manuscript (AOM) of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Global Discourse on 02 January 2018, available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2017.1402426. Lazarus, J. (2017) ‘Cooperation in adversity: an evolutionary approach’, Global Discourse, 7:4, 571-598. Abstract: Throughout the organic world cooperation provides mutual benefit but is vulnerable to exploitation from free riders. Over the last thirty years work in evolutionary biology and game theory has provided understanding of the conditions necessary for the maintenance of cooperation, and advances in gene-culture coevolution theory have extended this understanding to our own species. After a preamble on the evolutionary analysis of behaviour I outline this work. I then consider how cooperation is influenced by environmental adversity and find that in non-human species it is enhanced under these circumstances in a range of taxa. In a sample of human cases the same result is found in a majority, but the opposite effect in some when socioeconomic position is the measure of quality. In anthropological studies of societies living in extremis, again the opposite effect is found. I propose a sigmoid shape for the relationship between adversity and fitness (or human well-being) and a consequent inverted-U shaped relationship between adversity and the benefit of cooperation. Most of the data presented on the relationship between adversity and cooperation are consistent with this proposal. I suggest further tests of the proposal and place the study of cooperation in the broader context of prosociality.
    [Show full text]
  • Herbert Gintis – Samuel Bowles – Their Distribution Preferences, and That They Robert Boyd – Ernst Fehr (Eds.): Moral Do So Differently in Different Situations
    Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review, 2008, Vol. 44, No. 6 social capital theory, which shows that so- the face of the evolutionary logic in which cial collaboration is built on social networks material advantages can be achieved by that underlie norms of reciprocity and trust- adopting self-interested preferences? worthiness. The development of these pro- social dispositions is in turn enabled in so- Clara Sabbagh cieties that further extra-familial ties and University of Haifa disregard or transcend purely ‘amoral fa- [email protected] milist’ interactions [Banfi eld 1958]. This research project nevertheless References leaves several unresolved problems. First, Banfi eld, Edward C. 1958. The Moral Basis of a Backward Society. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. there is the problem of causality, which de- Camerer, Colin F. 2003. Behavioral Game Theory. rives from a major theoretical dilemma in New York: Russell Sage. the social sciences. To what extent are pro- Deutsch, Morton. 1985. Distributive Justice. New social dispositions the result of structur- Haven: Yale University Press. al constraints, such as market integration, Giddens, Anthony. 1997. Sociology. Cambridge, or rather an active element in structuring UK: Polity Press. these constraints [Giddens 1997]? Joseph Putnam, Robert D. 1993. Making Democracy Work. Henrich (Chapter 2) discusses this prob- Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: lem on a theoretical level by explaining the Princeton University Press. different mechanisms through which the Sabbagh, Clara and Deborah Golden. 2007. ‘Jux- structure of interaction affects preferences. taposing Etic and Emic Perspectives: A Refl ec- tion on Three Studies on Distributive Justice.’ Yet only future longitudinal research will Social Justice Research 20: 372–387.
    [Show full text]
  • Author's Personal Copy
    Author's personal copy Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 35 (2011) 1042–1051 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/neubiorev Review Human threat management systems: Self•protection and disease avoidance Steven L. Neuberg a,∗, Douglas T. Kenrick a, Mark Schaller b a Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287•1104, United States b Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4 article info abstract Article history: Humans likely evolved precautionary systems designed to minimize the threats to reproductive fitness Received 8 March 2010 posed by highly interdependent ultrasociality. A review of research on the self•protection and disease Received in revised form 18 August 2010 avoidance systems reveals that each system is functionally distinct and domain•specific: each is attuned Accepted 18 August 2010 to different cues; engages different emotions, inferences, and behavioral inclinations; and is rooted in somewhat different neurobiological substrates. These systems share important features, however. Each Keywords: system is functionally coherent, in that perceptual, affective, cognitive, and behavioral processes work Self•protection in concert to reduce fitness costs of potential threats. Each system is biased in a risk•averse manner, Disease avoidance Threat management erring toward precautionary responses even when available cues only heuristically imply threat. And Precautionary psychology each system is functionally flexible, being highly sensitive to specific ecological and dispositional cues Evolutionary psychology that signal greater vulnerability to the relevant threat. These features characterize a general template Domain specificity useful for understanding not only the self•protection and disease avoidance systems, but also a broader Fear set of evolved, domain•specific precautionary systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Pathogens, Personality, and Culture: Disease Prevalence Predicts Worldwide Variability in Sociosexuality, Extraversion, and Openness to Experience
    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Copyright 2008 by the American Psychological Association 2008, Vol. 95, No. 1, 212–221 0022-3514/08/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.212 Pathogens, Personality, and Culture: Disease Prevalence Predicts Worldwide Variability in Sociosexuality, Extraversion, and Openness to Experience Mark Schaller and Damian R. Murray University of British Columbia Previous research has documented cross-cultural differences in personality traits, but the origins of those differences remain unknown. The authors investigate the possibility that these cultural differences can be traced, in part, to regional differences in the prevalence in infectious diseases. Three specific hypotheses are deduced, predicting negative relationships between disease prevalence and (a) unrestricted sociosex- uality, (b) extraversion, and (c) openness to experience. These hypotheses were tested empirically with methods that employed epidemiological atlases in conjunction with personality data collected from individuals in dozens of countries worldwide. Results were consistent with all three hypotheses: In regions that have historically suffered from high levels of infectious diseases, people report lower mean levels of sociosexuality, extraversion, and openness. Alternative explanations are addressed, and possible underlying mechanisms are discussed. Keywords: culture, disease prevalence, extraversion, openness to experience, sociosexuality People’s personalities differ, and some of that individual vari- For example, Schmitt (2005) and his collaborators in the Inter- ability is geographically clumped. But why is that so? How are we national Sexuality Description Project assessed worldwide vari- to understand the origins of regional differences in personality? A ability in chronic tendencies toward either a “restricted” or “unre- complete response to that question will surely require attention to stricted” sociosexual style.
    [Show full text]
  • Hanging on to the Edges Hanging on to the Edges
    DANIEL NETTLE Hanging on to the Edges Hanging on to the Edges Essays on Science, Society and the Academic Life D ANIEL Essays on Science, Society I love this book. I love the essays and I love the overall form. Reading these essays feels like entering into the best kind of intellectual conversati on—it makes me want and the Academic Life to write essays in reply. It makes me want to get everyone else reading it. I almost N never feel this enthusiasti c about a book. ETTLE —Rebecca Saxe, Professor of Cogniti ve Science at MIT What does it mean to be a scien� st working today; specifi cally, a scien� st whose subject ma� er is human life? Scien� sts o� en overstate their claim to certainty, sor� ng the world into categorical dis� nc� ons that obstruct rather than clarify its complexi� es. In this book Daniel Ne� le urges the reader to unpick such DANIEL NETTLE dis� nc� ons—biological versus social sciences, mind versus body, and nature versus nurture—and look instead for the for puzzles and anomalies, the points of Hanging on to the Edges connec� on and overlap. These essays, converted from o� en humorous, some� mes autobiographical blog posts, form an extended medita� on on the possibili� es and frustra� ons of the life scien� fi c. Pragma� cally arguing from the intersec� on between social and biological sciences, Ne� le reappraises the virtues of policy ini� a� ves such as Universal Basic Income and income redistribu� on, highligh� ng the traps researchers and poli� cians are liable to encounter.
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense of Massive Modularity
    3 In Defense of Massive Modularity Dan Sperber In October 1990, a psychologist, Susan Gelman, and three anthropolo- gists whose interest in cognition had been guided and encouraged by Jacques Mehler, Scott Atran, Larry Hirschfeld, and myself, organized a conference on “Cultural Knowledge and Domain Specificity” (see Hirsch- feld and Gelman, 1994). Jacques advised us in the preparation of the conference, and while we failed to convince him to write a paper, he did play a major role in the discussions. A main issue at stake was the degree to which cognitive development, everyday cognition, and cultural knowledge are based on dedicated do- main-specific mechanisms, as opposed to a domain-general intelligence and learning capacity. Thanks in particular to the work of developmental psychologists such as Susan Carey, Rochel Gelman, Susan Gelman, Frank Keil, Alan Leslie, Jacques Mehler, Elizabeth Spelke (who were all there), the issue of domain-specificity—which, of course, Noam Chomsky had been the first to raise—was becoming a central one in cognitive psychol- ogy. Evolutionary psychology, represented at the conference by Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, was putting forward new arguments for seeing human cognition as involving mostly domain- or task-specific evolved adaptations. We were a few anthropologists, far from the main- stream of our discipline, who also saw domain-specific cognitive pro- cesses as both constraining and contributing to cultural development. Taking for granted that domain-specific dispositions are an important feature of human cognition, three questions arise: 1. To what extent are these domain-specific dispositions based on truly autonomous mental mechanisms or “modules,” as opposed to being 48 D.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Social Preferences Matter – the Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition, Cooperation and Incentives Ernst Fehr and Urs Fischbacher
    Institute for Empirical Research in Economics University of Zurich Working Paper Series ISSN 1424-0459 forthcoming in: Economic Journal 2002 Working Paper No. 84 Why Social Preferences Matter – The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition, Cooperation and Incentives Ernst Fehr and Urs Fischbacher January 2002 Why Social Preferences Matter - The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition, Cooperation and Incentives Ernst Fehra) University of Zurich, CESifo and CEPR Urs Fischbacherb) University of Zürich Frank Hahn Lecture Annual Conference of the Royal Economic Society 2001 Forthcoming in: Economic Journal 2002 Abstract: A substantial number of people exhibit social preferences, which means they are not solely motivated by material self-interest but also care positively or negatively for the material payoffs of relevant reference agents. We show empirically that economists fail to understand fundamental economic questions when they disregard social preferences, in particular, that without taking social preferences into account, it is not possible to understand adequately (i) the effects of competition on market outcomes, (ii) laws governing cooperation and collective action, (iii) effects and the determinants of material incentives, (iv) which contracts and property rights arrangements are optimal, and (v) important forces shaping social norms and market failures. a) Ernst Fehr, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, University of Zurich, Bluemlisalpstrasse 10, CH-8006 Zurich, Switzerland, email: [email protected]. b) Urs Fischbacher, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, University of Zurich, Bluemlisalpstrasse 10, CH-8006 Zurich, Switzerland, email: [email protected]. Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 The Nature of Social Preferences 2 2.1 Positive and Negative Reciprocity: Two Examples …...............
    [Show full text]
  • Contact Information
    REBECCA NEEL Department of Psychology Arizona State University Tempe, AZ 85287-1104 602-965-3326 EMPLOYMENT Beginning August, 2013 Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Iowa EDUCATION Ph.D., Psychology (May, 2013). Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona. Thesis: “Expert in the language of fear”: Stigmatized targets’ perception of others’ emotion-specific prejudice M.A., Psychology (2010). Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona. Thesis: When does seeing through your eyes help me? Emotions functionally encourage and inhibit perspective taking B.A., English Literature (2002). Carleton College, Northfield, Minnesota. Cum Laude AWARDS AND HONORS 2013 SPSP Graduate Student Travel Award 2012 SPSSI Grant-in-Aid for Dissertation Research 2012 The Robert B. Cialdini Dissertation Project Prize in Social Psychology, ASU 2012 The Darwyn and Marie Linder Fellowship in Experimental Social Psychology, ASU 2012 ASU Graduate and Professional Student Association Grant for Independent Research 2011 Summer Institute in Social Psychology, Princeton, NJ; SPSP program funded by NSF 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 ASU Graduate and Professional Student Association Grant for Conference Travel 2008 ASU Graduate and Professional Student Association Grant for Independent Research 2007 Departmental Research Excellence Award, ASU Psychology Department Neel CV RESEARCH Publications White, A.E., Kenrick, D.T., Neel, R., & Neuberg, S.L. (in press). From the bedroom to the budget deficit: Mate competition changes men’s attitudes toward economic redistribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Sadalla, E., Berlin, A., Neel, R., & Ledlow, S. (in press). Priorities in residential water use: A trade-off analysis. Environment and Behavior. Neel, R., Neufeld, S.L., & Neuberg, S.L. (2013). Would an obese person whistle Vivaldi? Targets of prejudice self-present to minimize appearance of specific threats.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Preferences Or Sacred Values? Theory and Evidence of Deontological Motivations
    SOCIAL PREFERENCES OR SACRED VALUES? THEORY AND EVIDENCE OF DEONTOLOGICAL MOTIVATIONS Daniel L. Chen and Martin Schonger∗ Abstract Recent advances in economic theory, largely motivated by ex- perimental findings, have led to the adoption of models of human behavior where decision-makers not only take into consideration their own payoff but also others’ payoffs and any potential consequences of these payoffs. Investi- gations of deontological motivations, where decision-makers make their choice not only based on the consequences of a decision but also the decision per se have been rare. We provide a formal interpretation of major moral philosophies and a revealed preference method to distinguish the presence of deontological motivations from a purely consequentialist decision-maker whose preferences satisfy first-order stochastic dominance. JEL Codes: D63; D64; D91; K00 Keywords: Consequentialism, deontological motivations, normative com- mitments, social preferences, revealed preference, decision theory, random lot- tery incentive method ∗Daniel L. Chen, [email protected], Toulouse School of Economics, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, University of Toulouse Capitole, Toulouse, France; Martin Schonger, [email protected], ETH Zurich, Law and Economics. First draft: May 2009. Current draft: January 2020. Latest version available at: http://users.nber.org/∼dlchen/papers/Social_Preferences_or_Sacred_Values.pdf. We thank research assistants and numerous colleagues at several universities and conferences. This project was conducted while Chen received fund- ing from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (Grant No. 2018-11245), European Research Council (Grant No. 614708), Swiss National Science Foundation (Grant Nos. 100018-152678 and 106014-150820), Ewing Marion Kauffman Foun- dation, Institute for Humane Studies, John M.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Goods Agreements with Other-Regarding Preferences
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES PUBLIC GOODS AGREEMENTS WITH OTHER-REGARDING PREFERENCES Charles D. Kolstad Working Paper 17017 http://www.nber.org/papers/w17017 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 May 2011 Department of Economics and Bren School, University of California, Santa Barbara; Resources for the Future; and NBER. Comments from Werner Güth, Kaj Thomsson and Philipp Wichardt and discussions with Gary Charness and Michael Finus have been appreciated. Outstanding research assistance from Trevor O’Grady and Adam Wright is gratefully acknowledged. Funding from the University of California Center for Energy and Environmental Economics (UCE3) is also acknowledged and appreciated. The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2011 by Charles D. Kolstad. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Public Goods Agreements with Other-Regarding Preferences Charles D. Kolstad NBER Working Paper No. 17017 May 2011, Revised June 2012 JEL No. D03,H4,H41,Q5 ABSTRACT Why cooperation occurs when noncooperation appears to be individually rational has been an issue in economics for at least a half century. In the 1960’s and 1970’s the context was cooperation in the prisoner’s dilemma game; in the 1980’s concern shifted to voluntary provision of public goods; in the 1990’s, the literature on coalition formation for public goods provision emerged, in the context of coalitions to provide transboundary pollution abatement.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Group Selection Plays an Essential Role in Explaining Human Cooperation: a Sketch of the Evidence
    BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2016), Page 1 of 68 doi:10.1017/S0140525X1400106X, e30 Cultural group selection plays an essential role in explaining human cooperation: A sketch of the evidence Peter Richerson Emily K. Newton Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California– Department of Psychology, Dominican University of California, San Rafael, CA Davis, Davis, CA 95616 94901 [email protected] [email protected] http://emilyknewton.weebly.com/ www.des.ucdavis.edu/faculty/richerson/richerson.htm Nicole Naar Ryan Baldini Department of Anthropology, University of California–Davis, Graduate Group in Ecology, University of California–Davis, Davis, CA 95616 Davis, CA 95616 [email protected] https://sites.google.com/site/ryanbaldini/ [email protected] Adrian V. Bell Lesley Newson Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California– [email protected] http://adrianbell.wordpress.com/ Davis, Davis, CA 95616 [email protected] [email protected] Kathryn Demps https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lesley_Newson/ Department of Anthropology, Boise State University, Boise, ID 83725 [email protected] Cody Ross http://sspa.boisestate.edu/anthropology/faculty-and-staff/kathryn- Santa Fe Institute, Santa Fe, NM 87501 demps/ [email protected] http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xSugEskAAAAJ Karl Frost Graduate Group in Ecology, University of California–Davis, Davis, CA 95616 Paul E. Smaldino [email protected] https://sites.google.com/site/karljosephfrost/ Department of Anthropology, University of California–Davis, Davis, CA 95616 [email protected] http://www.smaldino.com/ Vicken Hillis Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California– Timothy M.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Insecurity As a Driver of Obesity in Humans: the Insurance Hypothesis
    BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2017), Page 1 of 53 doi:10.1017/S0140525X16000947,e0 Food insecurity as a driver of obesity in humans: The insurance hypothesis Daniel Nettle Centre for Behaviour and Evolution & Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE2 4HH, United Kingdom. [email protected] http://www.danielnettle.org.uk Clare Andrews Centre for Behaviour and Evolution & Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE2 4HH, United Kingdom. [email protected] http://bit.ly/clareandrews Melissa Bateson Centre for Behaviour and Evolution & Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE2 4HH, United Kingdom. [email protected] https://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/melissa.bateson/ Abstract: Integrative explanations of why obesity is more prevalent in some sectors of the human population than others are lacking. Here, we outline and evaluate one candidate explanation, the insurance hypothesis (IH). The IH is rooted in adaptive evolutionary thinking: The function of storing fat is to provide a buffer against shortfall in the food supply. Thus, individuals should store more fat when they receive cues that access to food is uncertain. Applied to humans, this implies that an important proximate driver of obesity should be food insecurity rather than food abundance per se. We integrate several distinct lines of theory and evidence that bear on this hypothesis. We present a theoretical model that shows it is optimal to store more fat when food access is uncertain, and we review the experimental literature from non-human animals showing that fat reserves increase when access to food is restricted. We provide a meta-analysis of 125 epidemiological studies of the association between perceived food insecurity and high body weight in humans.
    [Show full text]