__
EEvvoolluuttiioonn,, BBiioollooggyy
&& SSoocciieettyy Fall 2012 Newsletter of the ASA Section on Evolution, Biology & Society Volume 9, No. 2
In this issue: Chair 2012-2013 Remarks on Kiecolt, Aggen & Kendler Guang Guo, University of North and Hopcroft & Martin by François Carolina-Chapel Hill Nielsen New Publications & News of Section Past-Chair Members 2012-2013 Photographs from ASA of 2012 Jonathan H. Turner, UC-Riverside Section Book Award Winner
Co-Chairs-Elect 2012-2013 Message from the Chair Tiimothy Criippen, Uniiversity of Mary Washington Guang Guo Richard Machalek, Uniiversity of University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Wyomiing
Secretary-Treasurer Our section of Evolution, Biology and 2010-2013 Society is a huge field including a variety of F. Scott Lewis, Penn-State Harrisburg exciting and fast-developing subareas. Over the past 12-15 years, I have worked in a Council Members subarea of society and genetics/genomics Marion Blute, University of Toronto at where we have tried to incorporate the Mississauga (2011-2014) advances in molecular genetics into sociological analysis. One of the sessions in Jeff Davis, California State University at the coming ASA will focus on this subarea. Long Beach (2011-2014) In this message from Chair, I will describe David Franks, Virginia Commonwealth two section sessions at the coming ASA University (2010-2013) meeting, remind you again of our constant task Colter Mitchell, Princeton of membership drive for our section, and University(2012-2015) provide the information on the section awards. Michael Shanahan, University of North In 2013, ASA will be in New York City Carolina at Chapel Hill (2010-2013) Our section day is the first day of the meetings, Susan Short, Brown University(2012-2015) which is double-edged. Our session(s) may get a lot of attention because of the first day and Newsletter editor and Webperson the location of New York City, but we are Rosemary L. Hopcroft, UNC-Charlotte allocated with only one session because of our www2.asanet.org/sectionevol/ small size. Michael Shanahan of UNC, Chapel
Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 9, No. 2 Fall 2012 - 2 –
Hill will be the organizer for this session of This award is given to the best paper written “Social and Biological Forces.” by a graduate student over the last three years. The student must be a member of the We will use the time slot allocated for our section. Coauthored articles are acceptable, section business meeting for a second and as long as all authors are students. This award invited session entitled “Advances in Genomics carries a Analysis and its Potential Impact and Benefits $300 stipend, which is shared if there is more for Sociology.” Three invited speakers will each than one author. All nominations should be speak for 20 minutes and then questions, submitted to the chair of the committee by comments, and discussion will follow. I will be March 1, 2013. This award committee will be the organizer of this session. You are welcome chaired by Colter Mitchell of Michigan to send me suggestions about this section. ([email protected]) (chair), Francois Nielsen You will see more information on this matter ([email protected]), and Christophe from ASA. Chase-Dunn [[email protected]].
Membership Drive
Recruiting more members is a constant ******** task for a small section like ours. By the end of September, 2012, the membership count for Evolution, Biology & Society is 174. Please consider talking to a few students about joining our section at the cost of $5/year. I have Congratulations to the noticed that we have 32 student members and 136 faculty members. In contrast, the section 2012 Section Award of Race, Gender and Class has 411 student Winner for members and 486 faculty members; the section of Culture has 438 student members Best Book: and 491 faculty members. The student members in our section represent a much David Franks lower proportion. We may be able to increase Neurosociology: the nexus between that proportion relatively easily. neuroscience and social psychology, Awards (2010 Springer Press)
The section has two awards:
1. Best Book or Article for a Faculty Member.
In 2013, this award will be given to a best article published over the last three years by a member of the section. The best article Let me know someone is reading this! committee for this year consists of the three same members as last year: Joan Huber [[email protected]] (chair), Robert McAulay If you have any comments, complaints [[email protected]], and Seth Abrutyn or suggestions, please email me at [[email protected]]. Please send [email protected] nominations to the committee chair by March 1, 2013. Self-nominations are accepted.
2. Best Article for a Graduate Student. ********
Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 9, No. 2 Fall 2012 - 3 –
Remarks on Kiecolt, Aggen and those associated with characteristics that vary between families such as social class or ethnic Kendler and on culture or “family values” have no impact Hopcroft and Martin* whatsoever on these two variables or their Presented at the association. However surprising this pattern of American Sociological Association meeting in results may appear to be, it has been found for Denver, CO. 20 Aug 2012. a multitude of traits: there is a substantial role of genes and a substantial role of non-shared François Nielsen environmental factors; when the role of shared August 24, 2012 environmental factors is nonzero, it is generally of a smaller magnitude than the role of genes Introduction (Freese 2008; Turkheimer 2000). There are several ways to classify issues Readers of this paper who have some related to the interface of biology and the familiarity with genetic research may recognize social sciences. One classification would the approach in the Kiecolt, Aggen and distinguish (1) issues related to the biological Kendler paper as the classic twin model of basis and evolution of universal human behavior genetics. They may have heard about behavior, what is usually referred to as (or be warned against) some of the difficulties evolutionary psychology or (using another term of the approach, particularly the need for the that maybe can now be rehabilitated) assumption that the environments of the twins sociobiology; (2) the biological basis of of both kinds (MZ and DZ) are equally similar. individual differences, or behavior genetics or In particular the classic twin design would (a better term) quantitative genetics; and (3) break down if MZ twins are treated more alike the exploration of the evolutionary analogy in than DZ twins and if the greater similarity of the case of cultural evolution, i.e., the evolution treatment causes greater similarity of the trait 1 of memes rather than genes, what might be in the MZ than in the DZ twins.1 They may called evolutionary sociology. The two papers also know that progress in molecular biology presented today are representative of the first has made it possible to detect actual genetic two categories of approaches. I will discuss markers in the genome, and relate those to some issues, contributions, and promises phenotypic outcomes. For these reasons the associated with the two approaches in turn. classic twin model may seem old hat: just an antiquated approach soon to be superseded by Kiecolt, Aggen and Kendler molecular genetic research that will identify the actual genes responsible for the phenotypes of In their “Genetic and Environmental Influences interest to medical researchers, psychologists, on the Relationship between Mastery and and sociologists, with the genes so identified Alcohol Dependence” the authors use modern serving as “proofs”, so to speak, of the genetic methods of quantitative genetics to study the basis of the trait. genetic and environmental factors affecting If this was ever the plan, it did not pan out, psychological trait mastery (also called locus of for reasons that are interesting, and the classic control) and alcohol dependence, and the twin model remains a centerpiece of association between the two traits. Using quantitative genetic research. Why have structural equations methodology applied to quantitative genetic researchers continued to data on MZ and DZ twins they show that 33 use twin research, instead of converting into percent of the variance in mastery and 56 molecular geneticists? One reason is that percent of the variance in alcohol dependence are explained by genes, while the best fitting 1 When actual similarity of treatment of twins has been actually model for each trait is one that specifies zero measured, it has typically been found that (1) yes, influence of the shared environment. MZ twins are treated more alike than DZ twins (more likely to be dressed the same, sleep in the same room and spend the same time talking to In other words the kind of influences that parents), and (2) No, greater similarity of treatment is not strongly associated with greater sociologists often assume to be paramount, similarity on the trait.
Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 9, No. 2 Fall 2012 - 4 – molecular geneticists have found relatively few human behavior. The basic idea was already genes of large effect in the determination of formulated by David Rowe (1994) but the human traits of interest, such as height, BMI, methodological issues are complicated and IQ, or alcohol dependence and mastery as in have been fully resolved only very recently, in the paper presented. When identifiable loci are a long paper by Kohler, Behrman and found, together they typically account for only a Schnittker (2011) that appeared last year. small part of the variance in the trait of interest. Consider as an example the association Most human trait we care about seem to be between educational attainment and earnings. determined by a large number of polymorphic In a status attainment framework we might genes that are (a) common,(b) of small or very adopt a “causal” formulation of the relationship, small effect. In other words, most interesting saying that Education “causes” Earnings, or human traits seem “truly polygenic”. EducationEarnings (e.g., Blau and Duncan Furthermore, some of the most recent 1967). But we do this with some trepidation research using genome-wide association because we have all learned that association studies (GWAS), such as research by Peter does not prove causation. Association of Visscher and coleagues, has shown that traits Education and Earnings does not prove that such as height and IQ are not only are truly one cause the other, because of the possibility polygenic but are also highly heritable. For of lurking variables that affect both Education example, Davies et al. (2011) find a low bound and Earnings. estimate of the heritability of IQ of .5 using In the multivariate ACE framework the GWAS methods that do not involve twins (and variables lurking behind the measured does in fact exclude even remote relatives phenotypes are explicitly decomposed into from the data). The .5 figure is a lower bound genetic, shared environmental and nonshared because the snips that are used in the analysis environmental latent factors affecting (i.e., are only a sample of markers of the functional causing) each measured phenotype. The genes that are affecting the trait in question, associations among the phenotypes are not the genes themselves. Given the strong explained as the result of the overlap of the likelihood that molecular geneticists will never latent factors (i.e., pleiotropy in the case of be able to identify a small number of genetic genetic factors). In the example of Education “smoking guns” of large effect, the and Earnings, the two variables are associated decomposition of phenotypic variance into not because Education causes Earnings, but “black box” components corresponding to because the genetic endowments, shared genes, shared environment, and nonshared family circumstances, and nonshared environment, using genetically-informative individual experiences that cause each designs such as twin studies, will continue to phenotype overlap to some extent. Thus the be of major theoretical interest in and of ACE provides a tool to resolve the causality themselves. problem. A second point is that the multivariate Does this mean that there is no purely quantitative genetic model exemplified in the causal effect of Education on Earnings? bivariate Cholesky decomposition such as the Kohler, Behrman and Schnittket (2011) show one Kiecolt and colleagues use provides a that one can also estimate a direct causal useful alternative to the naive view of causality effect of Education on Earnings in the ACE in human development that originates in the framework. It is necessary to assume that the statistical technique of multiple regression and nonshared environmental factors affecting that is commonplace in sociological research. Education do not affect Earnings (and The ACE model provides a more plausible generally that the nonshared environment approach on epistemological grounds that will for Education is not correlated with the clarify the notion of causality in sociological nonshared environment for earnings). Thus research on individual traits and behaviors. they clarify the way in which comparison of MZ The quintessential reason for this is that and DZ twins in the classic twin design genes represent a potential instrument (in the provides the leverage (i.e., instruments) statistical sense of the term) in the modelling of needed to resolve causality (e.g., in the effect
Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 9, No. 2 Fall 2012 - 5 – of Education on Earnings) from the effects of parental investment in education by sex lurking variables related to genetic (measured as educational attainment of endowments, shared characteristics of the respondent). family environment and unique individual The Trivers-Willard theory and the results experience. obtained by Hopcroft and Martin using more recent waves of the GSS inspire a number of Hopcroft and Martin reflections. First, the effect of parental resources on differential parental investment in In “The Trivers-Willard Hypothesis Revisited” the two sexes, while often significant, is small Hopcroft and Martin examine the general in an “effect size” sense, both in human and sociobiological hypothesis that parents in nonhuman populations. sexually reproducing species have an For example Hopcroft and Martin find that evolutionary advantage in modulating their the correlation between respondent sex and parental investment in male and female father’s status is .038. Likewise there is a offspring according to their environmental significant interaction of sex of respondent with conditions. Parents “in better than average father’s SEI in predicting educational condition” (to use Trivers’s terminology) would attainment of respondent, but the divergence benefit in producing more males, as males can of the regression lines is not spectacular. The potentially produce many more offspring reason for the small effect size of Trivers- than females with very little personal Willard is not that the evolutionary investment. Conversely, parents in stressful theory is wrong, it is that there is an even more conditions would rather “play it safe” by powerful evolutionary mechanism that tends producing more females, who are more likely to trump variation in the sex ratio of offspring to produce at least some offspring even in a according to parental condition. There is highly competitive environment. In human variation in parental investment by sex, but this terms it is straightforward to translate “good appears as a counterpoint to the massive condition” and “poor condition” into high and central tendency that nature tends to produce low status in the socioeconomic hierarchy, equal proportions of males and females, i.e. respectively. Thus high status parents would 1:1 sex ratios. This is true even when raising a tend to invest more in males than in females, male and a female require vastly different both in terms of the proportion of offspring of energetic investments, such as in sea lions each sex that they produce and the amount where males are huge compared to females; of resources they invest in their sons and even there the ratio of males to females is daughters. Conversely, low status parents close to unity. The mystery of the prevalence would tend to invest more in females than in of a 1:1 sex ratio in nature, like so many males. others, was elucidated by Ronald Fisher The beauty of the Trivers-Willard theory is (1930), who showed how if parents were to that it applies generally to all of nature, not only increase their production of one sex, say of humans; and it makes straightforward, males, over the other, they would automatically empirically testable predictions concerning increase the expected reproductive success of differential investment in the two sexes across the other, now the minority sex (females in the species and across human societies. The example). Fundamentally this is because each overall evidence, part of which is discussed in offspring, of either sex, has exactly one mother an 1985 book by Trivers entitled Social and one father (see also Nielsen 1994). Then Evolution, including for humans, is natural selection would favor evolution of vast and suggestive. Rosemary Hopcroft has mechanisms that enhance production of the introduced the issue to the mainstream minority sex and the sex ratio of offspring sociological literature in her 2005 Social would return to unity. Note how Fisher’s theory Forces paper. She finds that there is indeed a represents a strong refutation of facile significant effect of parental status on the sex functionalism at the species or group level. ratio of offspring in the GSS data, and that Clearly producing all these huge male sea there is a Trivers-Willard effect also for lions is wasteful at the group level, as most will
Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 9, No. 2 Fall 2012 - 6 – be unsuccessful in competition and leave zero This means that chances of finding evidence offspring. But nature does not have a strong for Trivers-Willard may be greater in the highly mechanism to achieve the optimum for the hierarchical and territorial human species than group; only that of individuals and their genes. in other species where parental condition is This is one profound lesson of sociobiology less subject to social reproduction. that there is no time to pursue here. Trivers is And fourth, the evolutionary approach well aware of Fisher’s model and shows how adopted by Hopcroft and Martin is potentially his parental investment model is derived from liberating from a philosophical and even Fisher’s, not in opposition to it. political point of view. Fisher’s model of the sex Second, the signal of Trivers-Willard comes ratio implies that in a sexually reproductive through the noise produced by many other population males and females have exactly the factors that may affect differential investment same reproductive expectation (although the in the sexes in human societies. For example, variance in reproductive success can and often as Trivers discusses in his 1985 book, male does vary across the sexes). This implies that patrilocality can favor production of males each somatic gene, including each new irrespective of parental status, simply because mutation, will have the same prospect of being by producing as adults for the parental unit part of a male as a female body. It follows that they compensate for resources invested in a gene that would tend to increase fitness in a them to a greater degree than their sisters who male but decrease it in a female will tend to be are dispersed by marriage among other eliminated by evolution, and vice-versa. In families. And this leads us to reflect on the other words evolution will tend to equalize the current tight marriage market in such societies fitness contributions of genes across the as China where other considerations led sexes, thereby placing strict limits on genetic parents in the past to have more sons differences between them. Thus males and than daughters, and where the distorted sex females are not from Mars nor from Venus but ratio makes it very difficult now for the sons to from the same species on Earth, joined find a spouse. These unfortunate parents are together in optimizing their reproductive now facing the full strength of Fisher’s model of success, the fundamental currency of the sex ratio. evolution. Third, there is a great deal of sociological underpinning in the Trivers-Willard theory, in References the sense that the theory works only if there is some mechanism of reproduction of status / Blau, Peter M., and Otis Dudley Duncan. 1967. environmental conditions across generations. The American Occupational Structure. New That is, Trivers-Willard only works if parents York:Wiley. are able to prolong their “better than average Davies, G, A Tenesa, A Payton, J Yang, SE condition” long enough that their sons will be Harris, D Liewald, X Ke, S Le Hellard, A advantaged in competition for mates and thus Christoforou,M Luciano, K McGhee, L will themselves produce more offspring, Lopez, AJ Gow, J Corley, P Redmond, HC thereby increasing their fitness. There needs to Fox, P Haggarty, LJ Whalley,G McNeill, ME be a positive correlation between parental Goddard, T Espeseth, AJ Lundervold, I condition and offspring condition for the Reinvang, A Pickles, VM Steen, W Ollier, mechanism to work. In fact, some of the most DJ Porteous, M Horan, JM Starr, N persuasive evidence for Trivers-Willard is from Pendleton, PM Visscher and IJ Deary. species that have a dominance hierarchy, such 2011. “Genomewide association studies as deer and chimpanzees, where number of establish that human intelligence is highly sons is positively correlated to status of the heritable and polygenic.” Molecular mother, as maternal condition is often the most Psychiatry advance online publication, 9 relevant characteristic of offspring August 2011; doi:10.1038/mp.2011.85 environment. A territorial arrangement in which Fisher, Ronald A. 1930. The Genetic Theory of parents are able to pass on a desirable Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon territory to their offspring works the same way. Press.
Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 9, No. 2 Fall 2012 - 7 –
Freese, Jeremy. 2008. “Genetics and the New Publications and News of Social Science Explanation of Individual Outcomes.” American Journal of Sociology Section Members 114 Supplement: S1–S35. Hopcroft, Rosemary L. 2005. “Parental Status and Differential Investment in Sons and Hopcroft, Rosemary L. 2012. “Evolution, Daughters: Trivers-Willard Revisited.” Biology and Society” for The Handbook Social Forces 83 (3): 1111–1136. of Sociology and Human Rights edited Hopcroft, Rosemary L. and David Martin. 2012. by David L. Brunsma, Keri E. Iyall Smith “Sociological Reflections on Trivers-Willard and Brian Gran. Boulder, Co: Paradigm Applied to the Contemporary U.S. and a University Press. New Test.” Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the Human Behavior and Horwitz, Allan V. and Jerome C. Wakefield: All Evolution Society, Albuquerque, NM, June We Have to Fear: Psychiatry's 13-17, 2012. Transformation of Natural Anxieties into Kiecolt, Jill K., Steven H. Aggen and Kenneth Mental Disorders. Oxford University S. Kendler. 2012. “Genetic and Press, 2012. Environmental Influences on the Relationship between Mastery and Alcohol Kato, Takahiro A., Motoki, Watabe, Sho Dependence.” Presented at the American Tsuboi, Katsuhiko Ishikawa, Kazuhide Sociological Association meeting in Denver, Hashiya, Akira Monji, Hideo Utsumi, & CO. 20 Aug. Shigenobu Kanba. 2012. “Minocycline Kohler, Hans-Peter, Jere R. Behrman and Modulates Human Social Decision- Jason Schnittker. 2011. “Social Science Making: Possible Impact of Microglia on Methods for Twins Data: Integrating Personality-Oriented Social Behaviors.” Causality, Endowments, and Heritability.” PLoS ONE 7(7): e40461. Biodemography and Social Biology 57: 1: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040461. 88–141. Loehlin, John. 1996. “The Cholesky approach: Ozono, Hiroki, Motoki Watabe, and A cautionary note.” Behavior Genetics 26: 1 Sakiko Yoshikawa. 2012. “Effects (January): 65–69. of FacialExpression and Gaze Direction Nielsen, François. 1994. “Sociobiology and on Approach and Avoidance Behavior.” Sociology.” Pp 267–303 in Annual Review Cognition & Emotion: 26, 943- of Sociology 20, edited by John Hagan and 949. doi:10.1080/02699931.2011.64180 Karen S. Cook. Palo Alto, CA: Annual 7. Reviews. Watabe, Motoki, Hiroshi Ban, and Hiroki Rowe, David C. 1994. The Limits of Family Yamamoto. 2011. “Judgments About Influence: Genes, Experience, and Others’ Trustworthiness: An fMRI Behavior. Guilford. Study.” Letters on Evolutionary Trivers, Robert. 1985. Social Evolution. Menlo Behavioral Science: 2, 28– Park, CA: Benjamin / Cummings. 32. doi:10.5178/lebs.2011. Turkheimer, Eric. 2000. “Three Laws of Behavior Genetics and What They Mean Watabe, Motoki, Takahiro A. Kato, Akira Monji, Current Directions in Psychological Science Hideki Horikawa, and Shigenobu 9: 5 (Oct): 160–164. Kanba. 2012. “Does Minocycline, an Antibiotic with Inhibitory Effects on Microglial Activation, Sharpen a Sense ******** of Trust in Social Interaction? Psychopharmacology: 220. 551-557. doi: 10.1007/s00213-011-2509-8.
Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 9, No. 2 Fall 2012 - 8 –
********
Neurosociology: the nexus between neuroscience and social psychology
(2012 Section Book Award Winner)
David D. Franks
Springer Press
Above, Section Chair Jonathan H. Turner and
Section Book Award Winner David D. Franks, Recently, neuroscientists have presented at the Section Business Meeting in Denver, new research which has a direct impact on Co. Below, David Franks with his Award. 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.
Find the Complete Works of Charles Darwin on-line at http://darwin-online.org.uk/
Evolution, Biology and Society Vol. 9, No. 2 Fall 2012 - 9 –
Free exam copies available for professors
Sociology: A Biosocial Free exam copies available for professors Introduction
Rosemary L. Hopcroft New 11th Edition Human Societies An Introduction to Macrosociology In an era of human genome research, environmental challenges, new reproductive technologies, and more, students can Patrick Nolan and Gerhard Lenski benefit from an introductory sociology text that is a biologically informed. This This classic text has been fully revised, updated innovative text integrates mainstream with new data, and refreshed in design for student-friendly reading. sociological research in all areas of sociology with a scientifically-informed model of an evolved, biological human actor. This grounding of sociology in a On the Origins of Gender Inequality biosocial conception of the individual actor is coupled with a comparative approach, as Joan Huber human biology is universal and often reveals itself as variations on themes across human Joan Huber challenges feminists toward a richer cultures. Tables, Figures, Photos, and the understanding of biological origins of author’s concise and remarkably lively style inequality—knowledge that can help women make this a truly enjoyable book to read and achieve greater equality today. teach. Makes a good companion book to Visit our Website and click on “Order an Nolan and Lenski’s Human Societies. Exam Copy” www.paradigmpublishers.com
Visit our Website and click on “Order an Exam Copy” www.paradigmpublishers.com