Search

We hypothesize that fictional stories are highly successful in human cultures partly because they activate evolved cognitive mechanisms, for instance for finding mates (e.g., in romance fiction), exploring the world (e.g., in adventure and speculative fiction), or avoiding predators (e.g., in horror fiction). In this paper, we put forward a comprehensive framework to study fiction through this evolutionary lens. The primary goal of this framework is to carve fictional stories at their cognitive joints using an evolutionary framework. Reviewing a wide range of adaptive variations in human psychology–in personality and developmental psychology, behavioral ecology, and evolutionary biology, among other disciplines –, this framework also addresses the question of interindividual differences in preferences for different features in fictional stories. It generates a wide range of predictions about the patterns of combinations of such features, according to the patterns of variations in the mechanisms triggered by fictional stories. As a result of a highly collaborative effort, we present a comprehensive review of evolved cognitive mechanisms that fictional stories activate. To generate this review, we (1) listed more than 70adaptivechallengeshumans faced in the course of their evolution, (2) identified the adaptive psychological mechanisms that evolved in response to such challenges, (3) specified four sources of adaptive variability for the sensitivity of each mechanism(i.e., personality traits, sex, age, and ecological conditions), and (4) linked these mechanisms to the story features that trigger them. This comprehensive framework lays the ground for a theory-driven research program for the study of fictional stories, their content, distribution, structure, and cultural evolution.

In the html version of this article the affiliation details for Marco Antonio Correa Varella were incorrectly given as ‘eduLab21, Ayrton Senna Institute, São Paulo, 05423-040, Brazil’, but should have been ‘Department of Experimental Psychology, Institute of Psychology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, 05508-030, Brazil’. This has now been corrected in the HTML version of the Article. The PDF version of the Article was correct at the time of publication.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused drastic social changes for many people, including separation from friends and coworkers, enforced close contact with family, and reductions in mobility. Here we assess the extent to which people's evolutionarily-relevant basic motivations and goals-fundamental social motives such as Affiliation and Kin Care-might have been affected. To address this question, we gathered data on fundamental social motives in 42 countries (N = 15,915) across two waves, including 19 countries (N = 10,907) for which data were gathered both before and during the pandemic (pre-pandemic wave: 32 countries, N = 8998; 3302 male, 5585 female; M-age = 24.43, SD = 7.91; mid-pandemic wave: 29 countries, N = 6917; 2249 male, 4218 female; M-age = 28.59, SD = 11.31). Samples include data collected online (e.g., Prolific, MTurk), at universities, and via community sampling. We found that Disease Avoidance motivation was substantially higher during the pandemic, and that most of the other fundamental social motives showed small, yet significant, differences across waves. Most sensibly, concern with caring for one's children was higher during the pandemic, and concerns with Mate Seeking and Status were lower. Earlier findings showing the prioritization of family motives over mating motives (and even over Disease Avoidance motives) were replicated during the pandemic. Finally, well-being remained positively associated with family-related motives and negatively associated with mating motives during the pandemic, as in the pre-pandemic samples. Our results provide further evidence for the robust primacy of family-related motivations even during this unique disruption of social life.

[No Abstract Available]

How does psychology vary across human societies? The fundamental social motives framework adopts an evolutionary approach to capture the broad range of human social goals within a taxonomy of ancestrally recurring threats and opportunities. These motives-self-protection, disease avoidance, affiliation, status, mate acquisition, mate retention, and kin care-are high in fitness relevance and everyday salience, yet understudied cross-culturally. Here, we gathered data on these motives in 42 countries (N = 15,915) in two cross-sectional waves, including 19 countries (N = 10,907) for which data were gathered in both waves. Wave 1 was collected from mid-2016 through late 2019 (32 countries, N = 8,998; 3,302 male, 5,585 female; M-age = 24.43, SD = 7.91). Wave 2 was collected from April through November 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic (29 countries, N = 6,917; 2,249 male, 4,218 female; M-age = 28.59, SD = 11.31). These data can be used to assess differences and similarities in people's fundamental social motives both across and within cultures, at different time points, and in relation to other commonly studied cultural indicators and outcomes., National Science Foundation [1822713]; FAPESP (SAo Paulo Research Foundation) [17-14387S, 20-01214S]; Czech Science Foundation [17-14387S, 20-01214S]; Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences [RVO: 68081740]; Departmental Research Funds from the Department of Psychology at Aberystwyth University; Universidad de La Frontera [DI20-0080]; National Science Foundation Graduate Student Fellowship Program, The authors thank Becca Neel and Mark Schaller for comments on an earlier draft. The data from Kenya were collected by Busara Center for Behavioral Economics. The contributions of M.E.W.V., D.T.K., C.M.P., and A.S.W. were supported by grant #1822713 from the National Science Foundation. The contributions of A.C.C. and R.P.D. were supported by funding from FAPESP (SAo Paulo Research Foundation). The contributions of S. Graf and M.H. were supported by grants #17-14387S and #20-01214S from the Czech Science Foundation and by RVO: 68081740 of the Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences. The contributions of J.O were supported by Departmental Research Funds from the Department of Psychology at Aberystwyth University. The contributions of S.S. were supported by Project DIUFRO DI20-0080 from Universidad de La Frontera. A.S.W. was supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Student Fellowship Program.

[No Abstract Available]

How does psychology vary across human societies? The fundamental social motives framework adopts an evolutionary approach to capture the broad range of human social goals within a taxonomy of ancestrally recurring threats and opportunities. These motives-self-protection, disease avoidance, affiliation, status, mate acquisition, mate retention, and kin care-are high in fitness relevance and everyday salience, yet understudied cross-culturally. Here, we gathered data on these motives in 42 countries (N = 15,915) in two cross-sectional waves, including 19 countries (N = 10,907) for which data were gathered in both waves. Wave 1 was collected from mid-2016 through late 2019 (32 countries, N = 8,998; 3,302 male, 5,585 female; M-age = 24.43, SD = 7.91). Wave 2 was collected from April through November 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic (29 countries, N = 6,917; 2,249 male, 4,218 female; M-age = 28.59, SD = 11.31). These data can be used to assess differences and similarities in people's fundamental social motives both across and within cultures, at different time points, and in relation to other commonly studied cultural indicators and outcomes., National Science Foundation [1822713]; FAPESP (SAo Paulo Research Foundation) [17-14387S, 20-01214S]; Czech Science Foundation [17-14387S, 20-01214S]; Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences [RVO: 68081740]; Departmental Research Funds from the Department of Psychology at Aberystwyth University; Universidad de La Frontera [DI20-0080]; National Science Foundation Graduate Student Fellowship Program, The authors thank Becca Neel and Mark Schaller for comments on an earlier draft. The data from Kenya were collected by Busara Center for Behavioral Economics. The contributions of M.E.W.V., D.T.K., C.M.P., and A.S.W. were supported by grant #1822713 from the National Science Foundation. The contributions of A.C.C. and R.P.D. were supported by funding from FAPESP (SAo Paulo Research Foundation). The contributions of S. Graf and M.H. were supported by grants #17-14387S and #20-01214S from the Czech Science Foundation and by RVO: 68081740 of the Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences. The contributions of J.O were supported by Departmental Research Funds from the Department of Psychology at Aberystwyth University. The contributions of S.S. were supported by Project DIUFRO DI20-0080 from Universidad de La Frontera. A.S.W. was supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Student Fellowship Program.