Search

The reproductive self-interest model of morality (RSIMM) is a framework for understanding moral judgments associated with sexual behavior. This model posits that individual differences in sexual strategies, mediated by one's religiosity and political orientation, casually influence people's moral judgments toward social hot-button issues. Previous work on the RSIMM has explained individual differences in attitudes toward abortion, prostitution, and contraception. Individuals more interested in long-term mating judged these behaviors as morally wrong. In this preregistered study, we proposed the RSIMM would account for individual differences in rape myth acceptance (RMA). RMA is the phenomenon of endorsing beliefs or stereotypes about rape that diminish the severity of assaults or shift blame from perpetrators to victims. We examined the relationship between political orientation, attitudes toward third-party casual sex, and RMA in a convenience sample of 308 participants (137 women). We predicted that more negative attitudes toward third parties' casual sex would correlate with increased RMA. Our hypothesis was supported for men but not women: Men who condemned others' casual sex, had more unrestricted attitudes about their own casual sex, and desired more casual sex were statistically more likely to accept more rape myths. In the discussion, we speculate that sex differences in the relationship between attitudes towards casual sex and RMA may be due to the costs of rape incurred by women but not men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Replies to comments on Evolutionary psychology: Controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations by Confer et al. The purpose of which was to clarify the logic of evolutionary psychology and clear up some of the more common misunderstandings about it. In this response, we address the key points raised by the commentators.

Evolutionary psychology has emerged over the past 15 years as a major theoretical perspective, generating an increasing volume of empirical studies and assuming a larger presence within psychological science. At the same time, it has generated critiques and remains controversial among some psychologists. Some of the controversy stems from hypotheses that go against traditional psychological theories; some from empirical findings that may have disturbing implications; some from misunderstandings about the logic of evolutionary psychology; and some from reasonable scientific concerns about its underlying framework. This article identifies some of the most common concerns and attempts to elucidate evolutionary psychology's stance pertaining to them. These include issues of testability and falsifiability; the domain specificity versus domain generality of psychological mechanisms; the role of novel environments as they interact with evolved psychological circuits; the role of genes in the conceptual structure of evolutionary psychology; the roles of learning, socialization, and culture in evolutionary psychology; and the practical value of applied evolutionary psychology. The article concludes with a discussion of the limitations of current evolutionary psychology. Keywords: evolutionary psychology, misconceptions, adaptation, psychological mechanisms, natural selection DOI: 10.1037/a0018413

Mate value discrepancies (MVDs) predict multiple outcomes in romantic relationships, including relationship satisfaction, jealousy, and forgiveness. We tested the hypotheses that MVDs would predict anger and shame in response to both medium and strong transgressions within romantic relationships. Participants in long-term committed relationships read scenarios describing relational transgressions and rated how much anger and shame they would feel if they were either the victim or the perpetrator of the transgressions in their current relationship. We found partial support for our hypotheses. Victims of medium-level transgressions were angrier the more alternative potential mates there were that were closer to their ideal mate preferences than their current partner. Perpetrators of strong transgressions felt more shame the higher in mate value their partner was compared to them. Results suggest that different MVDs may predict different outcomes in relationships and highlight the importance of using functional theories of emotions to predict individual differences in emotional responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We propose that middle childhood female ambivalent attachments, given the adaptive problem of uncertainty of future investment, is designed to evoke immediate investment from current caregivers, rather than new investment sources. We suggest greater specificity of strategic attachment solutions to adaptive problems that differ by sex, time, and relationship type.