Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-z5d2w Total loading time: 0.714 Render date: 2021-12-01T16:34:13.967Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

8 - From Evolved Motives to Everyday Mentation: Evolution, Goals, and Cognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2010

Steven L. Neuberg
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Arizona State University
Douglas T. Kenrick
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Arizona State University
Jon K. Maner
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Florida State University
Mark Schaller
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia
Joseph P. Forgas
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales, Sydney
Kipling D. Williams
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales, Sydney
Simon M. Laham
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales, Sydney
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Walking across a crowding shopping mall, you may see a group of people who vary in their race, gender, attractiveness, clothing style, and demeanor. A similarly complex array of social stimuli confronts us at conferences, airports, farmer's markets, and college campuses. Rarely do we attend equally to all individuals in such complex social environments or to all characteristics of any given individual. Rather, we selectively direct our attention toward a smaller subset of individuals and characteristics. This selective direction of attention often occurs automatically, without conscious intent, and can have important consequences for subsequent thoughts and actions.

Who do we attend to, think about, and later remember? And how are the answers to this question linked to our goals at the moment? We recently embarked on a program of research to explore the processes that influence the selective and automatic direction of perceptual and cognitive resources. In this chapter, we present a conceptual framework that begins to articulate the role that fundamental social goals play in governing these processes. We focus, in particular, on the ways in which self-protection and mating goals selectively facilitate attention toward people who have characteristics relevant to those goals. Integrating theory and research on selective attention processes, the influence of goals on social cognition and behavior, and ecological theories of motivation and social cognition, our framework yields some novel hypotheses about how self-protection and mating goals influence attention to, perceptions of, and cognitions about individuals who differ in gender, physical attractiveness, and ethnicity.

Type
Chapter
Information
Social Motivation
Conscious and Unconscious Processes
, pp. 133 - 152
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aarts, H., Dijskterhuis, A., & Vries, P. (2001). On the psychology of drinking: Being thirsty and perceptually ready. British Journal of Psychology, 92, 631–642CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abbey, A. (1982). Sex differences in attributions for friendly behavior: Do males misperceive females' friendliness?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 830–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altemeyer, B. (1988). Enemies of freedom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Bargh, J. A. (1990). Auto-motives: Preconscious determinants of social interaction. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 93–130). New York: Guilford Press
Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist, 54, 464–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruner, J. S., & Goodman, C. C. (1947). Value and need as organizing factors in perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 42, 33–44CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bugental, D. B. (2000). Acquisition of the algorithms of social life: A domain-based approach. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 187–219CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1999). Evolutionary psychology. Boston: Allyn & Bacon
Buss, D. M., & Kenrick, D. T. (1998). Evolutionary social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of evolutionary psychology (4th ed., Vol. II, pp. 982–1026). Boston: MA: McGraw-Hill
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carpenter, C. (1974). Aggressive behavioral systems. In R. L. Holloway (Ed.), Primate aggression, territoriality, and xenophobia (pp. 459–496). New York: Academic Press
Cheney, D. (1986). Interactions and relationships between groups. In B. B. Smuts, D. L. Cheney, R. M. Seyfarth, R. W. Wrangham, & T. T. Struhsaker (Eds.), Primate societies (pp. 267–281). Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Clarke, R. D., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 2, 39–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind (pp. 163–228). New York: Oxford University Press
Cummins, D. D. (1998). Social norms and other minds: The evolutionary roots of higher cognition. In D. D. Cummins & C. Allen (Eds.), The evolution of mind (pp. 30–50). New York: Oxford University Press
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter
Darwin, C. (1872/1998). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. New York: Oxford University Press
Di Lollo, V., Kawahara, J., Zuvic, S. M., & Visser, T. A. W. (2001) The preattentive emperor has no clothes: A dynamic redressing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 479–492CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eagly, A. H., & Kite, M. E. (1987). Are stereotypes of nationalities applied to both women and men?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 451–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekman, P. (Ed.). (1982). Emotion in the human face (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Feingold, A. (1990). Gender differences in effects of physical attractiveness on romantic attraction: A comparison across five research paradigms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 981–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feingold, A. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 125–139CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 1–74). New York: Academic PressCrossRef
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill
Friesen, C. K., & Kingstone, A. (1998). The eyes have it! Reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 490–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funder, D. C. (1987). Errors and mistakes: Evaluating the accuracy of social judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 75–90. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallCrossRef
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–644CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Goodall, J. (1986). Social rejection, exclusion, and shunning among the Gombe chimpanzees. Ethology and Sociobiology, 7, 227–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutierres, S. E., Kenrick, D. T., & Partch, J. (1999). Contrast effects in self-assessment reflect gender differences in mate selection criteria. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1126–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1988). Finding the face in the crowd: An anger superiority effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 917–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haselton, M., & Buss, D. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 81–91CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hassebrauck, M. (1998). The visual process method: A new method to study physical attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19, 111–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, W. (1890/1981). The principles of psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (1988). Out-group homogeneity: Judgments of variability at the individual and group levels. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 778–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
Kenrick, D. T. (1994). Evolutionary social psychology: From sexual selection to social cognition. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 26, pp. 75–121). San Diego, CA: Academic PressCrossRef
Kenrick, D. T., Li, N. P., & Butner, J. (2003). Dynamical evolutionary psychology: Individual decision-rules and emergent social norms. Psychological Review, 110, 3–28CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Zierk, K. L., & Krones, J. M. (1994). Evolution and social cognition: Contrast effects as a function of sex, dominance, and physical attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 210–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., Sadalla, E. K., Groth, G., & Trost, M. R. (1990). Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: Qualifying the parental investment model. Journal of Personality, 53, 97–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., Sadalla, E. K., & Keefe, R. C. (1998). Evolutionary cognitive psychology: The missing heart of modern cognitive science. In C. Crawford & D. L. Krebs (Eds.), Handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 485–514). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemics and human knowledge. New York: Plenum Press
Kruglanski, A. W., & Freund, T. (1983). The freezing and unfreezing of lay-inferences: Effects on impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping, and numerical anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing.”Psychological Review, 103, 263–283CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480–498CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurzban, R., & Leary, M. R. (2001). Evolutionary origins of stigmatization: The functions of social exclusion. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 187–208CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maner, J. K., Kenrick, D. T., Becker, D. V., Delton, A. W., Hofer, B., Wilbur, C., & Neuberg, S. L. (2003). Sexually selective cognition: Beauty captures the mind of the beholder. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1107–1120CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martindale, C. (1980). Subselves. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 193–218). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Martindale, C. (1991). Cognitive psychology: A neural-network approach. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole
McArthur, L. Z., & Baron, R. (1983). Toward an ecological theory of social perception. Psychological Review, 90, 215–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moskowitz, G. B. (1993). Individual differences in social categorization: The influence of personal need for structure on spontaneous trait inference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 132–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullen, B., Brown, R., & Smith, C. (1992). Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 103–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuberg, S. L., & Fiske, S. T. (1987). Motivational influences on impression formation: Outcome dependency, accuracy-driven attention, and individuating processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 431–444CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neuberg, S. L., & Newsom, J. T. (1993). Personal need for structure: Individual differences in chronic motivation to simplify. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 113–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Öhman, A., Lundqvist, D., & Esteves, F. (2001). The face in the crowd revisited: A threat advantage with schematic stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 381–396CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Öhman, A., & Mineka, S. (2001). Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning. Psychological Review, 108, 483–522CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). New York: Academic PressCrossRef
Plutchik, R. (1980). A general psychoevolutionary theory of emotion. In R. Plutchik, & H. Kellerman (Eds.), Emotion: Theory, research, and experience. (Vol. 1, pp. 3–33). New York: Academic PressCrossRef
Pratto, F., & John, O. P. (1991). Automatic vigilance: The attention-grabbing power of negative social information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 380–391CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rensink, R. A. (2000). Seeing, sensing, and scrutinizing. Vision Research, 40, 1469–1487CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rensink, R. A., O'Regan, J. K., & Clark, J. J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8, 368–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothgerber, H. (1997). External intergroup threat as an antecedent to perceptions of in-group and out-group homogeneity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1206–1212CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schaller, M., Boyd, C., Yohannes, J., & O'Brien, M. (1995). The prejudiced personality revisited: Personal need for structure and formation of erroneous group stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 544–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaller, M., Park, J. H., & Faulkner, J. (2003). Prehistoric dangers and contemporary prejudices. European Review of Social Psychology, 14, 105–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaller, M., Park, J. H., & Mueller, A. (2003). Fear of the dark: Interactive effects of beliefs about danger and ambient darkness on ethnic stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 637–649CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scherer, K. R., & Wallbott, H. G. (1994). Evidence for universality and cultural variation of differential emotion response patterning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 310–328CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, J. P. (1980). The function of emotions in behavioral systems: A systems theory analysis. In R. Plutchik & H. Kellerman (Eds.), Emotion: Theory, research, and experience. (Vol. 1, pp. 35–56). New York: Academic PressCrossRef
Shackelford, T. K. (2001). Self-esteem in marriage. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 371–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, J. W., & Ellis, H. D. (1973). The effect of attractiveness on recognition memory for faces. American Journal of Psychology, 86, 627–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Bobo, L. (1994). Social dominance orientation and the political psychology of gender: A case of invariance?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 998–1011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–883CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1992). Sociosexuality and romantic partner choice. Journal of Personality, 60, 31–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, J. A., Gangestad, S. W., & Lerma, M. (1990). Perception of physical attractiveness: Mechanisms involved in the maintenance of romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1192–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, L. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1995). Motivation and cognition in social life: A social survival perspective. Social Cognition, 13, 189–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tetlock, P. E., & Kim, J. I. (1987). Accountability and judgment processes in a personality prediction task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 700–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tipper, S. P. (1992). Selection for action: The role of inhibitory mechanisms. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 105–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todd, P. M., & Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Precis of “Simple Heuristics that Make Us Smart.”Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 727–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honk, J., Tuiten, A., Haan, E., Hout, M., & Stam, H. (2001). Attentional biases for angry faces: Relationships to trait anger and anxiety. Cognition and Emotion, 15, 279–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hippel, W., Hawkins, C., & Narayan, S. (1994). Personality and perceptual expertise: Individual differences in perceptual identification. Psychological Science, 5, 401–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1992). Competitiveness, risk-taking, and violence: The young male syndrome. Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 59–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wrangham, R. (1987). The significance of African apes for reconstructing human social evolution. In W. G. Kinzey (Ed.), The evolution of human behavior: Primate models (pp. 51–71). Albany, NY: SUNY Press
18
Cited by

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×