Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-n7x5d Total loading time: 0.579 Render date: 2021-12-04T12:10:42.920Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Rethinking innovative designs to further test parasite-stress theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2012

Ayse K. Uskul
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ, United Kingdom. auskul@essex.ac.uk http://www.essex.ac.uk/psychology/department/people/uskul.html

Abstract

Fincher & Thornhill's (F&T's) parasite-stress theory of sociality is supported largely by correlational evidence; its persuasiveness would increase significantly via lab and natural experiments and demonstrations of its mediating role. How the theory is linked to other approaches to group differences in psychological differences and to production and dissemination of cultural ideas and practices, need further clarification. So does the theory's view on the possible reduction of negative group interactions.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

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

Berry, J. W. (1966) Temne and Eskimo perceptual skills. International Journal of Psychology 1:207–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, J. W., van de Koppel, J. M. H., Sénéchal, C., Annis, R. C., Bahuchet, S., Cavalli Sforza, L. L. & Witkin, H. A. (1986) On the edge of the forest: Cultural adaptation and cognitive development in Central Africa. Swets and Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Diamond, J. (1998) Guns, germs, and steel: The fates of human societies. W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. & Baker, W. E. (2000) Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review 65:1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitayama, S., Conway, L. G. III, Pietromonaco, P. R., Park, H. & Plaut, V. C. (2010) Ethos of independence across regions in the United States: The production-adoption model of cultural change. American Psychologist 65:559–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kitayama, S., Mesquita, B. & Karasawa, M. (2006) Cultural affordances and emotional experience: Socially engaging and disengaging emotions in Japan and the United States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 91:890903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kitayama, S., Park, H., Sevincer, A. T., Karasawa, M. & Uskul, A. K. (2009) A cultural task analysis of implicit independence: Comparing North America, Western Europe, and East Asia. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97:236–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mortensen, C. R., Becker, D. V., Ackerman, J. M., Neuberg, S. L. & Kenrick, D. T. (2010) Infection breeds reticence: the effects of disease salience on self-perceptions of personality and behavioral avoidance tendencies. Psychological Science 21:440–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oishi, S. (2010) The psychology of residential mobility: Implications for the self, social relationships, and well-being. Perspectives on Psychological Science 5:521.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richerson, P. J. & Boyd, R. (2005) Not by genes alone: How culture transformed human evolution. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Schaller, M. C., Miller, G. E., Gervais, W. M., Yager, S. & Chen, E. (2010) Mere visual perception of other people's disease symptoms facilitates a more aggressive immune response. Psychological Science 21:649–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schaller, M. C. & Crandall, C. S. (2004) The psychological foundations of culture. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Sperber, D. (1996) Explaining culture: A naturalistic approach. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Uskul, A. K., Kitayama, S. & Nisbett, R. E. (2008) Ecocultural basis of cognition: Farmers and fishermen are more holistic than herders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105:8552–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Send article to Kindle

To send this article 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. 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.

Rethinking innovative designs to further test parasite-stress theory
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Rethinking innovative designs to further test parasite-stress theory
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Rethinking innovative designs to further test parasite-stress theory
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *