HUMAN AGGRESSION IN EVOLUTIONARY . - Antoniocasella.eu

2y ago
24 Views
2 Downloads
1.27 MB
15 Pages
Last View : 18d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Evelyn Loftin
Transcription

ClinicalPsychologyReview.Vol.17. No.CopyrightPergamonPrinted06, pp.1997in the603419,ElserierLISA. All rights027%7358/971995ScienceI.tdreserved 17.00 .OOPI1 s0272-7358(97)00037-8HUMAN AGGRESSION INEVOLUTIONARYPSYCHOLOGICALPERSPECTIVEDavid M. BussUniversityof Texas at AustinTodd K. ShackelfordFloridaAtlanticUniversityThis article proposes an evolutionary psychological account of human aggression.ABSTRACT.The psychological mechanisms underlying aggression are hypothesized to he context-sensitivesolutions to particular adaptive problems of social living. Seven adaptive problems are prqbosedfor which aggression might have evolved as a solution -co-opting the resources of others,defending against attack, inflicting costs on same-sex rivals, negotiating status and powerhierarchies, deterring rivals from future aggression, deterring mates from sexual infidelity, andreducing resources expended on genetically unrelated children. We outline several of the con textsin which humans confront these adaptive problems and the evolutionary logic of why men arecross-culturally more violently aggressive than womenin particular contexts. The article coneludes with a limited review of the empirical evidence surrounding each of the seven hypothesizedfunctionsof aggression and discusses the status and limitations of the current evolutionarypsychological account. 0 1997 Elsevier Science LtdANCIENTHOMINIDrib fracturesstab (TrinkausfoundThisarticleremainsinexplicable& Zimmerman,lodgedincreasinglyskeletalthat appear1982).in skeletalrib cages.sophisticated,evidencewas preparedwhile Toddhave been discoveredexceptby the forceFragmentsfromK. Shackelfordthat containandthatthe weaponsAs paleontologicalof violencecranialof clubs and weaponsdetectiveamongwas a Jacobourare occasionallywork has becomeancestorsK. eLJniversityof Texas,shouldAustin,be addressedTXto David M. Buss at Department78’712; E-mail:dbuss&psy.utexas.edu.605of Psychology,The

D. M. Buss and 71 K. Sharkelford606roomed(Daly & Wilson,1988).Humansapparentlyhave a long evolutionaryhistoryof msmodernlivingpurchaseby ongtheoriesviolenceof toy weaponsandand betweension, they run agroundand cross-culturalcognitivescripts,undoubtedlyas completerecords.Theywhich reveal a long history1989,(Berkowitz,1993;explanationshave troubleviolencethe Yanomamohands of otherneighboringviolentsuchtribesas a group,(HartA deeper1988).of Paraguaythe paleontologicalphenomenatoys, 3).Althoughthe Yanomamo& Hurtado,high among1996)andmay be unusuallytraditionalsocieties,the Tiwi of northernis needed,as violencetextbooksor the alienationcontainone that does not rely primarilyon television,chaptersthe mass media,of modernWesternliving.THEORY”on aggression(e.g.,Myers,1995;Amongtheorythe explanationsconsidered,one usually finds a section on theusually attributed to Freud and the ethologist Konradof aggression,”which is selectedto theseuninfluenced(e.g., Chagnon,one in four adult males die at theTHE DEMISE OF “INSTINCTSabini,They have troublesocietiesto televisionare commonlyprinciplessuchMost social psychologycivilization.traditionaldata,the inven-1960).set of explanatoryon modernsociety,(Chagnon,& Pilling,of aggres-with the historicalof years beforefor uesmannfrom within their local tribe or as a result of wars withrates of homicideas the AcheAustraliaeitheramonglackingof Venezuela,humans,1982;oftheBy watchingaggressiveexpiainingof violenceAmong1993).when confrontedor even the rise of Westernand entirelyplaguessociety,work on the interactionsand genetictions of guns or television,civilizationEron,for recentexplainingWesterntheplay a causal role in the ontogenyof humanthe prevalencedomain-generalin Westernare said to acquire(Berkowitz,& ning,these factorsTV,for their childrenon TV, for example,observationaloftenwith explanationsin moviesbut see HuesmannAlthoughof aggressionin conjunctionaccounts,to representa class of “biologicalexplanations.”Accordingenergy is said to be an instinctual drive that builds upby external stimuli, but its internal buildinguntil it explodes. It may be “released”quality guaranteesthat it will be “pushed out” one way or another.This depictionMyers (1995))of supposedaggressiveof instincttheory is usually dismissed with dispatch. Accordingto“the idea that aggression is an instinct collapsed as the listfor example,humaninstinctsgrew to includenearly every conceivablehumanbehav-ior.what the social scientists had tried to do was to explain social behavior by namingit” (p. 438). The second argumentfor dismissal is that “instincttheory.failstoaccountfor the variationin aggressiveness,frompersonto personand culturetoculture” (Myers, 1995, p. 439). Accordingto this argument,“biological”representsthose things that are invariant, and so evidence of cultural or individual variabilityrequires nonbiologicalexplanations.Berkowitz (1993) provides a more detailed critique.He dismissesthe instinctconceptionon the followinggrounds:(a) scientistshave not discovered within the brain or body any reservoirs of aggressive energy; (b)research rarely reveals spontaneousaggression, but commonly finds that aggression isresponsive to external stimuli; and (c) there are different types of aggression,not a

Evolution and Human Aggression607single form. Following these dismissals, textbook writers proceed to spend the bulk ofthe coverage on theories invoking environmental conditions, such as observationallearning as a result of media exposure to violence.Perhaps the dismissal was too hasty. During the domination of learning theory,which reigned over psychology for the bulk of this century, biological explanationswere roundly derided. The dichotomies drawn between instincts and learning, biologyand environment, or nature and nature, however, are inherently false (Tooby &Cosmides, 1992). These dichotomies obscure more than they reveal.The fact that humans show such behavioral flexibility and context-sensitivity isenough to jettison notions of inflexible aggressive instincts invariably getting “pushedout” into behavior regardless of circumstances. But neither are humans passivereceptacles for environmental forces, unformed lumps of clay until molded by reinforcement contingencies. A more complex model is needed.EVOLUTIONARYPSYCHOLOGY:AN INTERACTIONISTMODELEvolutionary psychology provides a more complex interactionist model for viewingthe origins of aggression (see Huesmann & Eron, 1989, for a different interactionistmodel, focusing on the interplay of genetic dispositions, observational learning, andcognitive scripts). Evolutionary psychology starts with a set of premises about humanbehavior. First, according to evolutionary psychology, all human behavior is a productof mechanisms internal to the person, in conjunction with inputs that trigger theactivation of those mechanisms. Even the simplest behaviors - such as the blink of aneye in response to a puff of air - require both a mechanism and an input. Nomechanisms, no behavior; no input, no behavior. This is as true for aggression as it isfor an eye blink.Second, all psychological mechanisms, at some fundamental level of description,owe their existence to evolution by selection. Whatever mechanisms we humans have- whether they are just a few highly general learning mechanisms or a larger numberof Lorenzian instincts, or different ones altogether - they originated through theprocess of evolution by natural or sexual selection. Selection is the only causal processpowerful enough to produce complex organic mechanisms (Cosmides & Tooby, 1994;Daly SCWilson, 1983; Tooby & Cosmides, 1992). If another causal process exists, it hasnot been made known to the scientific community (Daly & Wilson, 1988).If behavior requires the existence of mechanisms, and mechanisms owe theirexistence to evolution by selection, then evolution is relevant in every single instanceof human behavior. This is a trivial truism, but the basic point is often obscured byfalse dichotomies that divide the conceptual world into “evolutionary” and “nonevolutionary” explanations, or any number of similarly false dichotomies. In this sense, allor most modern scientists are evolutionists.When the rhetoric and false dichotomies are swept aside, the debate turns out to beabout this: The nature of the mechanisms. The radical behaviorist B.F. Skinner was asmuch an evolutionist as Konrad Lorenz, but they differed in their views of the natureof the mechanisms designed by natural selection (Skinner, 1981). Skinner believedthat evolution by selection had endowed organisms, including humans, with a smallnumber of highly general learning mechanisms. Lorenz believed that evolution byselection had endowed humans with a larger number of mechanisms, including anaggression instinct. The issue in contention is the nature of the mechanisms, notwhether they are or are not produced by evolutionary processes.

11. M. Buss anal 71 K. volved psychologicalinput with decisionexternalto othermechanisms,extendedFromthe vantageselectionor manifestthe“inclusivefitness”of the psychological(d) inglehypothesesinvariantCo-OptHumans,leadsand spreadto intuitiveus to poseadaptiveformasnotionsofnotionsover humanin aggression,abouta clusterproblemsof “theevolutionaryfunctionsof aggression?by variationsthe classes of adaptivehistoryfeatures”and can they be predictedthe adaptivebe explainedof relatedmight be solved by(c) What are the “designdo not enjoy a privilegedof aggression?and explained(e) Can individualin the degreeproblemsbyandto whichto which aggressionaboutcompetitionare thenfor adaptiveproblemsor any otherother.to which aggressiondoesbehavioralare sometimesTheused to adjudicate.are implicitlyperspectiveseveral hypotheseswith y,MIGHTstatus by virtue of being evolution-all psychologicalAn ted,in its modernand can they be predictedin the above on whichthan other variantsnor to long-discardedPROBLEMS TO WHICH AGGRESSIONEVOLVED AS A SOLUTIONevolutionary.intobetterbyand doesthe raw materialsis definedequally or differently?hypothesesare fashioned1994).perspectivein aggressionThus, within evolutionaryput1992,solution?ary. As impliedexplicitlymechanismsand does not correspondabout the adaptive functionsADAPTIVEEvolutionarythe internalactivity, inputis not forward-lookingpreserved,Fitness& Tooby,and groups confrontis a functionalskin, or fromprovidesor adjustment,mechanismscontextsspecificvariation(b) Have men and womenby particularanon that(see Buss, 1995; Tooby SC Cosmides,(a) What specificthese problemsoperatesThe input can stem from thepsychology,time.1964)psychologicalthe use of aggression?and explainedover(Cosmidesaggression:information-can be physiologicalto fitness and are thereforehappiness,An sonalaboutThe outputof evolutionarypopulationgood of the species”questionsof input,and variants that solve adaptive problemstributarythroughoutan output.aslevel of description,and discussions).what is needed.are ultimatelyformsto solve adaptive problems. nismsthe walls of the humandefinitionsprocessesnot anticipatetakes in specificoutsidefrom otherofAt the simplestrules, and then producesfor ent,environmentpsychologywith specialempiricalBelowphenomenon.proposeddata,we detailornot yield aandas with allseveralleadingmight be an evolved solution.the Resources of Othersperhapsmorethan any otherspecies,stockpileresourcesthat historicallyhave been valuable for survival and reproduction.These include fertile land andaccess to fresh water, food, tools, and weapons. There are many means for gainingaccess to the valuable resourcesstealing, or trickery. Aggressionheld by others, such as engaging in social exchange,is also a means to co-opting the resources of others.Aggression to co-opt resources can occur at the individual or group level. At theindividual level, one can use physical force to take resources from others. Modern-day

Evolution and Human includeat schoolfromabout resources,muggingsfrom others.who take the lunchotherchildrenand beatingsas a meansas when a child gives up his lunchmoneymoney,books,1978).Childhoodsuch as toys and territoryThe threat of aggressiongives mobsters(Olweus,(Campbell,to forciblyextractmay be enoughmoneyfor “protection”609to preventto preventleather jackets,1993).moneyoraggressionisAdult formsor othergoodsto secureresourcesfrom others,a beatingor a small store ownerhis or her lythe resourcesraid neighboringnon, 1983).men,formAmongtribes and forciblyThroughoutland possessedoftenof others.humanby roughthe benefits,for example,take food and reproductive-agedrecordedof forciblyco-male coalitionswomen(Chag-history, warfare has been used to co-opt theand to the victorsresourcesfor the purposesthe Yanomamo,go the spoils. Theaggressionon average,couldacquisitionhave selectedoutweighedof repro-for aggressivethe costs in the currencyoffitness.DefendAgainst AttackThe presencevictims -of aggressiveaddition,of aggressionof face or aken.aggressors.otherwisecan be used to defendIt can be usedA third adaptivesame resources.The losscan lead to furtheron the ease with whichabuse bythey can beagainstattack. Aggressionone’s resourcesa reputationthat detersmay be anfrom beingotherthe loss of status and honorwould-bethat wouldwith impunity.Rivalsproblemis posedOne such resourcehis woman is a stereotypedof status and reputation.by preventingto cultivatevictimizedsex. The image of the beachit conveysproblemAnd it can be used to preventfollow from beingInto retaliate.to this adaptiveCosts on Intrasexualby same-sexbully kickingnotionrivals who are vying for access to theconsists of access to valuablemembersof the othersand in the face of a weaker man and takingof intrasexualcompetition,but the underlyinglogicis powerful.Aggressionkillings.in part basedto would-beby the aggressors.both survival and reproduction.by being abused with impunityor their unwillingnesseffectiveadaptive problemthat are co-optedmay also lose in the currencyentailedwho may selectexploitedInflictposes a seriousresourcesvictims may suffer injury or death, impedingVictimsothers,conspecificsthey stand to lose valuableto inflictMen and womencostsand reputationto makeDedden,At the other1990).on rivals can rangeboth derogatethemfromtheir same-sexless desirableverbalto membersend of the spectrum,barbsof the othermen sometimes(Daly & Wilson,totheir statussex (Buss8ckill their same-sexrivals in duels. Bar fights that start as trivial altercationssometimespoint of death (Daly & Wilson, 1988). And men sometimes kill otherto have had sex with their wives or girlfriendsto beatingsrivals, impugningescalate to themen discovered1988).Since evolution operates according to differences in designs, a cost inflicted on a rivalcan translate into a benefit for the perpetrator.Accordingto this hypothesis,a keyfunctionof verbaland physicalaggressionis to inflictcosts on same-sexrivals.

D. M. Buss and 7: K. Shackelford610NegotiateStatus and Power HierarchiesA fourthevolutionaryhypothesisor power within existingmen engagefightsand feared,aggressionaggressionin the form of boxingstatus elevation1996).Men who exposematches,themselvesthe group1983;(Chagnon,display ferocityThein their(Campbell,hypothesisHill & Hurtado,beatingsof theirwhere the victor experiencesto kill enemiesan elevation1996).Withinare regardedasin their status withinstreetgangs,men whoexperiencestatus1993).that aggressionsometimesservesthe adaptivefunctionfor example,A professorwould is to specifyof statuswithin manyprofessorat aa declinein status.the social contextsin whichpays.Rivals from Future AggressionCultivatinga reputationas aggressiveof cost-inflictionfromwith the girlfriendthe reputationproblemof a memberfor aggressionof othersLong-Termsexualis the leading1982).of sheltersof cases,boyfriendsof the Hell’s Angels motorcycleto co-optand othertwice aboutstealingwould hesitateto flirtgang. Aggressionhelpingandto solve the adaptiveone’s resources.and the threatinfidelity.as the key causecite extreme(Dobashbatteringwomen,jealousy& Dobash,1984).maleliondisplacesanotherof theirAs repugnantand takesHe kills the young sired by the usurpedto deterthat male& Weghorst,documentthem from consortingWhenfunctionsuggests(Daly, Wilson,on the partChildreninfanticide.evidencefor example,Reduce Resources Expended on Unrelateda new maleof aggressionempiricalcause of spousalfor batteredwomenMuchsome men may beat their wives to detercommitsaggressionthinkwith Mike Tyson. Most peopleis that aggressionsexual jealousymajorityto deterwouldMates from Sexual Infidelitymates fromStudiesMost peoplethus can act as deterrents,attemptingA sixth hypothesislong-termmay functionothers.from a Mafia hit man or tanglingDeterstatuswe have ritualizedof fellow or rival gang memberskey to the status elevationaggressionformsin warfareexperiencegroups may result in a status decrement.Deteras a resultsocieties,does not imply that this strategy works in all groups. Aggressionfaculty meeting,Thestatus and powerIn modernfor example,to dangerand consequentlyelevationone’sfor example,and the loser a status loss.brave and courageous,elevationto increasethe Ache of Paraguay,men. Men who have survived many cluband so attain(Hill & Hurtado,functionsAmongin ritual club fights with otherare admiredsuccessfulis that aggressionsocial hierarchies.that in thehusbandsoras this may be,with otherover a female,men.he oftenmale and re-inseminatesthe female. This act of brutality may seem repugnant,but in evolutionarycontext itserves a specific function for the killer - it reduces the resources he and his new mateexpend on offspring that are genetically unrelatedto him. A similar adaptive logicmay apply to aggression against stepchildren,including that which falls short of actualhomicide. Since the presence of stepchildrenthreatens to absorb valuable resourcesthat might otherwise get channeledto genetically related children, adult aggression

611Evolution and Human Aggressionagainst stepchildren may have functionedpended on unrelated children.THE MODULARITYhistoricallyAND CONTEXT-SPECIFICITYto reducethe resourcesex-OF AGGRESSIONThis account of seven key adaptive problems that might be solved by a strategy ofaggression strongly suggests that aggression is not a unitary, monolithic, or contextblind strategy. Rather, it suggests that aggression is highly context-specific, triggeredonly in contexts in which the specific adaptive problems are confronted and theadaptive benefits are likely to be reaped.Consider the use of spousal battering to solve the adaptive problem of a partner’spotential infidelity. This adaptive problem is more likely to be confronted by men whoare lower in relative mate value than their wives, for example, or who experience adecrement (e.g., loss of a job) in the resources that women value (Buss, 1994). Underthese conditions, the probability that a woman might commit infidelity or defect fromthe relationship altogether is likely to be higher, and so the adaptive problem isconfronted more severely. Men in these conditions are predicted to be more aggressive than men whose partners are less likely to commit infidelity or to defect fr

cognitive scripts). Evolutionary psychology starts with a set of premises about human behavior. First, according to evolutionary psychology, all human behavior is a product of mechanisms internal to the person, in conjunction with inputs that trigger the activation of those mechanisms.

Related Documents:

NATURE OF HUMAN INTELLIGENCE Leda Cosmides* and John Tooby* EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY The goal of research in evolutionary psychology is to discover and understand the de- sign of the human mind. Evolutionary psychology is an approach to psychology, in which knowledge and principles from evolutionary biology and human evolutionary

evolutionary biology. From this point of view, some authors have tried to extend the Darwinian theory universally beyond the domain of evolutionary biology (Cf. Dawkins, 1983), using the three principles of evolutionary theory (inheritance or retention, variation, and adaptation) as a heuristic for evolutionary economic theorizing (Campbell, 1965).

human behaviour Natural selection 3 Box 1.1 Speciation and the evolutionary processes 4 Asking the right questions 5 Box 1.2 Reductionism vs holism 7 Approaches to the study of human behaviour 8 Human behavioural ecology 8 Evolutionary psychology 10 Box 1.3 The problem of external validity 11 Environment of evolutionary adaptedness12 Box 1.4 .

data into studies of eco-evolutionary dynamics can provide a better mechanistic understanding of the causes of phenotypic change, help elucidate the mechanisms driving eco-evolutionary dynamics and lead to more accurate evolutionary predictions of eco-evolutionary dynamics in nature (Fig. 2). What genomic data can reveal about

1.1.3 Evolutionary Design by Computers So it is clear that evolutionary design in nature is capable of generating astonishingly in-novative designs. This book demonstrates how evolutionary design by computers is also cap-able of such innovation. To achieve this, the highest achievers in evolutionary design have

other evolutionary forces on human psychology. This is evidenced by greater emphasis on evolutionary theories in leading handbooks of personality psychology (Buss, 2009; Buss & Penke, 2015) and social psychology (Buss & Ken-rick, 1998; Neuberg, Kenrick, & Schaller, 2010), special issues dedicated to an evolutionary approach to the psycho-

endorsed by senior high school boys’ and girls’ soccer players, and if they differ in the justifications for their use. Two hundred and forty-four (N 244) senior high school boys’ and girls’ soccer players responded to the Buss and Perry Aggression Questionnaire and the Mintah-Huddleston Aggression Justification Inventory (MHAJI).

the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each other's learning. It may be contrasted with competitive (students work against each other to achieve an academic goal such as a grade of "A" that only one or a few students can attain) and individualistic (students work by themselves to accomplish learning goals unrelated to those of the other .