Family and Kinship Isaiah Magpali-Isaac Tatiana Hughes Tanisha Tatum Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Project VIABLE: Behavioral Specificity and Wording Impact on DBR Accuracy Teresa J. LeBel 1, Amy M. Briesch 1, Stephen P. Kilgus 1, T. Chris Riley-Tillman.
Advertisements

Unit 3-C (B): Twin Studies
Lecture (11,12) Parameter Estimation of PDF and Fitting a Distribution Function.
Evolutionary Perspectives on Sibship PSYC 452 Domenico DeCaro Natalia Gonzalez Natasha Grabowski.
+. Reciprocal altruism: One organism provides a benefit to another in the expectation of future reciprocation Assumes that cheaters can be identified/punished.
Recipient/Donor Effects Non-Kin and Relatives. Kin Selection Question: Reproductive Altruism Eusocial Insects Reproductive, Worker Castes Cooperative.
Altruism and the Family The Genetical Evolution of Social Behaviour.
Evolutionary Psychology, Workshop 3: Altruism and Cooperation.
Combinatorics and InBreeding. Goal To provide a rough model which gives a lower bound of organisms needed to prevent inbreeding Show that an exponential.
Fundamental Concepts in Behavioural Ecology. The relationship between behaviour, ecology, and evolution –Behaviour : The decisive processes by which individuals.
Module 2 Psychology & Science.
Genetic Factors Predisposing to Homosexuality May Increase Mating Success in Heterosexuals Written by Zietsch et. al By Michael Berman and Lindsay Tooley.
Darwin’s Puzzle: Why are Males and Females Different?
Language, kinship, family. Is there “kinship” and “family” in other animal species?
Summary by Amber Kika, Nina Dangourian, and Esmeralda Huerta
Nature vs. Nurture.
Heredity: Our Genetic Background
Behavioral Ecology Introduction Social behavior Sexual selection.
SARA NISHIKAWA, BOBBY CASTILLO AND ARI SATURNE EVOLUTION Kruger, D. J. (2003). Evolution and altruism: Combining psychological mediators with naturally.
By: Isaiah Magpali-Isaac, Tatianna Smith, Viris Colmenero Farrelly, Daniel, Lazarus, John, & Roberts, Gilbert (2007). Altruists Attract. Evolutionary Psychology.
Psychology 3051 Psychology 305A: Theories of Personality Lecture 6 1.
Psychology 3051 Psychology 305A: Theories of Personality Lecture 6 1.
Hamilton’s Rule – Kin Selection. KIN SELECTION & ALTRUISM Kin Selection: selection of a trait through helping relatives, either 1.descendant kin (offspring):
Video. Heredity: Our Genetic Heredity is transmission of characteristics from parents to offspring - Physical traits – height, hair, & eye color - Psychological.
Altruism By Mr Daniel Hansson. Learning outcomes Distinguish between altruism and prosocial behavior Contrast two theories explaining altruism in humans.
Prosocial behavior Why do people help?. Does Pure Altruism Exist? Altruism (textbook definition) - The desire to help another person even if it involves.
Altruism and Pro-social Behavior
Social Psychology David Myers 10e Copyright 2010 McGraw-Hill Companies1.
Video. Hughes, C., Happe, F. & Taylor, H., Jaffee, S.R., Caspi, A. & Moffitt T.E. (2005).Origins of Individual Differences in Theory of Mind: From Nature.
Figure 1. Percent of Couples Still Dating at Time 2, as a Function of Their Relationship Commitment at Time 1. Trolley Problem Decisions Follow the Laws.
1 Lesson 4 Attitudes. 2 Lesson Outline   Last class, the self and its presentation  What are attitudes?  Where do attitudes come from  How are they.
10. Cooperation and Helping. Inclusive Fitness Direct Fitness (Individual Fitness): personal reproductive success measured as the number of offspring.
Lecture Outline Theories of helping: –Socio-biological theory –Kin protection –Perceived similarity –Norms.
Sex differences in romantic kissing among college students: An evolutionary perspective Summary by Amber Kika, Nina Dangourian, and Esmeralda Huerta For.
Personal Control over Development: Effects on the Perception and Emotional Evaluation of Personal Development in Adulthood.
Evolutionary Psychology and Emotion Tanisha Tatum Kali Thomas.
Play Me. For the Teacher  Simple activity- teach the members of the family: Click on each picture in slide 1, then click on the.
Ms. Carmelitano. Define Altruism: When one person helps another for no reward, and even at some cost to themselves Bell Ringer.
H Copyright 2016 © McGraw-Hill Education. Permission required for reproduction or displayBlend Images/Alamy.
Emotional Closeness as a Mediator of the Effect of Genetic Relatedness on Altruism By: Josephine D. Korchmaros and David A. Kenny Presentation By: Kristin.
Hamilton vs. Kant: Pitting adaptations for altruism against adaptations for moral judgment by Ana Lira and Chi-Yun Lee.
Kin Selection, Genetic Selection, and Information- dependent strategies By JC Santos, Thomas Valencia, Jannall Brummell.
Chapter 10, Kinship and Descent Why Study Kinship? Unilineal Descent Cognatic Descent Bilateral Kinship Influences on Kinship Systems Classifying Relatives:
Kin Selection and Social Behavior. I. Motivation Cooperative behaviors are widespread. Why?
Altruism & Kin Stewart-Williams, S. (2007) Altruism among kin vs. nonkin: effects of cost of help and reciprocal exchange. Evolution and Human Behavior,
Common Communication Strategies For Survival. Altruism/ Assume Control Altruism Be of help and assistance Be of help and assistance Be available to give.
Nature vs. Nurture.
Classical Kin Selection. Kin Selection Kin Selection  Natural Selection Fitness: Lifetime Reproductive Success Inclusive Fitness Direct & Indirect Components.
Conflicts & Peacemaking Internal Conflicts – Approach & avoidance approach=-approach – Boat or plane to vacation? avoidance-avoidance – Homework or bed.
Promiscuity and the evolutionary transition to complex societies C. Cornwallis, S. West, K. Davis & A. Griffin Nature; 2010.
RELD Family Members Pictures Adapted From:
RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION DESIGN © (—THIS SIDEBAR DOES NOT PRINT—) DESIGN GUIDE This PowerPoint 2007 template produces.
TRUE OR FALSE QUIZ. A gene is a length of DNA. TRUE or FALSE.
Altruism & Kin Stewart-Williams, S. (2007) Altruism among kin vs. nonkin: effects of cost of help and reciprocal exchange. Evolution and Human Behavior,
PSYC 206 Lifespan Development Bilge Yagmurlu.
University of Akron – Akron, OH For further information
Family, Kinship, & Descent
Family Grandfather Grandmother Mother Father Aunt Uncle Sister Brother
Kinship and Inclusive Fitness
Alturistic Social Behaviors
Puzzle A Puzzle B.
Heredity, Genes & Chromosomes, and Nature vs. Nurture
Inclusive Fitness and Its Implications
Chapter 4 (B): Twin Studies
Theories of Altruism Contrast two theories of altruism.
General Social Competence (18)
Material vs Non Material Culture
Complete the following sentences with the name of the relative.
JOHN’S FAMILY.
THE FAMILY.
Presentation transcript:

Family and Kinship Isaiah Magpali-Isaac Tatiana Hughes Tanisha Tatum Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Video E E MeRDfMvK0 Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Introduction Altruism has always been a puzzle for Evolution This article hypothesizes that we have heuristics for decisions that involve altruism. As we know natural selection favors those who are prone to help others with the same genes. – The closer the person is related to you, the more likely you are to help them.

Introduction cont. Inclusive Fitness- by helping genetic kin to survive and reproduce, your shared genes can spread. In regards to altruism, a Heuristic evolved to help us figure out who to help, according to how closely related they are to us. The article examines this heuristic by measuring how we perceive our relatedness to different relatives, vs. how close they are actually related to us.

Background/Objectives Background – People can discriminate between close relatives and moderately close relatives (mother vs. aunt) – Weber’s law: Differences between close kin appear greater than differences between distant kin. Objectives – Determine the relationship between perceived and actual kinship Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Subjects/Procedures/Methods Subjects – 26 undergraduates from University of Michigan Procedures – Subjects asked to indicate how closely related the felt to kin (close to distant to fictive) Fictive = stepparents, acquaintances – 19 Question Questionnaire 1 for genetically identical (twins; r=1.00) 4 for very close (mother, father, sister, etc.; r=0.50) 6 for moderately close (aunt, uncle, grandmother, etc.; r=0.25) 3 for distant relatives (cousin, great-grandmother, etc.; r=0.125) 4 for fictive kin (stepparent, acquaintance; r=0.00) – Use of ANOVA and Dunne’s test to analyze data Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Results Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Results (cont.) ANOVA indicated a significant decline in perceived relatedness with actual relatedness. Dunne’s test demonstrates drop in perceived relatedness between each pair of adjacent points was reliable – Most precipitous declines occurred between Very close and moderately close kin And between distant kin and acquaintances Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Results (cont.) What does mean for helping behaviors? – If our decision to help someone is based off of perceived relatedness, kinship should have greatest impact when one person is very close or unrelated. – We have heuristic thinking when it comes to inclusive fitness that says: “ Help those most closely related to you who have the greatest reproductive value” Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Study Strengths Use well defined hierarchy of kin closeness. Accurately measured the perceptions vs. the actual level’s of kinship. Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Study Weaknesses Some people may not have any connection for distant relatives. – How close they feel towards them could be effected. Questionnaire does not have an equal number of questions for each level of kin. Limited number of subjects (26) Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Quiz Multiple Choice – What is the r value for distant relatives as defined by the study? A).125 B).50 C).00 – How many levels of actual kinship were studied? A) 3 B) 4 C) 5 D) 6 – Who are you more inclined to help in dangerous situations? A) Your Aunt B) Your cousin C) Your grandfather B) Your second cousin Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Quiz (cont.) True or False – The study set out to determine the relationship between perceived and actual kinship. T/F – The least abrupt declines occurred between very close kin and moderately close kin and between distant kin and acquaintances. T/F – In terms of the results, you are more likely to save your sister than you are to save your than 2 of your cousins. T/F Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.

Reference Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994) Some Neo-Darwinian Decision Rules for Altruism: Weighing Cues for Inclusive Fitness as a Function of the Biological Importance of the Decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 779.