Search

The issue with most studies concerned with mate selection preferences in humans is that they rely on declarations and rational actions of experimental subjects, which are affected by their pre-conceived opinions and prejudices. Moreover, current research suggests that subcortical structures and processes, rather than the neocortex, play the principal role in actual partner choice behaviour. Consequently, we have only limited information on how relevant our current knowledge is in relation to real-life human ethology. To address these issues, we surveyed 2718 women and 4073 men between the ages of 16–50 and compared their declared and observed preferences for various properties in short-term and long-term partners. We found differences between what the subjects declared to prefer and what they preferred in reality: for example, men declared that wealth was the second least desirable property out of eleven in short-term partners, but we observed that in reality, they considered wealth the third most important factor after charisma and sense of humour. Similarly, while women declared that dominance and masculinity were desirable properties in short-term partners, in the observational part of the study, they showed little preference for these traits. Furthermore, we investigated the effects of the phase of the menstrual cycle, hormonal contraception, pregnancy, and partnership and parenthood status on these preferences. We found some support for the good parents hypothesis and no support for the good genes and the immunocompetence handicap hypotheses when observed, rather than declared preferences were considered. We also detected that hormonal contraception, and parenthood and partnership status influenced declared preferences in considerable ways, but had only a small, if any, impact on observed preferences. We suggest interpreting the results of studies reliant on declarations and rational actions of experimental subjects with great caution.

Konrad Lorenz (Zietschrift fur Tierpsychologie, 5, 234–409, 1943) proposed that pedomorphic characteristics (Kindchenschema) in infants and parental caregiving responses to these characteristics co-evolved in species with parental care. Previous research on Kindchenschema has generally utilized human infants and computer-generated or manipulated images of human infants as stimuli. A recent study provided the first evidence that humans perceived non-mammalian infants requiring parental care as more attractive and more dependent on parents and expressed greater caregiving intentions for them compared to non-mammalian infants not requiring parental care (Kruger, Ethology, 121, 1–6, 2015; Kruger and Miller, Human Ethology Bulletin, 31, 15–24, 2016). The current study is the first to demonstrate that ratings of attractiveness and dependency mediated both the relationship of species parental dependency with caregiving intentions and the relationship between class (avian vs. reptilian) and caregiving intentions. Individual differences in perceptions of attractiveness and dependency also predicted caregiving intentions. Thus, we provide a new form of empirical evidence consistent with Lorenz’ (Zietschrift fur Tierpsychologie, 5, 234–409, 1943) proposal for the convergent co-evolution of Kindchenschema and caregiving reactions.

This chapter addresses the question of “what is culture” and what is cultural about what people do, focusing in the perinatal period and early childhood. It describes the fact that animals have cultural practices learned within the social group. Similarly, humans have “innate parenting behaviors” and behaviors that are strongly shaped by culture. There is a universal tendency of promoting what is “best” for children within each culture or ethnic group. The chapter describes practices that could be considered cruel or unusual but which are understandable within a specific belief system. The separation between this world and the underworld, or the world of ancestors or spirits, is not held in many social groups. What we consider “ideal” may be abhorrent in other cultures. The chapter illustrates the notion of blindness to one’s culture and the tendency to hold certain practices as better than all others, “natural,” and more civilized. Finally, there are many differences but also strong commonalities in world views and desires and wishes for the pregnancy and the baby to helps us relate to any couple or family with young children and their wish for optimal outcomes.

This paper compares various explanatory concepts of food sharing in humans. In many animal species, parents share food with their offspring, thus investing into the 50% of their own genes present in each child. Even in modern families of industrialised societies, there is a very significant flow of material goods from the parent to the offspring generation. Sharing food between reproductive partners is also easily explainable in evolutionary terms: „food for sex“ as male strategy is observed in some primate species. Sharing within one’s group in small-scale societies can be explained also as consequence of its members being actually rather closely related to each other; this, among others, gives credit to the concept of group selection which gains attention again after having been discarded by classic sociobiology. The ethos of individual and group sharing can quite readily be transferred to larger groups, i.e. a whole nation or, especially in the case of unusually devastating natural disasters, to members of other societies. Food sharing beyond genetic relationship or reproductive interest has been explained as „tit for tat“ and „reciprocal altruism“. Events of give and take, however, are, how the last example demonstrates, quite often non-symmetrical, i.e. one partner shares much more than the other. „Tolerated theft“, a behavioural trait in non-human primate species thought to be a stepping stone for the typical preparedness of humans to share, does not play a big role in traditional societies, which provide an important base to discuss the topic. The Trobriand Islanders, e.g., have a very complex system of sharing. In the years of competitive harvest, their yield of yam is distributed to close relatives, especially to fathers and elder brothers. The donors keep almost nothing for themselves, are however given as well, so that everybody has enough to live. High rank men receive a partly enormous surplus, by which their status is increased. Western farmers would find this generosity quite strange. It is one outcome of the human tendency to create bonds through food gifts. It is interesting, that Marcel Mauss has well described the power of the gift which generates a counter gift, but did not inquire evolutionary nor ontogenetic building blocks of the often very complex acts and rituals of giving and receiving one finds in all cultures. It seems reasonable to take an evolutionary position and argue that those of our ancestors who were generous and socially competent with a well-developed emphronesis (Theory of Mind) were preferred interaction and marriage partners and that this sexual selection was the ultimate mechanism spreading the motivations and behaviours involved in sharing. To counteract cheaters humans have a rather sharp perception to detect those who don’t play by the rules and a very strong motivation to punish them, even accepting, in doing so, high costs for themselves. This strongly disproves the idea that humans mainly act on rationale choice. Rather, we are endowed, one must conclude, with a very powerful, archaic sense of balanced social interaction, of fairness and justice. This raises the interesting question whether the laws governing social conduct, made by all cultures of the world, are contra or secundum naturam. For quite some time, in the wave of sociobiological thinking, the common stand was that humans are dangerously egoistic beings and that their antisocial instincts must be kept in check by powerful laws. As Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt, the founder of human ethology as a discipline, has stated and as recent primatological and anthropological research has corroborated, humans are much more social than postulated by some authors. The Ten Commandments are built on not against basic human tendencies. Konrad Lorenz spoke of animals having “morally analogous” behaviours and was criticised for this. Modern research is rehabilitating him. The joy of sharing, a proximate behavioural set of motivation, is typical for our species. Notwithstanding expectations of economic and status gain this biopsychologically rooted tendency most likely is the engine driving the systems of do ut des, so marvellously developed in our species.

Any design for a nonviolent world must take special account of what happens to children, and what they are prepared for. Since in any case they are the shapers of the future, we cannot avoid an examination of the nature of the child and the impact of various socialization experiences on the child’s capacity to act nonviolently on a changing social order. The socialization model developed here draws on several different disciplinary frameworks and research areas that have not been brought together before in just this way. Included are (1) animal and human ethology, with emphasis on both genetic and developmental aspects of animal-man potentials; (2) a variety of social learning theories; (3) a delineation of the social spaces within which the individual receives social shaping and acts out roles; and finally (4) a review of studies on altruism and nonviolent activists in recent protest movements.

Gender differences in communication styles have been observed in subjects of all ages, in many cultures. This study was designed to see whether such gender differences persist in happily married couples. Observers coded the nonverbal behaviors of 40 happily married US couples who were videotaped discussing commitment in marriage. Although these couples showed no significant sex differences in marital satisfaction (as measured by the MARQ of Russell and Wells) or in verbal statements regarding commitment, robust sex differences in the following nonverbal behaviors emerged: smiling, laughing, and average length of look at spouse (t-test for matched pairs, p

In this volume, Burke (2014) makes a number of arguments for why evolutionary approaches have failed to penetrate the rest of the field of psychology (what Burke refers to as “mainstream” psychology). While all of his arguments have merit, I will focus on one that I consider to be particularly important—the characterization by critics of the “Santa Barbara school” (Laland and Brown, 2011) as representative of all evolutionary approaches to psychology. Here, I agree with this point, and I expand upon Burke's point to argue that the focus on massive modularity as one of the foundational principles of evolutionary psychology is “putting the theory before the data,” and opens the discipline to criticism that is unwarranted for many of its researchers. In 2013, I was fortunate to attend a talk by John Richer at the International Society for Human Ethology's Summer Institute, who argued that there is much to be gained from applying the ethological methodology of observation and documentation to clinical psychology settings. He was advocating deviating from hypothesis and experimentation, and applying a technique more akin to the production of ethnographies in social anthropology (Richer, 2014). While initially resistant to the idea, I later read Rozin's (2001) critique of the state of social psychological research. A comparison is made to Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection which, he argues, was the result of a large body of observation, description and documentation that took place before the formalization of foundational principles. It grew out of an empiricist—as opposed to theorist—desire to understand the origins of species. Rozin argues that social psychology, in its rush to model itself on more established lines of research, such as biology and cognitive science, has skipped these important stages of observation and description, which he considers so critical to the development of a young discipline. In so doing, Rozin argues, social psychologists have rushed to formalize as theoretical underpinnings of the discipline ideas that have little supporting evidence, and have greatly restricted the range of acceptable topics for investigation within the field. The situation in evolutionary psychology is similar, though not identical. Early in its conception, researchers attempted to formalize the field with a set of foundational principles—typically evolved psychological mechanisms, massive modularity of mind/domain specificity and the concept of an environment of evolutionary adaptedness, often assumed to be the Pleistocene (Cosmides and Tooby, 1987). These principles are not universally accepted within the community of researchers who take an evolutionary approach to psychology (Laland and Brown, 2011), and Burke (2014) argues that the massively modular view of the brain is not necessary for the application of evolutionary theory to psychology. Indeed, most research in the field is focused on gathering observations and testing hypotheses derived from fundamental evolutionary principles, rather than from the Santa Barbara school's formulation (Burke, 2014). In most discussions about modularity and plasticity in the mind, the argument is really over the degree of modularity in the mind, and therefore the level on which selection operates. In much of the research being conducted in the field of evolutionary approaches to psychology, this distinction is, however, largely irrelevant. In contrast to the criticisms of many critics of evolutionary approaches to behavior (Benton, 2000), even adherents to the Santa Barbara school's formulation predict the evolution of flexible mental modules in order to allow flexibility of behavior in response to environmental and internal factors (Kurzban, 2002; see also Sperber, 2005). Consider the example of men's preferences for women's body size, which is hypothesized to represent a preference for healthy weight given the local environmental conditions. Men living in areas of food scarcity prefer higher BMI women, as this is most adaptive, while men in areas of food security prefer lower BMI women, as this is most adaptive given the local conditions (Tovee et al., 2006). This same hypothesis follows equally from a massive modularity, Santa Barbara school approach as from a mental plasticity, cultural evolution approach. The Santa Barbara school approach predicts that an evolved mental module for body size preference should have been selected to be sensitive to local ecological conditions, and would therefore predict the pattern of higher BMI preferences in areas of food scarcity and lower BMI preferences in areas of food security. A more moderate modularity approach would predict a mental module for attractiveness that can learn the appropriate preferences given the local ecological conditions, and thus predict the same pattern. Finally, a mental plasticity, cultural evolution approach would predict that culturally transmitted body size preferences would result in fitness benefits for those who carried the appropriate body size preference given the local ecological conditions, and would therefore predict the same pattern. It is not necessary to commit to one of these models of mind in order to formulate hypotheses based on evolutionary predictions (Burke, 2014). The necessary foundational principles are merely that behavior, cognition and perception have fitness consequences, and that selection shapes behavior, perception and cognition; something upon which all researchers adopting evolutionary approaches to psychology can surely agree. While mainstream cognitive psychology and neuroscience are producing some convincing data that different types of information are processed in different brain regions—which could be considered modules—and there have been some well-reasoned defenses of the concept of massive modularity (e.g., Barrett and Kurzban, 2006), the conception of the massively modular mind lacks sufficient empirical evidence (Laland and Brown, 2011). Burke (2014) points out that, in the absence of alternative formally articulated sets of foundational principles, the Santa Barbara school's formulation presents critics of evolutionary approaches to psychology with a supposed foundational principle that lacks a solid empirical basis, and allows these critics to dismiss the entire field as built on shaky foundations. Ironically, the criticism that is aimed at evolutionary approaches to psychology (which, it should be noted, began well before the formalization of the Santa Barbara principles) provides substantial pressure to formalize that other disciplines did not have to weather during their early stages (Rozin, 2001). Laland and Brown (2011) point out that Wilson felt that sociobiology was held up to unfair standards: “While the sociological or cultural model is assumed to be true unless proven false beyond any possible doubt, the biological model is assumed to be false unless evidence is completely unassailable in their support.” This could also be said of evolutionary approaches to psychology more generally. So where to from here? Others in this volume argue that the massive modularity of mind is an empirical question (Barrett et al., 2014), and I strongly agree. It may well turn out to be true, but before identifying this model of mind as a foundational principle, it is important to ensure that it is well supported empirically. In the meantime, it is encouraging to note that the early attempt to formalize foundational principles has not led to the over-focus on a small number of topics and techniques that Rozin (2001) decries in social psychology. Evolutionary approaches to psychology investigate a wide range of topics, from mate selection, life history strategy, food gathering and sharing, cooperation and altruism, aggression, gender roles, and parenting, and use a wide range of techniques—experimental psychological techniques, game theory, ethology, and ethnographic observations to name but a few. Anyone who attends HBES, EHBEA, ISHE or any of the other conferences dedicated to the approach will discover that new fields of study are constantly being approached through the lens of evolutionary theory. In conclusion, then, while there is pressure from critics of the field to declare a set of foundational principles for the field, including determining whether or not the mind is domain specific and massively modular, these are empirical questions that require further research. Further, the structure of the mind is not a prerequisite for the investigation of psychology through an evolutionary lens. The field should therefore continue to research the question of modularity of mind, and continue to explore the broad range of human behavior and cognition through observation, documentation and hypothesis generation and testing. There is little to be gained by prematurely formalizing the foundations of the field—putting the theory before the data—particularly if those foundations later turn out to be shaky.

O presente artigo pretende apresentar ao público leitor de psicologia alguns conceitos importantes sobre o masculino e o feminino defendidos em obras seminais da etologia humana, sociobiologia e psicologia evolutiva. As críticas clássicas das ciências sociais ao determinismo biológico não encontram eco nas actuais teorias biológicas sobre o comportamento, que enfatizam a interacção necessária entre factores genéticos, ecológicos e sócio-culturais, assim como o carácter estatístico das observações empíricas. No entanto, a conclusão do artigo aponta para o risco potencial destas disciplinas reduzirem demasiado a distância entre as causas últimas e os factores próximos de motivação, ignorando desta forma os efeitos inovadores dos processos actuais de socialização. This paper intends to introduce the readers of psychology to some important concepts about male and female specificities presented in seminal works of human ethology, sociobiology and evolutionary psychology. The classical critiques of social sciences on the biological determinism of these disciplines do not resonate in current biological theories about behavior. These later emphasize the interaction between genetic, ecological and socio-cultural factors, as well as the statistical nature of empirical observations. Nevertheless, the conclusion stresses the risk that these disciplines may reduce the distance between the ultimate causes and the proximate factors of motivation, thus avoiding the innovative effects of current socialization processes.

Two aspects of the ethological approach outlined by Tinbergen [(1963): Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie 20:410–433] are considered in relation to the way psychologists have studied human aggression. These aspects are the provision of a sound descriptive base and the application of the principle of natural selection. Description requires more than cataloging, and is best aided by quantitative data. Three examples from aggression research are used to illustrate problems generated by lack of attention to these principles: 1) imitation of aggression by children, 2) pain-induced aggression in rats and 3) measures of spousal violence. The principle of natural selection can be used to re-interpret existing data sources and to generate new ones. Darwinian and social psychological accounts of homicide are contrasted to indicate different conclusions and different emphases generated by the two approaches. The extension of the Darwinian approach to provide a theoretical basis for female aggression is also considered. © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Crying in infancy is a complex phenomenon — we are trying to bring experiences of behavioural biology and human ethology together with pathophysiological and therapeutic pediatric considerations. Parent‐child relationships, circadian rhythms, feeding methods and environmental stimuli are the most important factors for objective observation of the infant's behavioural patterns. We developed a special technique for analysing the parent‐child‐interaction and especially the crying behaviour by the use of so‐called “crying‐maps”. Our clinical research was established by nurses’ experiences in the coincidence of increased irritability, restlessness and chronic excessive crying on one hand, with feeding problems like spitting and vomiting in the infants on the other hand. By new recording‐techniques, especially the 2‐d‐sonography of the esophago‐gastric region and long‐term‐pH‐metry in the distal esophagus, in most of these infants a relevant gastro‐esophageal reflux [GER] can be proven. This was demonstrated in...

This chapter presents a model of the basic human emotions which, it is argued, can be taken as comprising the main elements of the human ethogram and hence of human behavior. The chapter begins with a critical review of criteria that have commonly been used in constructing such lists, and argues for heavy reliance on the criteria of adaptive value and affect. Since affect is the most characteristic feature of emotions and seems to induce their particular behavioral tendencies, expressions, and visceral adjustments, affect is perhaps the single best defining feature of each emotional modality. Because of its ethological nature, this sort of list of emotions may be more comprehensive than alternative lists lacking a comparative basis, and it avoids superficial dichotomies between types of emotions. Some general properties of affects are then discussed, such as their valence, intensity, and timing. Some possible applications of this model for studying a wide range of human behaviors are then suggested, including sex and developmental differences, and individual, cultural, and pathological variation. It is argued that ethological methods and a phylogenetic perspective are essential for arriving at a complete description of the human emotions and their facets, while at the same time avoiding an overly cybernetic modularization model.

The Scholarship of Daniel G. Freedman Pursuing the Big Picture My Three Mentors Is Nonduality Possible in the Social and Biological Sciences? Small Essays on Holism and Related Issues Are Genetically-Based Individual Differences Compatible with Species-Wide Adaptations? Genetic Bases of Behaviour Contributions to Psychological Research A Developmental and a Genetic Perspective on Aggression Genetic Analysis of Social Behaviour Twin Research Perspective on Human Development Biological Approaches to Developmental Issues - Rethinking the Data Ethological and General Systems Perspectives on Child-Parent Attachment During the Toddler and Preschool Years Sexual Orientation as a Developmental Context for Lesbians, Gays, and Bisexuals - Biological Perspectives What Can the Genotype Tell Us About Complex Human Conditions? Naturalistic Studies of Behaviour - How Does a Cross-Cultural Approach Inform Ongoing Research? Why Do Hadza Children Forage? Expression or Communication About Emotion Mother-Infant Interaction in Cross-Cultural Perspective Marriage in a Cross-Cultural Perspective Evolutionary Analyses - New Issues and Continuing Controversies Genetic Basis of Intrapsychic Conflict Is Human Happiness Universal? An Evolutionary Perspective Discrete Emotions Theory with Specific Reference to Pride and Shame Film Retrospective - The Method and the Medium Film Commentaries Behaviour Genetics, Human Ethology, Evolutionary Psychology and Culture - Looking to the Future Pair-Bonding Deconstructed by Twin Studies of Marital Status - What is Normative? An Ethological Perspective on Normal Behaviour, Especially as it Relates to Mating Systems Evolving Beyond Evolutionary Psychology - A Look at Family Violence Final Overview - Uniting Psychology and Biology.

This study replicated an earlier one on selection of seats and looking up in a college eating environment. Both studies showed that solitary individuals chose wall tables more often than center tables. Opposite findings held here for looking up, with almost twice as much occurring at wall tables whether by solitary individuals or groups. The differences between these studies may reflect environmental variables. Sitting at wall tables may enhance security and promote looking-up as an indication of exploratory behavior or alternatively and more simply an exploratory need may determine the selection of wall tables.

The invited articles in this special section were initially part of a symposium entitled ‘‘Nonverbal Aspects of Mate Choice and Courtship,’’ which occurred at the Fifth International AnthropologicalCongressofAlesHrdlicka inPrague,CzechRepublic, September 2–5, 2009. The main aim of the symposium was to bring together scholars who use evolutionary theory as a conceptual framework for their research on mate choice and courtship. Represented disciplines included anthropology, psychology, human ethology, and biology. The symposium included 2 plenaries, 20 oral presentations, 12 poster presentations, 2 round table discussions, and one workshop. The symposium was convened by Jan Havlicek of Charles University and Vladimir Blažek of the University of West Bohemia. Articles were reviewed by the Guest Editor and the Editor and other members of the Editorial Board.

Reports the APA Presidential address delivered at the Chicago convention, August 1975. Urban humanity is considered as a product of both biological and social evolution. Evolutionary genetics shows that when there is genetic competition among the cooperators (as for humans but not for the social insects), great limitations are placed upon the degree of socially useful, individually self-sacrificial altruism that biological evolution can produce. Human urban social complexity is a product of social evolution and has had to counter with inhibitory moral norms the biological selfishness which genetic competition has continually selected. Because the issues are so complex and the available data are so uncompelling, all of this should be interpreted more as a challenge to an important new area for psychological research than as established conclusions. It is emphasized, however, that these are important issues to which psychology should give much greater attention, and that scientific reasons exist for believing that there can be profound system wisdom in the belief systems our social tradition has provided us with. (31/2 p ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)

In humans, forcible rape is usually defined as copulation achieved by violence or threat of violence without the free consent of the female. Although rape is universally considered a heinous and punishable crime, it remains a serious and growing problem in many modern cultures. Rape has been perceived as the pathological result of (1) the psychological dysfunction of individual rapists or (2) the sexism inherent in male-dominated societies. Both sociocultural hypotheses recommend that rape be controlled through the rehabilitation of diseased rapists, diseased societies, or both. Exploration of rape in nonhuman animals and a wider application of evolutionary principles to human behavior have generated an alternative evolutionary view of rape as a potentially adaptive rather than a necessarily pathological act. The expanded biological model explores both the ultimate consequences of rape, in terms of a cost/benefit analysis of its expected effects on inclusive fitness, and its immediate proximate control, in terms of the intrinsic motivating variables and external stimuli that determine its probability of occurrence for specific individuals in specific instances. Ultimately, rape is expected to occur only when its potential benefit (production of an extra offspring) exceeds its potential cost (energy expended and risk taken owing to some probability of resistance or retribution that would reduce a rapist's reproductive success). We agree with the sociocultural view that rape is a violent rather than a sexual act. Proximately, rape appears to be motivated by male hostility, with increasing hostility increasing the probability of rape. The external stimulus for rape is a sufficiently vulnerable female. Here vulnerability varies inversely with the probability and severity of resistance or retribution expected by a rapist (i.e., the expected cost of rape in inclusive fitness). Both the frequency and patterns of rape observed in nature are either equally or more consistent with the sociobiological predictions than with the sociocultural predictions. The biological perspective implies that a society can most effectively control rape by ensuring that a rapist can expect to pay a sufficient cost to outweigh any potential benefit.

Although nonverbal cues of dominance and the emotional responses they elicit have been well known since antiquity, the facial displays associated with successful political leadership have a direct political impact on the electorate in the television age. The effects of these stimuli can be studied experimentally from the perspective of human ethology. Recent findings indicate that expressive displays like those of nonhuman primates have similar effects when exhibited by human leaders in France and the United States but that cultural differences in expected behavior may significantly modify their effects

A study of the frequency of looking both ways before crossing a street revealed that both males and females tend to look both ways more often when accompanied by juveniles than when alone and that when males and females are together (with or without juveniles), males look both ways more often than do females. These findings are consistent with predictions for a primate that has evolved in savannah environments.

The possibility, desirability, and potential outcomes of applying ethological methods to the study of culture-specific human behaviors are investigated. Ethology and culture are explored. A new term, “instruction,” and its use in cultural ethology are proposed. Genetics and survival value are related to cultural ethology. A cultural ethology is given a possible theoretical foundation, and current attempts at a cultural ethology are appraised. A research program in cultural ethology and related fields is proposed.

Introduction Can human behavior be studied experimentally from the perspective of human ethology? This paper presents evidence which shows that socially important categories of nonverbal behavior can be defined in objective terms, integrating ethological research on primate social displays with studies of human expressive behavior in social psychology. Focusing on facial displays, we show that three categories of displays---called here 'happiness/reassurance', 'anger/threat', and 'fear/evasion'--have distinctive features that affect the emotions and attitudes of viewers. When presented with videotapes of a powerful leader exhibiting these different kinds of facial displays, viewers describe the leader's expressive behavior in ways consistent with the objective criteria used to select the stimuli. Further, the viewer's description of these displays was not influenced by their prior attitudes toward the leader, even though he is well known and controversial. We also find that the same dimensions of expressive behavior are communicated by facial cues, by the spoken message, by the combination of sound and image, by the image accompanied by filtered sound (so that paravocal cues are heard but the meaning is obscured), and even by the written text being read silently. While viewers describe expressive behavior in a way that is consistent with the objective classification of non-verbal behavior, their emotional responses are more complex. Verbal self-reports of emotion are the result of an interaction between previous attitudes toward the leader and the display that has been observed. Hence, even though all the viewers describe a particular display in the same way, supporters report emotional reactions to these displays which differ from those of critics. The results are particularly significant because, at the psychophysioiogical level, different kinds of expressive displays elicit distinct patterns of response that did not vary for both critics and supporters. These physiological reactions include both autonomic changes associated with arousal and changes in the tension of facial muscles known to

Ethogeny, supposedly patterned on ethology, differs as an approach to human social behaviour in obvious respects. Ethogenists follow an emic research strategy, whereas human ethologists have strongly favoured etic research options. However, recent trends to a broader, evolutionary approach in human ethology suggest that an avoidance or rejection of verbal reports and ethogenic methods merits reconsideration, The distinctions involved in the eticlemic contrast are examined, and compared to Richer's distinction between D- and N-type agreements. It is argued that none of the distinctions are dichotomous. The useful aspects of the distinctions refer to the generality of findings, and the validity of evidence. Bearing these in mind, ethogenic methods have a place in a broader human ethology. So far as validity is concerned, the value of a comparison of information from different sources, such as verbal and non-verbal data, is stressed. So far as generality is concerned, ethogenists may consider this to be very limited because of idiosyncratic cultural factors in the causation of human social action. A reconsideration of the biology/culture dimension in terms of function rather than causation may lead to more optimism in this respect, and be more productive scientifically.

Behavior, emotion, and intellect are capabilities that result from physiological processes in nerve tissues. One can therefore argue that phylogenetic laws are valid for these capabilities as well as for the tissues themselves. The author introduces a phylogenetic branching tree showing the evolutionary development of behavioral and intellectual capabilities. It will be pointed out how this sequence of capabilities can be understood as homologies or as convergently developed in relation to man. Further, it will be attempted to demonstrate how this naturalistic model can provide a common basis for communication between proponents of competing theories in the field of psychology.

This paper reports on a study that examines the relationship between "high regard" and behavior in G/wi San of the Kalahari desert. A rank order was formed based on the different frequencies with which children were the center of attention, which was defined as being looked at by three or more children simultaneously. Such an attention-structure could be observed in the different playgroups of the G/wi San children. Furthermore, the occurence of rank specific behavior was recorded to find out whether there was any relationship between rank and behavior. The following results were obtained: "high regard" correlated positively with the behaviors of initiating and organizing. Older children were significantly more often imitated, asked, told, and shown than were younger children. Rank played a role only for compliance: here older and higher ranking children were complied significantly more often than younger or lower ranking ones. In contrast to results found in German children, in the G/wi helping and sharing occur irrespective of rank. This also applies to body contact, which in German children was initiated significantly more often by children of higher rank. In the San there did not exist any relationship between initiation of body contact and rank. Furthermore, body contact occured significantly more often within the same sex than the other sex. Behavior patterns that serve to attract the attention from other group members in order to gain high regard could be observed in both the German and San children's groups; however, although such behavior is tolerated in Germany, the San try to suppress it by ridicule. This may be helpful in maintaining their egalitarian social system.

Summary 1. A major development within the ethology of the last decade focusses attention upon the relations between social behaviour, ecology and population dynamics. This field may be termed ‘social ethology’ following an early but neglected usage of the term by Waxweiler at the start of the century. 2. Contemporary social ethology comprises three interdependent perspectives, socio-ecology, socio-demography and the study of social processes within natural and experimental groups. 3. In socio-ecology recent studies reveal that close correlations exist between the forms of avian and mammalian social organizations and their respective ecological niches. In particular the adaptive significance of certain mammalian societies comprising, on the one hand, multimale reproductive units and, on the other, those made up of one-male and all-male units is discussed and explanatory hypotheses derived from primate and ungulate data briefly considered. 4. In socio-demography research suggests that socially mediated mortality is of greater significance in the density-dependent control of bird and mammal numbers than had formerly been thought. The relations between ecological factors extrinsic to and social factors intrinsic to a social organization may be modelled in the form of open adaptive cybernetic systems rather than expressed in terms of analogies to closed mechanical or physiological systems. 5. Studies of social processes in non-human primate groups suggest that some form of role analysis may prove heuristic. The relations between dominance status, affiliative and kinship relations, social subterfuge and competition-contingent cooperation are discussed in an attempt to outline the dynamics of social change within relatively stable group structures. 6. ‘Human ethology’ seems at present to lack adequate definition as an academic discipline. Social ethology may provide the essential biological basis for future research in this area.

This paper describes a number of displays of various gulls (Laridae) with special reference to the Herring Gull group, the hooded gulls, and the Kittiwake, and discusses their functions, causation, evolutionary origin and further evolution as signals. After a sketch of the rationale of comparative behaviour studies (chapter II), the most common single displays and display sequences are described (chapter III). They are rather similar through the family, though many species-specific differences exist. The behaviour similarities strengthen the conclusion that the gulls are a monophyletic group. Evidence is presented in chapter IV to show that the displays have signal function. A distinction is made between distance-increasing and distance-reducing displays. The reasons for the occurence of more than one, yet no more than about six distance- increasing postures are discussed ; it is argued that each display may well be adapted to deal with a distinct category of opponent : accidental trespassers require another repellent than intentional persistent intruders; and within each category actual trespassers are met in another way than potential trespassers. In addition, one particularly loud call is a typical long-distance threat. This call usually acts as advertisement in a double sense: it repels competitors and attracts unmated females. Some of the distance-reducing (or appeasement) postures are used in agonistic situations, and still more regularly at the end of the pair formation or meeting ceremony. The need for and the possibility of more systematic studies of the precise functions of displays is stressed. Chapter V discusses aims and methods of analysis of the motivation of the displays. The value of "natural experiments" is stressed. The application of three independent methods leads to the conclusion that agonistic displays are ambivalent, i.e. the outcome of the simultaneous arousal of a tendency to attack and a tendency to flee: the relation between fluctuations in these tendencies and the displays shown is examined. There is a striking correlation between the motivation of these displays and the information they pass on to other individuals. Appeasement gestures always contain an element of fear; this tendency is in conflict with a tendency to stay, which can be, but usually is not part of the tendency to attack; it may be sexual attraction, attraction to at nest site, or attraction to a provider of food. The need for motivational analyses of the many different forms in which one posture can occur is stressed. The similarity of motivation in the pair formation ceremonies in the diff.erent species is much greater than the formal similarity of the display sequences; the conflict theory of courtship is tested. The origin of the displays (chapter VI) is varied. Some have clearly arisen as preparatory or intention movements of the patterns directly aroused by the situation ("aut- ochthonous" movements) ; of these, some are redirected to inanimate objects. Others are derived from movements belonging to functional patterns not directly aroused by the situation ("displacement activities") ; their various origins are discussed, and it is shown that they are second components of a dual movement, of which the first component is "auto?hthonous" in the above sense and facilitates the displacement activity. In chapter VII some ultimate causes of evolutionary change are discussed, and a preliminary functional classification of alleged changes in displays is presented. It is argued that change has been enhanced by at least four different types of selection pressure: (i) towards improvement of signal function (conspicuousness) ; (2) towards increase in intraspecific unambiguity; (3) towards increased interspecific unambiguity; and (4) as a corrollary of selection pressure in other functional systems. In some gulls, (4) may have made the major contribution to sexual isolation. A preliminary classification is given of the postulated evolutionary changes in behaviour mechanisms. The value of behaviour characters for taxonomic use is considered. After a discussion of adaptive and non-adaptive differences the relative validity of LORLNz's emphasis on the phylogenetic conservatism of displays is reconsidered, and the occurrence of convergent similarities is demonstrated.

Observations of children’s spacing behaviour were made during nursery school introduction and after integration into the group. Children showed rapid adjustment of interpersonal proximity within a few

I studied the behavior of Homo sapiens in an eating-place and found indications of security-seeking behavior, perhaps suggesting an unconscious, species-preserving fear of predators. Solitary individuals showed a significant preference for wall tables over center tables while grouped individuals showed no such preference. “Looking-up” frequency was higher among solitary than grouped individuals and higher among patrons at center tables than at wall tables.