Humans, unlike most other species, show intense interest in the activities of conspecifics, even when the activities in question pose no obvious fitness threat or opportunity. Here, we investigate one content domain in which people show substantial interest, the use of drugs for non-medical purposes. Drawing from two subject populations-one undergraduate and one Internet-based-we look at the relationships among (i) abstract political commitments; (ii) attitudes about sexuality; and (iii) views surrounding recreational drugs. Whereas some theories suggest that drug views are best understood as the result of abstract political ideology, we suggest that these views can be better understood in the context of reproductive strategy. We show that, as predicted by a strategic construal, drug attitudes are best predicted by sexual items rather than abstract political commitments and, further, that the relationship between factors such as political ideology and drugs, while positive, are reduced to zero or nearly zero when items assessing sexuality are controlled for. We conclude that considering morality from the standpoint of strategic interests is a potentially useful way to understand why humans care about third party behaviour.

for data sharing. We thank Geoffrey Goodwin for helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.Word count: 2,580 (excluding abstract, tables, and references) Disgust sensitivity and moral judgments 2 Disgust sensitivity and moral judgments 3 AbstractMoral judgments seem related to the emotion disgust. Evolutionary considerations might illuminate the psychological processes underlying this relation. Several studies have noted that individuals who are more disgust sensitive condemn moral violations more strongly.However, this association could result from both disgust sensitivity and moral judgment being correlated with political ideology. To clarify the relationship between disgust sensitivity and moral judgment, we analyzed data from multiple published and unpublished datasets that included the Three-Domain Disgust scale, the Moral Foundations Questionnaire, and a measure of ideology (total N = 2,478). Results showed that associations between disgust sensitivity and moral judgment remained when controlling for ideology. Each of the three types of disgust sensitivity uniquely predicted at least one of the five moral foundations. Moral disgust predicted scores for all moral foundations (largest effect forFairness/reciprocity). Sexual disgust predicted scores for all moral foundations except Fairness/reciprocity (largest effect for Purity/sanctity). Pathogen disgust had small predictive effects for Ingroup/loyalty, Authority/respect, and Purity/sanctity. All effects were positive (i.e., higher levels of disgust sensitivity were associated with greater moral foundation endorsement). These findings suggest specific relations between disgust sensitivity and moral judgment that are not explained by ideology, shedding further light on the functions of disgust and morality.

Ancestrally, relatively attractive individuals and relatively formidable males may have had reduced incentives to be egalitarian (i.e., to act in accordance with norms promoting social equality). If selection calibrated one's egalitarianism to one's attractiveness/formidability, then such people may exhibit reduced egalitarianism ("observed egalitarianism") and be perceived by others as less egalitarian ("perceived egalitarianism") in modern environments. To investigate, we created 3D body models of 125 participants to use both as a source of anthropometric measurements and as stimuli to obtain ratings of bodily attractiveness and perceived egalitarianism. We also measured observed egalitarianism (via an economic "dictator" game) and indices of political egalitarianism (preference for socialism over capitalism) and "equity sensitivity." Results indicated higher egalitarianism levels in women than in men, and moderate-to-strong negative relationships between (a) attractiveness and observed egalitarianism among men, (b) attractiveness and perceived egalitarianism among both sexes, and (c) formidability and perceived egalitarianism among men. We did not find support for two previously-reported findings: that observed egalitarianism and formidability are negatively related in men, and that wealth and formidability interact to explain variance in male egalitarianism. However, this lack of support may have been due to differences in variable measurement between our study and previous studies.

In their analyses of the neural correlates of discrete emotionality, Lindquist et al. do not consider the numerous drawbacks to inferring psychological processes based on currently available cognitive neurometric technology. The authors also disproportionately emphasize the relevance of neuronal activation over deactivation, which, in our opinion, limits the scope and utility of their conclusions.